[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78417-78422]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98886; File No. SR-ISE-2023-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq ISE, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Permit the
Listing and Trading of XND Options

November 8, 2023.
    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 27, 2023, Nasdaq ISE, LLC (``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to permit the listing and trading of options
based on 1/100 of the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index[supreg] (``Nasdaq-
100'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/ise/rules, 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
rules to permit the listing and trading of index options on Nasdaq 100
Micro Index Options (``XND''). The XND options contract will be the
same in all respects as the current Nasdaq-100 Index options (``NDX'')
\3\ contract listed on the Exchange, except that it will be based on 1/
100 of the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index, and will be P.M.-Settled with
an exercise settlement value based on the closing index value of the
Nasdaq-100 Index on the day of expiration.\4\ The Exchange believes
that the proposed contract will be valuable for retail and other
investors that wish to trade micro options on the Nasdaq-100 Index.
Finally, today, Nasdaq Phlx

LLC (``Phlx'') has approval to list and trade XND options. The rules to
list and trade NDX [sic] options on ISE are identical to those of
Phlx.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Options 4A, Section 12(a)(5).
    \4\ In addition to the current Nasdaq-100 Index value, Nasdaq
will disseminate an Index value for XND that is 1/100 of the value
of the Nasdaq-100 Index.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98451 (September 20,
2023), 88 FR 66088 (September 26, 2023) (SR-Phlx-2023-07) (Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Make Permanent Certain P.M.-Settled Pilots).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nasdaq-100 Index
    The Nasdaq-100 Index is a modified market capitalization-weighted
index that includes 100 of the largest non-financial companies listed
on The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''),\6\ based on market
capitalization.\7\ It does not contain securities of financial
companies, including investment companies. Security types generally
eligible for the Nasdaq-100 Index include common stocks, ordinary
shares, American Depository Receipts, and tracking stocks. Security or
company types not included in the Nasdaq-100 Index are closed-end
funds, convertible debentures, exchange traded funds, limited liability
companies, limited partnership interests, preferred stocks, rights,
shares or units of beneficial interest, warrants, units and other
derivative securities.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Nasdaq is an affiliate of the Exchange.
    \7\ The Nasdaq-100 Index is a broad-based index, as defined in
Options 4A, Section 3.
    \8\ A description of the Nasdaq-100 Index is available on
Nasdaq's website at https://indexes.nasdaqomx.com/docs/methodology_NDX.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XND Options Contract
    Currently, the Exchange lists and trades NDX options that are based
on the full value of the Nasdaq-100 Index. In an effort to attract
additional interest in index options based on the Nasdaq-100 Index, the
Exchange now proposes to list and trade a new micro option contract
based on this index. XND options will trade independently of and in
addition to NDX options, and the XND options will be subject to the
same rules that presently govern the trading of index options based on
the Nasdaq-100 Index, including sales practice rules, margin
requirements, trading rules, and position and exercise limits. Similar
to NDX, XND options will be European-style and cash-settled, and will
have a contract multiplier of 100. The contract specifications for XND
options will mirror in all respects those of the NDX options contract
already listed on the Exchange, except that the Exchange proposes that
XND options will be based on 1/100 of the value of the Nasdaq-100
Index, and will be P.M.-settled pursuant to proposed Options 4A,
Section 12(a)(6). The ISE XND option contracts will trade identically
to Phlx XND options.\9\ Also, similar features are available with other
index options contracts listed and/or approved for trading on the
Exchange such as options on NQX (a reduced value index based on \1/5\
of the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index).\10\ The Exchange also proposes
to amend Options 4A, Section 12(a)(5)(ii) to permit options on the
