                                  APPENDIX A
                                  WAGE RATES

This appendix describes the derivation of the fully loaded labor rates used in calculating costs of labor. Costs for this report are for year-end 2007.
A.1 	Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates
Unit labor costs are calculated by adding fringe benefits and overhead to the wage or salary to derive a fully loaded labor cost. The basic method is described in Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (Rice, 2002). The resulting loaded labor rates are given in Table A-1. Costs are calculated for several labor categories: Managerial, Professional/ Technical, Clerical, and EPA staff.

A.1.1 Derivation of Labor Rates for Managerial, Professional/Technical, and Clerical Labor
	Wages and fringe benefits for managerial, professional/technical, and clerical labor were taken from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) data, for December, for manufacturing industries.
	The cost of fringe benefits such as paid leave and insurance, specific to each labor category, are taken from the same ECEC series. Fringe benefits as a percent of wages are calculated separately for each labor category. For example, for December 2007, the average wage rate for professional/technical labor was $33.14; the average fringe benefit was $16.65. Fringe benefits as a percent of wages were $16.65/$33.14, or approximately 50.2 percent.
      An additional loading factor of 17 percent is applied to wages to account for overhead. This approach is used for consistency with Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics economic analyses for two major rulemakings: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (Rice, 2002) and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPAB, 2002). This overhead loading factor is added to the benefits loading factor, and the total is then applied to the base wage to derive the fully loaded wage. For example, the December 2007 fully loaded wage for professional/technical labor is $33.14 x (1+0.502414 + 0.17) = $55.42.
Fully loaded costs for managerial and clerical labor are calculated in a similar manner, as shown in Table A-1.
A.1.2 Derivation of Labor Rates for EPA Staff

      Agency labor costs are calculated based on annual Federal salaries for the Washington-Baltimore area published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2007 (OPM, 2007). The average salary for one Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff is estimated as the salary for a GS-13 Step 5 employee.
Multiplying the annual pay by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect Federal fringe benefits and overhead, the loaded annual salary of EPA staff was calculated to be $143,976.
The Agency loading factor is from an EPA guide, Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) (OPPE, 1992, page 30, footnote 9). The 60 percent assumption was labeled "the benefits multiplication factor" in the EPA Guide, but has been used in many EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ICRs to reflect both fringe benefits and overhead for Federal staff. For example, it was used in an August 2000 document supporting ICR No. 1139.06, with the following explanation:
      "The annual costs per FTE are derived by multiplying the annual pay rate by 1.6 (the benefits multiplication factor). The multiplication factor used is recommended in EPA's Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation's Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) (June 1, 1992). An EPA internal phone call between Carol Rawie (OPPT/EETD/RIB) and Carl Koch (OPPE/RMD/IMB) on May 3, 1994, indicated that the 1.6 factor included not only benefits but also overhead." (ICR No.1139.06)
Table A-1 Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates
                              EPAB Labor Category
                                 Data Sources
                                     Date

                                     Wage
                                Fringe Benefit
                               Fringes as % wage
                              Over-head % wage[1]
                           Fringe + overhead factor
                                 Loaded Wages

                                      (a)
                                      (b)
                                 (c) =(b)/(a)
                                      (d)
                                 (e)=(c)+(d)+1
                                 (f)=(a) x (e)
                                  Managerial
BLS ECEC, Private Manufacturing industries, "Mgt, Business, and Financial"[2]
                                    Dec-07
                                    $41.93
                                    $20.15
                                    48.06%
                                      17%
                                     1.65
                                    $69.21
                            Professional/
Technical
BLS ECEC, Private Manufacturing industries, "Professional and related"[2]
                                    Dec-07
                                    $33.14
                                    $16.65
                                    50.24%
                                      17%
                                     1.67
                                    $55.42
                                   Clerical
BLS ECEC, Private Manufacturing industries, "Office and Administrative Support" [2]
                                    Dec-07
                                    $16.47
                                    $8.32
                                    50.52%
                                      17%
                                     1.68
                                    $27.59

                                 EPA staff FTE
Annual Federal staff cost: OPM Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV, area, GS-13 Step 5 pay rates, with 60% overhead. [3]
                                    Jan-07
                                 $89,985/year
                                  $43.12/hour
                                      --
                          [Included in 60% overhead]
                                      60%
                                      1.6
                                 $143,976/year
                                  $68.99/hour
Notes:
[1]An overhead rate of 17% was used based on assumptions in Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (Rice, 2002), and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPAB, 2002).
[2]Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: December 2007, US Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 12, 2008 (BLS, 2008a).
[3]The Federal salary is the unloaded Federal GS-13 Step 5 salary for calendar 2007, from the Office of Personnel Management salary table for Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia (OPM, 2007). The 60% fringes-and-overhead rate is from an EPA guide, Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) (OPPE, 1992, page 30, footnote 9).

                             APPENDIX A REFERENCES
BLS, 2008a.  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation
      Supplementary Tables: December 2007 (March 12, 2008) at
      http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuptc5.pdf
     EPAB, 2002. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. Washington, DC. August 2002.
      ICR No. 1139.06. [Information Collection Request for] TSCA Existing Chemical Test Rules, Consent Orders, Test Rule Exemptions, and Voluntary Test Data Submissions: Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Attachment 5, Wage Rates Estimation, August 29, 2000.
      OPPE, 1992. U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs). Washington, DC, June 1, 1992.
      OPM, 2007. Office of Personnel Management, Salary Table 2007-DCB, Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV. Accessed from http://www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/html/dcb.asp
Rice, 2002. Cody Rice. Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program. Washington, DC: U.S.EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch, June 10, 2002.


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 232 (Friday, December 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75520-75522]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30375]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63389; File No. S7-16-09]

 Order Extending Temporary Conditional Exemptions Under The
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in Connection With Request on Behalf of
Ice Clear Europe, Limited Related to Central Clearing of Credit Default
Swaps and Request for Comment

November 29, 2010.

I. Introduction

    The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') has taken
multiple actions designed to help foster the prompt development of
credit default swap (``CDS'') central counterparties (``CCP''),
including granting temporary conditional exemptions from certain
provisions of the federal securities laws.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See generally Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 60372
(Jul. 23, 2009), 74 FR 37748 (Jul. 29, 2009) and 61973 (Apr. 23,
2010), 75 FR 22656 (Apr. 29, 2010) (temporary exemptions in
connection with CDS clearing by ICE Clear Europe Limited);
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 60373 (Jul. 23, 2009), 74 FR
37740 (Jul. 29, 2009) and 61975 (Apr. 23, 2010), 75 FR 22641 (Apr.
29, 2010) (temporary exemptions in connection with CDS clearing by
Eurex Clearing AG); Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59578 (Mar.
13, 2009), 74 FR 11781 (Mar. 19, 2009), 61164 (Dec. 14, 2009), 74 FR
67258 (Dec. 18, 2009), and 61803 (Mar. 30, 2010), 75 FR 17181 (Apr.
5, 2010) (temporary exemptions in connection with CDS clearing by
Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.); Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 59527 (Mar. 6, 2009), 74 FR 10791 (Mar. 12, 2009), 61119 (Dec.
4, 2009), 74 FR 65554 (Dec. 10, 2009), and 61662 (Mar. 5, 2010), 75
FR 11589 (Mar. 11, 2010) (temporary exemptions in connection with
CDS clearing by ICE Trust U.S. LLC); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 59164 (Dec. 24, 2008), 74 FR 139 (Jan. 2, 2009) (temporary
exemptions in connection with CDS clearing by LIFFE A&M and
LCH.Clearnet Ltd.); and other Commission actions discussed in
several of these orders. In addition, the Commission has issued
interim final temporary rules that provide exemptions under the
Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for
CDS to facilitate the operation of one or more central
counterparties for the CDS market. See Securities Act Release Nos.
8999 (Jan. 14, 2009), 74 FR 3967 (Jan. 22, 2009) (initial approval),
9063 (Sep. 14, 2009), 74 FR 47719 (Sep. 17, 2009) (extension until
Nov. 30, 2010), and 9158 (Nov. 30, 2010) (extension until Jul. 16,
2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In July 2009, the Commission issued an order providing temporary
conditional exemptions to ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear
Europe''), and certain other parties, to permit ICE Clear Europe to
clear and settle CDS transactions.\2\ In response to ICE Clear Europe's
request, the Commission temporarily extended and expanded the
exemptions in April 2010.\3\ The current exemptions pursuant to the
April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive Order are scheduled to expire on
November 30, 2010, and ICE Clear Europe has requested that the
Commission extend the exemptions contained in the April 2010 ICE Clear
Europe Exemptive Order.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60372 (Jul. 23, 2009),
74 FR 37748 (Jul. 29, 2009) (``July 2009 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive
Order'').
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61973 (Apr. 23, 2010),
75 FR 22656 (Apr. 29, 2010) (``April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive
Order'').
    \4\ See Letter from Russell D. Sacks, ICE Clear Europe, to
Elizabeth Murphy, Secretary, Commission, Nov. 29, 2010 (``November
2010 Request'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