Nasdaq 100 Micro Index to trade a.m.-settled.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 5. See also Phlx Options 4A, Section
12(a)(6).
    \10\ See ISE Options 4A, Section 12(a)(6). NQX is P.M.-settled
and a European-style and cash-settled, with a contract multiplier of
100.
    \11\ The Exchage also proposes to re-letter the internal list in
Options 4A, Section 12(a)(5)(ii) as A through E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The value of the Nasdaq-100 Index has increased significantly in
recent years such that the value of the index stood at 14,717.90, as of
the opening of trading on October 22,023. As a result of the increase
in the value of the underlying Nasdaq-100 Index, the premium for NDX
options has also increased. The Exchange believes that this has caused
NDX options to trade at a level that may be uncomfortably high for
certain retail and other investors. The Exchange believes that listing
options at a micro value will attract a greater source of retail
customer business. Further, listing options on a micro index will
provide an opportunity for investors to trade and hedge the market risk
associated with the Nasdaq-100 Index.
    With an exercise settlement value based on 1/100 of the Nasdaq-100
Index, the Exchange believes that retail and other investors would be
able to use this trading vehicle while extending a smaller outlay of
capital. Furthermore, the proposed micro index will have a notional
value at a level that is comparable to similar products that have been
successful in the market, including the S&P 500 Mini SPX Options Index
(XSP), which had an index value of (428.45) as of the opening of
trading on October 2, 2023. Of note, Phlx XND options have traded at
this level since 2021. The Exchange therefore believes that basing the
proposed XND options contract on 1/100 of the value of the Nasdaq-100
Index should attract additional investors, and, in turn, create a more
active and liquid trading environment.
    XND options will also be P.M.-settled as the Exchange believes that
market participants, and in particular, retail investors, who are the
target audience for this product, prefer P.M.-settled index options.
P.M.-settlement is preferred by retail investors as it allows market
participants to hedge their exposure for the full week. A.M.-settled
options by contrast are based on opening prices on the day of
expiration and therefore stop trading on the day prior, leaving
residual risk on the day of expiration. Feedback from Members that
handle retail order flow has indicated that P.M.-settlement is needed
to garner retail investor support for this product. In this regard, the
Exchange notes that XND options on Phlx are P.M.-settled and recently
received approval for permanency.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98451 (September
20, 2023), 88 FR 66088 (September 26, 2023) (SR-Phlx-2023-07) (Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, To Make Permanent Certain P.M.-Settled Pilots).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Supplementary Material .07 to ISE Options 4A, Section
12, Phlx's proposal to list XND would permit XND, as a broad-based
index and part of the Nonstandard Expirations Program, to open for
trading Weekly Expirations on XND to expire on any Monday, Wednesday,
or Friday (other than the third Friday-of-the-month or days that
coincide with an EOM expiration). Additionally, the Exchange proposes
to amend Supplementary Material .07 to ISE Options 4A, Section 12 to
permit the listing and trading of XND options that expire on any
Tuesday or Thursday similar to Nasdaq-100 Index options which today
expire on each business day of the week. With this proposal, XND would
be permitted to open for trading Weekly Expirations to expire on any
Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday. Today, Phlx's rules
permit XND to expire on any Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or
Friday pursuant to Options 4A, Section 12(b)(5).
    Weekly Expirations in XND would be subject to all provisions of
this Rule and treated the same as options on the same underlying index
that expire on the third Friday of the expiration month; provided,
however, that Weekly Expirations shall be P.M.-settled and new series
in Weekly Expirations may be added up to and including on the
expiration date for an expiring Weekly Expiration. Further, the
Exchange may open for trading EOMs on any broad-based index eligible
for standard options trading to expire on last trading day of the
month. EOMs shall be subject to all provisions of this Rule and treated
the same as options on the same underlying index that expire on the
third Friday of the expiration month; provided, however, that EOMs
shall be P.M.-settled and new series in EOMs may be added up to and
including on the expiration date for an expiring