A. Legislative Developments

    Subsequent to the Commission's issuance of the April 2010 ICE Clear
Exemptive Order, the President signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (``Dodd-Frank Act'') into law.\5\
The

Dodd-Frank Act was enacted to, among other purposes, promote the
financial stability of the United States by improving accountability
and transparency in the financial system.\6\ To this end, the
provisions of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act provide for the
comprehensive regulation of security-based swaps \7\ by the
Commission.\8\ The Dodd-Frank Act amends the Exchange Act to require,
among other things, that transactions in security-based swaps be
cleared through a clearing agency that is registered with the
Commission or that is exempt from registration if they are of a type
that the Commission determines must be cleared, unless an exception or
exemption from mandatory clearing applies.\9\ Furthermore, Title VII of
the Dodd-Frank Act provides that a derivatives clearing organization
registered with the CFTC that cleared swaps pursuant to an exemption
from registration as a clearing agency prior to the date of enactment
of the Dodd-Frank Act, such as ICE Clear Europe, is deemed registered
as a clearing agency for the purposes of clearing security-based swaps
(``Deemed Registered Provision'').\10\ The Deemed Registered Provision,
along with other general provisions under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank
Act, becomes effective on July 16, 2011.\11\ As a result, ICE Clear
Europe will no longer need the exemption from registration as a
clearing agency under Section 17A of the Exchange Act provided by the
April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive Order, and previous orders, to
clear security-based swaps after the Deemed Registered Provision
becomes effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Public Law 111-203 (July 21, 2010).
    \6\ See Public Law 111-203, Preamble.
    \7\ Section 761(a)(6) of the Dodd-Frank Act defines a
``security-based swap'' as any agreement, contract, or transaction
that is a ``swap,'' as defined in Section 1a(47) of the Commodity
Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. 1a(47), that is based on an index that is a
narrow-based security index, a single security, or a loan, including
any interest therein or on the value thereof; or the occurrence,
nonoccurrence, or extent of the occurrence of an event relating to a
single issuer of a security or the issuers of securities in a
narrow-based security index, provided that such event directly
affects the financial statements, financial condition, or financial
obligations of the issuer. See Section 3(a)(68) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act''), 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(68) (as
added by Section 761(a)(6) of the Dodd-Frank Act). Section 712(d) of
the Dodd-Frank Act provides that the Commission and the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC''), in consultation with the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, shall, among other
things, jointly further define the terms ``swap'' and ``security-
based swap.''
    \8\ Section 761(a)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act explicitly includes
security-based swaps in the definition of ``security'' in Section
3(a)(10) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78c.
    \9\ See Section 763(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act (adding new Section
3C to the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78c-2).
    \10\ See Section 763(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act (adding new
Section 17A(l) to the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(1)). Under this
Deemed Registered Provision, ICE Clear Europe will be required to
comply with all requirements of the Exchange Act, and the rules
thereunder, applicable to registered clearing agencies to the extent
it clears security-based swaps after the effective date of the
Deemed Registered Provision, including, for example, the obligation
to file proposed rule changes under Section 19(b) of the Exchange
Act.
    \11\ Section 774 of the Dodd-Frank Act states, ``[u]nless
otherwise provided, the provisions of this subtitle shall take
effect on the later of 360 days after the date of the enactment of
this subtitle or, to the extent a provision of this subtitle
requires a rulemaking, not less than 60 days after publication of
the final rule or regulation implementing such provision of this
subtitle.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. ICE Clear Europe's Request for Extension of April 2010 ICE Clear
Europe Exemptive Order

    ICE Clear Europe seeks an extension of the temporary exemptions of
the April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive Order under the same terms
and conditions contained in the April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive
Order.\12\ In ICE Clear's request for an extension of the April 2010
ICE Clear Exemptive Order, ICE Clear represents that there have been no
material changes to the operations of ICE Clear, and that the
representations made by ICE Clear in connection with the April 2010 ICE
Clear Exemptive Order remain true in all material respects.\13\ These
representations are discussed in detail in our earlier ICE Clear
orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See November 2010 Request, supra note 4.
    \13\ See id. ICE Clear Europe notes that it has created a set of
amendments to its rulebook and procedures for technical improvements
to the process for dealing with restructuring credit events and to
facilitate the imminent introduction of clearing of non-U.S., non-
U.K. sovereign CDS contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, consistent with our findings in the April 2010 ICE
Clear Europe Order, and, in particular, in light of the risk management
and systemic benefits in continuing to facilitate CDS clearing by ICE
Clear Europe until Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act becomes fully
effective, the Commission finds that it is necessary or appropriate in
the public interest and is consistent with the protection of investors
to exercise its authority to extend the exemptive relief granted in the
April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive Order until July 16, 2011.
Specifically, pursuant to the Commission's authority under Section 36
of the Exchange Act,\14\ based on the facts presented and the
representations made by ICE Clear Europe,\15\ the Commission is
extending until July 16, 2011, under the same terms and conditions in
the April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive Order each of the existing
exemptions connected with CDS clearing by ICE Clear Europe, which
include: The temporary conditional exemption granted to ICE Clear
Europe from clearing agency registration under Section 17A of the
Exchange Act solely to perform the functions of a clearing agency for
certain non-excluded CDS; the temporary conditional exemption of ICE
Clear Europe and certain of its clearing members from the registration
requirements of Sections 5 and 6 of the Exchange Act solely in
connection with the calculation of mark-to-market prices for certain
non-excluded CDS cleared by ICE Clear Europe; the temporary conditional
exemption of ICE Clear Europe and certain eligible contract
participants from certain Exchange Act requirements with respect to
certain non-excluded CDS cleared by ICE Clear Europe; and the temporary
conditional exemption from certain Exchange Act requirements granted to
registered broker-dealers with respect to certain non-excluded CDS.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78mm. Section 36 of the Exchange Act authorizes
the Commission to conditionally or unconditionally exempt any
person, security, or transaction, or any class of classes of
persons, securities, or transactions, from any provision or
provisions of the Exchange Act or any rule or regulation thereunder,
by rule, regulation, or order, to the extent that such exemption is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and is consistent
with the protection of investors.
    \15\ See November 2010 Request, supra note 4. The exemptions we
are granting today are based on all of the representations made by
ICE Clear Europe in its request, which incorporate representations
made by ICE Clear Europe in connection with the April 2010 ICE Clear
Europe Exemptive Order, which in turn incorporate representations
related to our earlier exemptive orders. We recognize, however, that
there could be legal uncertainty in the event that one or more of
the underlying representations were to become inaccurate.
Accordingly, if any of these exemptions were to become unavailable
by reason of an underlying representation no longer being materially
accurate, the legal status of existing open positions in non-
excluded CDS (as defined in the April 2010 ICE Clear Europe
Exemptive Order) that previously had been cleared pursuant to the
exemptions would remain unchanged, but no new positions could be
established pursuant to the exemptions until all of the underlying
representations were again accurate.
    \16\ See April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Exemptive Order, supra note
3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Solicitation of Comments

    When we granted the April 2010 ICE Clear Europe Order, we requested
comment on all aspects of the exemptions. We received no comments in
response. In connection with this Order extending the exemptions
granted in connection with CDS clearing by ICE Clear Europe, we
reiterate our request for comments on all aspects of the exemptions.
    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number S7-16-09 on the subject line; or
     Use the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov/). Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number S7-16-09. This file number
should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help us
process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one
method. We will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site
(http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml). Comments are also available for
Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference
Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business
days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. All comments received will
be posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly.

III. Conclusion

    It is hereby ordered, pursuant to Section 36(a) of the Exchange
Act, that, until July 16, 2011, the following exemptions connected with
CDS clearing by ICE Clear Europe contained in the April 2010 ICE Clear
Europe Exemptive Order are extended: (i) The temporary conditional
exemption granted to ICE Clear Europe from clearing agency registration
under Section 17A of the Exchange Act solely to perform the functions
of a clearing agency for certain non-excluded CDS; (ii) the temporary
conditional exemption of ICE Clear Europe and certain of its clearing
members from the registration requirements of Sections 5 and 6 of the
Exchange Act solely in connection with the calculation of mark-to-
market prices for certain non-excluded CDS cleared by ICE Clear Europe;
(iii) the temporary conditional exemption of ICE Clear Europe and
certain eligible contract participants from certain Exchange Act
requirements with respect to certain non-excluded CDS cleared by ICE
Clear Europe; and (iv) the temporary conditional exemption from certain
Exchange Act requirements granted to registered broker-dealers with
respect to certain non-excluded CDS.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30375 Filed 12-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


 [Federal Register: August 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 166)] [ Notices]                [Page 50321-50322] [DOCID:fr26au08-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP08-401-000]

  Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation; Notice of Request for

Permission To Withdraw Tariff Filing

August 19, 2008.