EOM.\13\ Today, XND options on Phlx are part of the Nonstandard
Program.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ XND is a broad-based index.
    \14\ See Phlx Options 4A, Section 12(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that the introduction of a new P.M.-
settled Nasdaq-100 Index contract will cause any market disruptions, as
noted herein, Phlx XND options recently received approval for
permanency.\15\ The Exchange will monitor for any disruptions caused by
P.M.-settlement of the proposed XND options contract or the development
of any factors that could cause such disruptions. P.M.-settled options
predominate in the over-the-counter (``OTC'') market, and the Exchange
is not aware of any adverse effects in the OTC market attributable to
the P.M.-settlement feature. The Exchange is merely proposing to offer
a P.M.-settled product in an exchange environment, which offers the
additional benefits of added transparency, price discovery, and
stability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trading Hours, Minimum Increments, Expirations and Strike Prices
    XND options will be available for trading during the Exchange's
standard trading hours for index options, i.e., from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15
p.m. (Eastern time), except that that on the last trading day,
transactions in expiring p.m.-settled broad-based index options may be
effected on the Exchange between the hours of 9:30 a.m. (Eastern time)
and 4:00 p.m. (Eastern time).\16\ The trading hours for XND options
will be the same as the trading hours for options on Nasdaq-100 Index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Supplementary Material .07(c) to Options 4A, Section
12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    XND options will trade with a minimum trading increment of $0.01
for all options series \17\ similar to Phlx XND options.\18\ ISE
proposes to adopt a new Supplementary Material .04 to Options 3,
Section 3 to state that for so long as Invesco QQQ Trust Series 1
(``QQQ'') options participate in the Penny Interval Program, the
minimum increments for XND options shall be the same as QQQ for all
options series (including LEAPS), which shall be $0.01 for options for
all other series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ This is the case as long as QQQ options (``QQQ'')
participate in the Penny Interval Program.
    \18\ See Phlx Supplementary Material .03 to Options 3, Section
3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes that XND options will have monthly expiration
dates on the third Friday of each month (i.e., Expiration Friday), and
the Exchange proposes to list XND options in expiration months
consistent with those of other index option products available on the
Exchange.\19\ In addition, the Exchange may list long term index
options series (``LEAPS'') that expire from twelve (12) to sixty (60)
months from the date of issuance.\20\ With the addition of XND, the
Exchange proposes to amend the first sentence of Options 4A, Section
12(b)(1)(i) to provide that ``Index long term options series may be
based on either the full value, reduced value or micro index value of
the underlying index.'' There may be up to ten (10) expiration months,
none further out than sixty (60) months. Strike price intervals and
continuity Rules shall not apply to such options series until the time
to expiration is less than twelve (12) months. Bid/ask differentials
for long-term options contracts are specified within Options 2, Section
4(b)(4)(i)(A). Further, the Exchange proposes to add rule text at
Options 4A, Section 12(b)(3)(ii) that provides, ``Micro index long term
options series may expire at six-month intervals. When a new expiration
month is listed, series may be near or bracketing the current index
value. Additional series may be added when the value of the underlying
index increases or decreases by ten (10) to fifteen (15) percent.'' XND
options would also be eligible to be added to the Short Term Option
Series Program (``Weeklies'') and/or Quarterly Options Series Program
(``Quarterlies'') if designated by the Exchange Supplementary Material
.01 and .02 to Options 4A, Section 12, respectively.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Options 4A, Section 12(a)(3) currently provides that the
Exchange may list: (i) up to six (6) standard monthly expirations at
any one time in a class, but will not list index options that expire
more than twelve (12) months out; (ii) up to 12 standard monthly
expirations at any one time for any class that the Exchange (as the
Reporting Authority) uses to calculate a volatility index; and (iii)
up to 12 standard (monthly) expirations in NDX options and NQX
options.
    \20\ See Options 4A, Section 12(b)(3).
    \21\ The Exchange expects that it will add XND options to the
Weeklies program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, as noted herein, the Exchange proposes to permit XND
options to be listed and traded in accordance with the Nonstandard
Expirations Program, which permits broad-based indexes to list standard
options trading to expire on any Monday, Wednesday, or Friday (other
than the third Friday-of-the-month or days that coincide with an End of
Month (``EOM'') expiration), and permit XND options to separately
expire on Tuesdays and Thursdays, similar to options on the Nasdaq-100
Index. Weekly Expirations would be subject to all provisions of Options
4A, Section 12 and would be treated the same as options on the same
underlying index that expire on the third Friday of the expiration
month. New series in Weekly Expirations could be added up to and
including on the expiration date for an expiring Weekly Expiration. The
maximum number of expirations that could be listed for each Weekly
Expiration (i.e., a Monday expiration, Wednesday expiration, or Friday
expiration, as applicable) in a given class would be the same as the
maximum number of expirations permitted for standard options on the
same broad-based index.\22\ Further, the Exchange could open for
trading EOMs on any broad-based index eligible for standard options
trading to expire on last trading day of the month. EOMs would be
subject to all provisions of Options 4A, Section 12 and treated the
same as options on the same underlying index that expire on the third
Friday of the expiration month. However, the EOMs would be P.M.-settled
and new series in EOMs could be added up to and including on the
expiration date for an expiring EOM.\23\ Today, Phlx XND options trade
in the Nonstandards Program.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Weekly Expirations would not need to be for consecutive
Monday, Wednesday, or Friday expirations as applicable. However, the
expiration date of a non-consecutive expiration would not be
permitted beyond what would be considered the last expiration date
if the maximum number of expirations were listed consecutively.
Weekly Expirations that are first listed in a given class could
expire up to four weeks from the actual listing date. If the last
trading day of a month were a Monday, Wednesday, or Friday and the
Exchange were to list EOMs and Weekly Expirations as applicable in a
given class, the Exchange would list an EOM instead of a Weekly
Expiration in the given class. Other expirations in the same class
would not be counted as part of the maximum number of Weekly
Expirations for a broad-based index class. If the Exchange were not
open for business on a respective Monday, the normally Monday
expiring Weekly Expirations would expire on the following business
day. If the Exchange were not open for business on a respective
Wednesday or Friday, the normally Wednesday or Friday expiring
Weekly Expirations would expire on the previous business day. See
Supplementary Material .07(a) to Options 4A, Section 12.
    \23\ The maximum number of expirations that could be listed for
EOMs in a given class would be the same as the maximum number of
expirations permitted for standard options on the same broad-based
index. EOM expirations would not need to be for consecutive end of
month expirations. However, the expiration date of a non-consecutive
expiration may not be beyond what would be considered the last
expiration date if the maximum number of expirations were listed
consecutively. EOMs that are first listed in a given class could
expire up to four weeks from the actual listing date. Other
expirations would not be counted as part of the maximum numbers of
EOM expirations for a broad-based index class. See Supplementary
Material .07(a) to Options 4A, Section 12.
    \24\ See Phlx Options 4A, Section 12(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, pursuant to Options 4A, Section 12(c)(1), except as
provided in