    Take notice that on August 15, 2008, Columbia Gas Transmission

Corporation (Columbia) filed to request permission from the Commission

to withdraw Columbia's proposed tariff sheets filed in the above-

captioned docket on June 5, 2008. Columbia contends that good cause

exists to justify such a withdrawal and that certain Columbia shippers

have agreed to withdraw, without prejudice, their Natural Gas Act

section 5 compliant in Docket No. RP08-403-000 regarding issues raised

by the Columbia filing.

    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance

with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 85.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by

the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but

will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such

protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of section

154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing

a protest must serve a copy of that document on the parties to the

proceeding.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu

of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To

facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will

eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must

create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration

link. Select the eFiling

link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit original and 14

copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filing in the above proceeding is accessible in the

Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the

above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's

Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link

on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification

when a document is added to a subscribed dockets. For assistance with

any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or

call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 27, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

 [FR Doc. E8-19680 Filed 8-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68111-68113]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27040]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70816; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2013-86]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Adopt
Commentary .03 to Rule 980NY To Limit the Volume of Complex Orders by a
Single ATP Holder During the Trading Day

November 6, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 28, 2013, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE MKT'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On November 5, 2013, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal.\3\ The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
as modified by Amendment No. 1 thereto, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange proposed to delete the
phrase ``at any given time'' located on page six of the Form 19b-4
and in the last paragraph on page 14 of the Exhibit 1 to the Form
19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is proposing to adopt as Commentary .03 to Rule 980NY,
which was reserved, a Complex Order Table Cap, to limit the volume of
complex orders by a single ATP Holder during the trading day. The text
of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to adopt as Commentary .03 to Rule 980NY,
which was reserved, a Complex Order Table Cap, to limit the volume of
complex orders entered by a single ATP Holder during the trading day.
The Exchange believes that the Complex Order Table Cap would help
maintain a fair and orderly market because it is a system protection
tool designed to assist the Exchange in preventing any single ATP
Holder from utilizing more than a specified percentage of the complex
order table during the trading day.
    Rule 980NY governs trading of ``Complex Orders'' \4\ on the NYSE
MKT System (``Electronic Complex Orders''). Rule 980NY(c)(i) currently
provides that Electronic Complex Orders accepted in the Exchange's
Complex Matching Engine (``CME'') \5\ are executed automatically
against other Electronic Complex Orders in the Consolidated Book,\6\
unless individual orders or quotes in the Consolidated Book can execute
against incoming Electronic Complex Orders, subject to specified
conditions, in which case such individual orders and quotes have
priority. Rule 980NY(c)(ii) currently provides that Electronic Complex
Orders in the CME that are not marketable against other Electronic
Complex Orders automatically execute against individual quotes or
orders in the Consolidated Book, provided that the Electronic Complex
Orders can be executed in full or in a permissible ratio by the
individual quotes or orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rule 900.3NY(e) defines an Complex Order as ``any order
involving the simultaneous purchase and/or sale of two or more
different option series in the same underlying security, for the
same account, in a ratio that is equal to or greater than one-to-
three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one (3.00) and for
the purpose of executing a particular investment strategy.''
    \5\ Rule 980NY(a) defines the CME as ``the mechanism in which
Electronic Complex Orders are executed against each other or against
individual quotes and orders in the Consolidated Book.''
    \6\ Rule 900.2NY(14) defines the Consolidated Book as ``the
Exchange's electronic book of limit orders for the accounts of
Customers and broker-dealers, and Quotes with Size. All orders and
Quotes with Size that are entered into the Book will be ranked and
maintained in accordance with the rules of priority as provided in
Rule 964NY.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 980NY(c)(iii) currently provides that ATP Holders have the
ability to view the Electronic Complex Orders in the Consolidated Book
via an electronic interface and may submit orders to the CME to trade
against orders in the Consolidated Book.\7\ Current Rule 980NY does not
impose any cap on the volume of Electronic Complex Orders entered by
ATP Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Under Rules 980NY(c)(i)-(iii), incoming orders or quotes, or
those residing in the Consolidated Book, that execute against
Electronic Complex Orders are allocated pursuant to Rule964NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange ranks and tracks Electronic Complex Orders in the
Consolidated Book in a ``complex order table.'' The complex order table
has sufficient capacity (i.e., the maximum allowable Electronic Complex
Orders during the trading day) to accept all Complex Orders submitted
by all ATP Holders under normal operating conditions. However, that
capacity is not unlimited.\8\ Thus, if an ATP Holder were to experience
a systems malfunction that led to the entry of an inordinate number of
Electronic Complex Orders, the entire capacity of the complex order
table could potentially be utilized solely by that one ATP Holder. If
this were to happen, the Exchange would have to reject all subsequent
Electronic Complex Orders--from all ATP Holders--exceeding the total
capacity of the complex order table on that trading day. Under current
Rule 980NY, there is no limitation to the number of Electronic Complex
Orders that a single ATP Holder may submit, which, as explained above,
could result in a single ATP Holder utilizing the entire capacity of
the complex order table. Thus, the Exchange is proposing to adopt as
Commentary .03 to Rule 980NY a cap to prevent an ATP Holder from
utilizing more than a specified percentage of the complex order table
during the trading day (the ``Complex Order Table Cap'' or ``Cap'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The complex order table currently has the capacity to hold
Electronic Complex Orders containing up to 16 million legs
throughout the trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to proposed Commentary .03 to Rule 980NY, if an ATP Holder
exceeds the Complex Order Table Cap by submitting orders that comprise
more than ``n%'' of the capacity of the complex order table, the
Exchange would reject that ATP Holder's Electronic Complex Orders for
the remainder of the trading day. Prior to breaching the Complex Order
Table Cap, the ATP Holder would receive a warning to signal a potential
breach. Specifically, when an ATP Holder utilizes more than ``n%-x'' of
the complex order table, the ATP Holder's Electronic Complex Orders
would be rejected until such time that the ATP

Holder has notified the Exchange to re-enable the submission of
Electronic Complex Orders.
    If, however, the Complex Order Table Cap is breached (i.e., the ATP
Holder submits orders in excess of ``n%'' of the complex order table),
all Electronic Complex Orders submitted by that ATP Holder would be
rejected for the remainder of the trading day. The Exchange would not
reject any Electronic Complex Orders until after an ATP Holder had
breached either the warning threshold (i.e., ``n%-x'') or the Cap.
Thus, for example, if an ATP Holder submits an Electronic Complex Order
that, once accepted, breaches the Cap, the Exchange would accept that
order in its entirety and then would reject all subsequent Electronic
Complex Orders from that ATP Holder for the remainder of the trading
day. Unless determined otherwise by the Exchange and announced to ATP
Holders via Trader Update, the specified percentage (i.e., ``n% [sic])
would be no less than 60%, and ``n%-x'' would be no less than 40%.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Trader Updates are disseminated electronically to all ATP
Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the Exchange does not currently anticipate having to adjust
the proposed Cap, the Exchange recognizes that under certain market
conditions (e.g., extreme volatility) or in unforeseen circumstances
(e.g., unusual influx of market participants) the specified percentages
prescribed by the Exchange may be overly restrictive at times and there
could be situations where the Exchange may need to temporarily reduce
the percentages applicable to the Cap to accommodate these situations.
Thus, the Exchange proposes that in the interest of a fair and orderly
market, the applicable percentages may be temporarily modified by a
Trading Official to a percentage lower than prescribed. The Trading
Officials are presently authorized to make similar determinations
regarding such matters as position limits \10\ and quote-width
differentials.\11\ Permitting a Trading Official to temporarily modify
the percentages applicable to the Cap is consistent with their ability
to recommend and enforce rules and regulations relating to trading,
access, order, decorum, health, safety and welfare on the Exchange
which contributes to the Exchange's obligation to maintain a fair and
orderly market. If a Trading Official were to temporarily modify the
percentages applicable to the Cap, the Exchange would contemporaneously
announce the new settings to all ATP Holders via Trader Update.
Temporary modifications to the percentages applicable to the Cap would
be completed at the Exchange level. ATP Holders will not have to make
any adjustments to proprietary systems to accommodate such
modifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Exchange Rule 904.05.
    \11\ See Exchange Rules 925NY(b)(5) and 925NY(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At present, the Exchange estimates that, on average, during the
trading day, the volume of orders populating the complex order table
from all ATP Holders combined is less than 40%. Because under normal
operating conditions all ATP Holders combined utilize less than 40% of
the complex order table, the Exchange believes that setting the Cap for
a single ATP Holder at 60% would ensure that 40% of the complex order
table--which is typically sufficient to accommodate all ATP Holder's
orders--would remain accessible to the balance of ATP Holders and would
not unfairly deny these ATP Holders access to the market. Moreover, the
Exchange believes that a single ATP Holder would only exceed the Cap
(or receive a warning of a near breach) in the event of a bona fide
problem (e.g., a system error or malfeasance).
    The Exchange believes that the Complex Order Table Cap would
improve the efficiency of the Electronic Complex Order process and help
maintain a fair and orderly market because it is designed as a system
protection tool that will enable the Exchange to prevent any single ATP
Holder from utilizing more than a specified percentage of the complex
order table during the trading day.