Options 4A, Section 12(c)(5),\25\ the exercise (strike) price intervals
will be no less than $5, provided that the Exchange may determine to
list strike prices at no less than $2.50 intervals for options on the
following indexes (which may also be known as sector indexes). The
Exchange proposes to amend Options 4A, Section 12(c)(1) to add XND
options to the list of classes where strike price intervals of no less
than $2.50 are generally permitted and note, ``if the strike price is
less than $200.'' The Exchange proposes to adopt the same strike price
intervals for XND options as are listed for XND options on Phlx \26\
and currently approved for Reduced Value Nasdaq 100 Options within
Options 4A, Section 12(c)(5). Thus, notwithstanding Options 4A, Section
12(c)(1), the interval between strike prices of series of XND options
will be $1 or greater, subject to the conditions described in Options
4A, Section 12(c)(5).\27\ The Exchange will not list LEAPS on XND
options at intervals less than $5. If the Exchange determines to add
XND options to the Weeklies or Quarterlies programs such options will
be listed with expirations and strike prices described in Options 4A,
Section 12(c)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Proposed Options 4A, Section 12(c)(1) provides that the
interval between strike prices of series of Mini-Nasdaq-100 Index
(``MNX'' or ``Mini-NDX''), Nasdaq 100 Reduced Value Index (``NQX'')
or Nasdaq 100 Micro Index Options (``XND'') options will be $1 or
greater, subject to certain conditions.
    \26\ See Phlx Options 4A, Section 12(a)(2).
    \27\ See also Phlx Supplementary Material .02 to Options 4A,
Section 12 describing XND options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Position and Exercise Limits; Margin
    As with NDX, in determining compliance with Options 4A, Section 6,
Position Limits, there will be no position limits for broad-based index
option contracts in the XND class.\28\ Although there will be no
position limits for XND options, the Exchange proposes to amend Options
4A, Section 6 to include XND. Options 4A, Section 6(c) provides,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The Exchange is amending Options 4A, Section 6(a) to
reflect this proposed change.

Positions in reduced-value index options shall be aggregated with
positions in full-value indices. For such purposes, reduced-value
contracts will be counted consistent with their value (e.g., 5 NQX
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
reduced-value contracts equal 1 NDX full-value contract).

Since the Exchange is proposing to list a micro index contract that is
based on 1/100 of the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index, Options 4A,
Section 6(c) would apply. In addition, as with NDX, there would be no
exercise limits for XND.\29\ The same rules for position and exercise
limits to XND options on Phlx.\30\ Finally, the Exchange proposes to
apply broad-based index margin requirements for the purchase and sale
of XND options that are the same as margin requirements currently in
place for NDX options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Options 4A, Section 10 which provides that exercise
limits for index options contracts shall be equivalent to the
position limits described in Options 4A, Section 6.
    \30\ See Phlx Options 4A, Section 6, Phlx Options 4A, Section
10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surveillance and Capacity
    The Exchange represents that it has sufficient capacity to handle
additional quotations and message traffic associated with the proposed
listing and trading of XND options. Further, the Exchange has analyzed
its capacity and represents that it believes the Exchange and the
Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary systems
capacity to handle any additional traffic associated with the listing
of the maximum number nonstandard expirations permitted pursuant to
Supplementary Material .07 to Options 4A, Section 12.
    Index options are integrated into the Exchange's existing
surveillance system architecture and are thus subject to the relevant
surveillance processes. The Exchange represents that it has adequate
surveillance procedures to monitor trading in XND options thereby
aiding in the maintenance of a fair and orderly market.
    The Exchange notes that it is amending Options 4A, Section 12 to
include the Nasdaq 100 Micro Index Options within the Rule to conform
to the amendments proposes herein.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\31\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\32\ 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 a national market system, and, in general to protect
investors and the public interest. Specifically, the Exchange believes
that the listing and trading of a micro index P.M.-settled index option
contract based on the Nasdaq-100 Index will attract order flow to the
Exchange, increase the variety of listed options, and provide a
valuable hedge tool to retail and other investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and compete with similar products that
are offered on Cboe such as SPXW and OEX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will further
the Exchange's goal of introducing new and innovative products to the
marketplace. Specifically, the Exchange believes that XND options would
provide additional opportunities for market participants to trade and
hedge exposure to the Nasdaq-100 Index as it does today on Phlx. The
proposed XND options product is identical to XND options on Phlx.\33\
Additionally, the proposed XND options product is similar to NDX
options that are currently listed and traded on the Exchange with two
important differences: (1) XND options will be based on 1/100 the value
of the Nasdaq-100 Index, and (2) XND options will be P.M.-settled.
These differences are based on the Exchanges experience listing NDX
options, and are designed to attract additional participation from
retail and other investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Phlx Options 4A, Section 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the trading of XND options on Phlx, the Exchange believes
that the proposed contract specifications will be attractive to market
participants, and will remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system. The nonstandard
expirations would expand the ability of investors to hedge risks
against market movements stemming from economic releases or market
events that occur during the month and at the end of the month.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes that weekly expirations and EOMs
should create greater trading and hedging opportunities and
flexibility, and provide customers with the ability to tailor their
investment objectives more closely.
    Currently, the Exchange believes that there continues to be unmet
market demand for exchange-listed index options on the Nasdaq-100
Index. This unmet demand stems in part from the high value of the
Nasdaq-100 Index and the consequently higher cost of purchasing NDX
options. The high value of the Nasdaq-100 Index has made it more
difficult for retail and other investors to comfortably purchase
options on the index. The Exchange believes that a micro index option
would allow additional participation from these investors.
Specifically, the Exchange believes that basing the contract on a micro
value of the Nasdaq-100 Index will encourage additional participation
by retail and other investors due to the reduced capital outlay needed
to trade these options. While the NQX product has attracted retail
trading volume to a certain point given that the NQX product represents

\1/5\ the value of the Nasdaq-100 Index, the Exchange believes that XND
options, which represent \1/100\ of the Nasdaq-100 Index, may strike a
more appropriate balance for other retail investors with its reduced
size. This value is more similar to other competitive index option
products, such as Cboe's Mini-S&P 500 Index (``XSP'').
    Furthermore, based on experience with XND options on Phlx, the
Exchange believes that providing P.M.-settlement will make this product
more attractive to market participants and help garner additional
support for this new index options product. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that P.M.-settlement will be attractive to retail and other
investors that want to use these options to hedge an entire week of
risk without leaving residual risk on the day of expiration, and
without having to actively manage these positions, for example, by
rolling their hedge into the next expiration. Finally, the Exchange
proposes to offer such a product so that it can compete effectively
with similar index option products offered by options markets such as
Cboe which offers SPXW and OEX. Recently, the Commission approved the
permanency of XND as a P.M.-settled product.\34\ Additionally, the
Exchange notes that Nasdaq has an automated closing cross that
facilitates orderly closings by aggregating a large pool of liquidity,
across a variety of order types, in a single venue. The Exchange
believes that Nasdaq's closing procedures are well-equipped to mitigate
imbalance pressure at the close. Also, the Exchange believes that the
proposal will provide additional trading and hedging opportunities for
investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    XND options will be subject to the same rules that presently govern
the trading of index options based on the Nasdaq-100 Index, including
sales practice rules, margin requirements, trading rules, and position
and exercise limits. The Exchange therefore believes that the rules
applicable to trading in XND options are consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. Furthermore, the Exchange
represents that it has sufficient systems capacity and adequate
surveillance procedures to handle trading in XND options.
    With respect to the Exchange's proposal to adopt new Supplementary
Material .04 to Options 3, Section 3 to provide that minimum increments
for bids and offers for XND options be the same as those for QQQ,
regardless of the value at which the option series is quoted, may
promote competition and benefit investors. This proposal aligns the
minimum increments for XND options with those for QQQ options in order
to allow market participants to quote in minimum increments of $0.01 is
consistent with the Act because allowing participants to quote in
smaller increments may provide the opportunity for reduced spreads,
thereby lowering costs to investors. In addition, because both XND and
QQQ are based on the Nasdaq-100 Index it would be reasonable for the
minimum increments of bids and offers to be the same for both types of
options.