Implementation

    The Exchange will announce the implementation date of the proposed
rule change by Trader Update to be published no later than 60 days
following approval. The implementation date will be no later than 60
days following the issuance of the Trader Update.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\13\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to, and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that providing
the Complex Order Table Cap removes impediments to, and perfects the
mechanism of a free and open market because it would provide the
Exchange with a system protection tool designed to assist in addressing
the risk that a single ATP Holder could--either intentionally or
inadvertently and erroneously--utilize the entire complex order table,
effectively shutting out from the market for the remainder of the
trading day all other ATP Holders' Electronic Complex Orders. By
rejecting an ATP Holder's Electronic Complex Orders when that ATP
Holder's orders encroach upon or exceed the Cap, the Exchange would
ensure that the complex order table could fairly accommodate Electronic
Complex Orders from all ATP Holders. The Cap would provide the
ancillary benefit of reducing the risk that options orders submitted in
error or otherwise by a single ATP Holder could clog the complex order
table, potentially foreclosing the execution of valid orders. Thus, the
Exchange believes that the Complex Order Table Cap would protect
investors and the public interests because the Cap would ensure the
optimal functioning of the complex order table by disabling the
submission of Electronic Complex Orders of a single ATP Holder that has
exceeded the Cap, thereby allowing the Exchange to accommodate
Electronic Complex Orders from all other ATP Holders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that the implementation of the
Cap would not unfairly deny any ATP Holder access to the market. Under
normal operating conditions, the Electronic Complex Orders of all ATP
Holders combined does not exceed 40% of the complex order table.
Therefore, the Exchange believes that setting the Cap for a single ATP
Holder at 60% would ensure that 40% of the complex order table--which
is typically sufficient to accommodate all ATP Holder's orders--would
remain accessible to the balance of ATP Holders and would not unfairly
deny these ATP Holders access to the market. Moreover, the Exchange
believes that a single ATP Holder would only exceed the Cap (or receive
a warning of a near breach) in the event of a bono [sic] fide problem
(e.g., a system error or malfeasance).

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposal will provide market participants with additional protection
from erroneous executions. Thus, the Exchange does not

believe the proposal creates any significant impact on competition.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2013-86 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2013-86. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used.
    To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room on
official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying
at the principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be
posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2013-86, and should be submitted
on or before December 4, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27040 Filed 11-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17548-17549]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07041]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0451]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Oregon Trucking Associations (OTA)
Exemption; FAST Act Extension of Compliance Date

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final determination; extension of existing exemption
date.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces the extension of the exemption granted to the
Oregon Trucking Associations (OTA) on March 18, 2015, for certain
timber operations in Oregon. The Agency extends the expiration date
from March 18, 2017 to March 18, 2020 in response to section
5206(b)(2)(A) of the ``Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act''
(FAST Act). That section extends the expiration date of hours-of-
service (HOS) exemptions in effect on the date of enactment of the FAST
Act to 5 years from the date of issuance of the exemptions. The OTA
exemption from the Agency's 30-minute rest break requirement is limited
to commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers engaged in transporting
timber from Oregon forestlands, and further limited to periods of the
year in which the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) has formally
restricted logging operations to certain hours of the day due to an
elevated risk of forest fire. The Agency previously determined that the
CMV operations of OTA timber transporters under this exemption would
likely achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the
level of safety that would be obtained in the absence of the exemption.