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. XND options would be
available for trading to all market participants. The proposed rule
change will facilitate the listing and trading of a new option product
that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit
of investors and the marketplace. The listing of XND will enhance
competition by providing investors with an additional investment
vehicle, in a fully-electronic trading environment, through which
investors can gain and hedge exposure to the Nasdaq-100 Index.
Furthermore, this product could offer a competitive alternative to
other existing investment products that seek to allow investors to gain
broad market exposure. Finally, it is possible for other exchanges to
develop or license the use of a new or different index to compete with
the Nasdaq-100 Index and seek Commission approval to list and trade
options on such an index.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \35\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\36\
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \37\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of
Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \36\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \38\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \39\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \40\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so
that it may immediately list and trade XND options on the Exchange,
which are currently listed on Phlx. Further, according to the Exchange,
the rules to list and trade XND options on ISE are identical to those
of Phlx.\41\ The Exchange has stated that waiver of the operative delay
would deepen the liquidity pool for XND options and allow ISE to
compete with similar products that are offered on other exchanges. The
Commission believes that the proposed rule change presents no novel
issues and that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the
proposed rule change operative upon filing.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \40\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \41\ See Phlx Options 4A, Section 12.
    \42\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or 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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number SR-ISE-2023-24 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to file number SR-ISE-2023-24. 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 website (https://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 website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-ISE-2023-24 and should be
submitted on or before December 6, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12), (59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-25108 Filed 11-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 196 (Thursday, October 12, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47396-47397]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21929]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0143; FRL-9969-14--Region 7]

Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Amendment to the Administrative Consent
Order, Grain Processing Corporation, Muscatine, Iowa; Withdrawal of
Direct Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Due to an adverse comment, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is withdrawing the direct final rule for ``Air Plan Approval;
Iowa; Amendment to the Administrative Consent Order, Grain Processing
Corporation, Muscatine, Iowa,'' published in the Federal Register on
August 25, 2017.

DATES: The direct final rule published at 82 FR 40491, August 25, 2017,
is withdrawn effective October 12, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Due to an adverse comment, EPA is
withdrawing the direct final rule to approve a SIP revision submitted
by the State of Iowa pertaining to an amendment to the Administrative
Consent Order, Grain Processing Corporation, Muscatine, Iowa. In the
direct final rule published in the Federal Register on August 25, 2017,
(82 FR 40491), we stated that if we received adverse comment by
September 25, 2017, the rule would be withdrawn and not take effect.
EPA received an adverse comment. We will address those comments in a
proposed rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: September 27, 2017.
Cathy Stepp,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
Accordingly, the amendment to 40 CFR 52.820 published in the Federal
Register on August 25, 2017 (82 FR 40491) on page 40493 is withdrawn
effective October 12, 2017.

[FR Doc. 2017-21929 Filed 10-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment: Dear Mr. Zeller,

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. I am also an employee of a store that makes products to contribute to the many people who have used e-cigarettes and have made strides when it comes to their health due to quitting smoking combustible cigarettes. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited due to the work I have to do on a daily basis to keep our customers using e-cigarettes and being happy with their decision to use them.  I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I have been a non-smoker who has used e-cigarettes for over a year now, and the benefits I have seen have been nothing but positive. I can run without feeling like I cannot breathe, I don't have to worry about second hand smoke effecting the people around me and also I over all feel better when it comes to my overall health. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further if it is needed.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 43 (Monday, March 8, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13260-13263]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04749]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0115; FRL-10020-88-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Multi-Pollutant Standards Rule,
Control of Emissions From Large Combustion Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP) to
amend requirements applicable to certain coal-fired electric generating
units (EGUs) in the Illinois Administrative Code (IAC), also known as
the Multi-Pollutant Standards Rule. On January 23, 2020, the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) submitted a request to amend the
provisions of the Multi-Pollutant Standards Rule in the Illinois
regional haze SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the revision because it
will result in a significant decrease in emissions of NOX
and SO2, meets the applicable requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA), and does not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 7, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2020-0115 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>The
EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays and facility closures due to COVID-
19.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is the background for this action?