DATES: This limited exemption is effective from March 18, 2015, through
March 18, 2020.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations. FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in
the Federal Register [49 CFR 381.315(a)].
    Section 5206(b)(2)(A) of the FAST Act requires FMCSA to extend any
exemption from any provision of the HOS regulations under 49 CFR part
395 that was in effect on the date of enactment of the Act to a period
of 5 years from the date the exemption was granted. The exemption may
be renewed. Because this action merely implements a statutory mandate
that took effect on the date of enactment of the FAST Act, notice and
comment are not required.

OTA Exemption

    The OTA, a trade association, applied for a limited exemption from
the mandatory rest break requirement of 49 CFR 395.3(a)(3)(ii) on
behalf of all motor carriers and drivers who operate CMVs to transport
logs in interstate commerce from Oregon forestlands.
    FMCSA reviewed OTA's application and the public comments and
concluded that limiting the timber operations of these CMV drivers to a
fixed 12-hour window would promote safety at least as effectively as
the 30-minute break. These drivers operate like certain short-haul
drivers, who are already permitted to follow a 12-hour duty period,
during which they are

exempt from the break requirement. A Notice of Final Determination
granting the OTA exemption was published on March 18, 2015 [80 FR
14227].
    The substance of the exemption is not affected by this extension.
The exemption covers only the 30-minute break requirement [49 CFR
395.3(a)(3)(ii)]. The exemption is restricted to drivers operating CMVs
engaged in interstate logging originating in Oregon forestlands during
periods in which the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODOF) imposes
Industrial Fire Precaution Level 3 (IPFL3) on those lands, restricting
the transportation of logs to certain hours of the day because of an
elevated risk of forest fire.\1\ Drivers operating under this exemption
must be released from duty no more than 12 consecutive hours after the
time they come on duty following 10 consecutive hours off duty. They
must maintain a record of duty status (``log book'') for the days on
which they travel outside a 100 air-mile radius of their normal work
reporting location. If an individual chose to forego this short-haul
exemption either by travelling outside the 100 air-miles or by working
a 14 hour day instead of the 12 hours required by the exemption, he or
she would be required to maintain a logbook for that day and also to
comply with the 30-minute rest break provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Neither IFPL 1 nor IFPL 2 restricts the transportation of
timber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FMCSA does not believe the safety record of any driver
operating under this exemption will deteriorate. However, should
deterioration in safety occur, FMCSA will take all steps necessary to
protect the public interest, including revocation of the exemption. The
FMCSA has the authority to terminate the exemption at any time the
Agency has the data/information to conclude that safety is being
compromised.

    Issued on: March 23, 2016.
T. F. Scott Darling, III,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-07041 Filed 3-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: November 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 69622]
[DOCID:fr19no08-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13200-000; Project No. 13201-000]

FFP Missouri 19, LLC; FFP Missouri 20, LLC; Notice of Preliminary
Permit Applications Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comment, Motions
To Intervene, and Competing Applications

November 12, 2008.
    On April 15, 2008, FFP Missouri 19, LLC and FFP Missouri 20, LLC
each filed an application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal
Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Missouri 19 and
Missouri 20 Projects, to be located on the Missouri River in Saline,
Cooper, and Howard Counties, Missouri.
    The proposed Missouri 19 Project consists of: (1) 4,860 proposed 20
kilowatt Free Flow generating units having a total installed capacity
of 97.2 megawatts, (2) a proposed transmission line, and (3)
appurtenant facilities. The FFP Missouri 19, LLC, project would have an
average annual generation of 425.74 gigawatt-hours and be sold to a
local utility.
    The proposed Missouri 20 Project consists of: (1) 1,800 proposed 20
kilowatt Free Flow generating units having a total installed capacity
of 36 megawatts, (2) a proposed transmission line, and (3) appurtenant
facilities. The FFP Missouri 20, LLC, project would have an average
annual generation of 157.68 gigawatt-hours and be sold to a local
utility.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Dan Irvin, FFP Missouri 19, LLC and FFP
Missouri 20, LLC, 69 Bridge Street, Manchester, MA 01944, phone (978)
232-3536.
    FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. 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-13200
or P-13201) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-27369 Filed 11-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P