    On June 24, 2011, IEPA submitted to EPA rules to address the
visibility protection requirements of section 169A of the CAA and
regional haze, as codified in 40 CFR 51.308. The submission included
the provisions contained in 35 IAC Part 225 (Part 225): Section 225.233
Multi-Pollutant Standards (MPS) (hereafter the ``MPS Rule''). On July
6, 2012, EPA approved subsections (a), (b), (e), and (g) of Section
225.233 into the Illinois SIP. See 77 FR 39943.
    The MPS Rule establishes control requirements and emission
standards for oxides of nitrogen (NOX), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), and emissions of mercury. The MPS Rule provides the
owner of certain EGUs an alternative means to demonstrate compliance
with the emission standards in 35 IAC 225.230(a).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 35 IAC 225.230 contains Illinois' mercury emission standards
for EGUs and is not part of the federally approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The owner of one or more EGUs are identified or referred to as a
``MPS Group'' in the MPS Rule. There are currently two MPS groups in
Illinois: The Dynegy MPS Group and the Ameren MPS Group. The Dynegy MPS
Group included EGUs at the following facilities: Baldwin Power Station,
Havana Power Station, Hennepin Power Station, Vermillion Power Station,
and Wood River Power Station. The Ameren MPS Group included EGUs at the
following facilities: The Coffeen Power Station, Duck Creek Power
Station, E.D. Edwards Power Station, Joppa Power Station, Newton Power
Station, Hutsonville Power Station, and the Meredosia Power Station.

MPS Rule NOX and SO2 Emission Rates

    The Dynegy MPS Group is required to comply with NOX and
SO2 emission standards for the EGUs in section 225.233(e)(1)
and (2). The MPS Rule requires the EGUs in the Dynegy MPS Group to meet
a fleet-wide annual and ozone season NOX emission rate of
0.10 pound/million British thermal units (lb/mmBtu), based on the
greater stringency of a limit calculated from those units' base annual
and ozone season NOX rates beginning in 2012 and continuing
in each calendar year thereafter. The MPS rule requires the EGUs in the
Dynegy MPS Group to meet a fleet-wide annual SO2 emission
rate of 0.25 lb/mmBtu or a rate equivalent to 35 percent of the base
rate of SO2 emissions, whichever was more stringent,
beginning in the 2015 calendar year. The Dynegy MPS Group is currently
required to meet a fleet-wide annual SO2 emission rate of
0.19 lb/mmBtu, which was calculated as 35 percent of the units' base
rate of SO2 emissions.
    The Ameren MPS Group is required to comply with NOX and
SO2 emission standards for the EGUs in section
225.233(e)(3). The MPS Rule requires the EGUs in the Ameren MPS Group
to meet a fleet-wide annual NOX emission rate of 0.14 lb/
mmBtu and ozone season NOX emission of 0.11 lb/mmBtu
beginning in 2010. These units were then required to meet an annual
NOX emission rate of 0.11 lb/mmBtu beginning in 2012 and
continuing in each calendar year thereafter. Beginning in the calendar
year 2017, the Ameren MPS Group was required to meet a fleet-wide
annual SO2 emission rate of 0.23 lb/mmBtu.

MPS Group Changes Due to Change of Ownership

    In 2013, the operating EGUs in the Ameren MPS Group were purchased
by Illinois Power Holdings, LLC (IPH), a wholly owned, indirect
subsidiary of Dynegy, Inc. (Dynegy). Dynegy purchased the EGUs at the
Coffeen, Duck Creek, E.D. Edwards, Joppa, and Newton facilities. The
EGUs at the Meredosia and Hutsonville facilities were transferred to
AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen LLC.
    The following EGUs were permanently retired with this purchase:

Vermillion Units 1 and 2; Wood River Units 4 and 5; E.D. Edwards Unit
1; Newton Unit 2; Hutsonville Units 5 and 6; and Meredosia Units 1, 2,
3, 4, and 5. Therefore, the remaining permitted and operating EGUs
owned by Dynegy include: Baldwin Units 1, 2, and 3; Havana, Unit 9;
Hennepin Units 1 and 2; Coffeen Units 1 and 2; Duck Creek Unit 1; E.D.
Edwards Units 2 and 3; Joppa Units l, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6; and Newton
Unit l.
    On January 23, 2020, IEPA submitted amendments to the MPS Rule as a
revision to the Illinois regional haze SIP. These amendments will: (1)
Combine the two existing MPS Groups of EGUs into one MPS Group; (2)
require all subject EGUs as a group to comply with mass-based emissions
limitations for annual NOX and SO2 emission
limits, and NOX emission limits for the ozone season; (3)
add a requirement for the EGUs at the Joppa facility to comply with a
combined annual SO2 mass-based emissions limit; (4) require
certain facilities that operate EGUs equipped with selective catalytic
reduction (SCR) control to comply with a specific rate-based seasonal
NOX emissions limit and operational requirements; and (5)
add requirements governing the transfer of EGUs from one group to a
different owner or operator, shutdown of EGUs, recordkeeping and
reporting.

II. What are the elements of the State's submittal?

    The amendments to the MPS Rule are as follows:

Subsection 225.233(a): General

    Subsection 225.233(a) sets forth the purpose and applicability of
the MPS Rule to the owner of coal-fired EGUs. IEPA amended this
subsection to establish one MPS Group that includes all of the EGUs
owned and in operation by Dynegy. Thus, IEPA added subsection
225.233(a)(4)(A), which provides that, on and after January 1, 2019,
the following EGUs shall be merged into a new MPS Group: Baldwin Units
1, 2, and 3; Coffeen Units 1 and 2; Duck Creek Units 1; E.D. Edwards
Units 2 and 3; Havana Unit 9; Hennepin Units 1 and 2; Joppa Units 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, and 6; and Newton Unit 1. The MPS Rule further stipulates,
``If one or more of the listed EGUs are transferred to a different
owner, such EGU or EGUs will become a separate MPS Group on and after
the date of transfer. For purposes of this section, `transfer' means
sale, conveyance, transfer, or other change in ownership of an EGU.''
Also, IEPA added subsection 225.233(a)(4)(B) which states, ``No other
EGUs except for those listed in subsection 225.233(a)(4)(A) are subject
to the requirements of this Section.''

Subsection 225.233(e): Emission Standards for NOX and
SO2

    Subsection 225.233(e) contains the NOX and
SO2 emissions standards applicable to the EGUs in each MPS
Group. IEPA amended subsection 225.233(e) to include requirements that
replace the existing annual emission rate-based NOX and
SO2 emission limits, and NOX seasonal emission
limits with mass-based emissions limits. Below are the revised
NOX and SO2 emission limits.
MPS NOX Standards
    In subsection 225.233(e)(1)(C), IEPA amended the MPS Rule by adding
the requirement that, ``beginning in the calendar year 2019 and
continuing in each calendar year thereafter, the owner and the operator
of the EGUs in an MPS Group must not cause or allow to be discharged
into the atmosphere combined annual NOX emissions in excess
of 19,000 tons from all EGUs''. In subsection 225.233(e)(1)(D), IEPA
amended the MPS Rule by adding the requirement that, ``beginning in the
calendar year 2019 and continuing in each calendar year thereafter,
from May 1 to September 30, the owner and the operator of the EGUs in
an MPS Group must not cause or allow to be discharged into the
atmosphere combined NOX emissions in excess of 11,500 tons
from all EGUs.''
    In subsection 225.233(e)(1)(E), IEPA amended the MPS Rule by adding
a specific requirement for all existing EGUs currently equipped with
selective catalytic reduction (''SCR'') control system to control
NOX emissions. Specifically, subsection 225.233(e)(1)(E)
states that, ``on or after January 1, 2019, the owner and operator of
any of Baldwin Units 1 and 2, Coffeen Units 1 and 2, Duck Creek Unit 1,
E.D. Edwards Unit 3, and Havana Unit 9 are required to comply with a
combined NOX average emission rate of no more than 0.10 lb/
mmBtu from May 1 to September 30.'' Additionally, subsection
225.233(e)(1)(E), requires that the owner and operator of the above-
mentioned EGUs must operate each SCR control system in accord with
limitations, manufacturers' specifications, and good engineering and
maintenance practices.
MPS SO2 Standards
    In subsection 225.233(e)(2)(C), IEPA amended MPS Rule by adding a
requirement that, ``beginning in the calendar year 2019 and continuing
in each calendar year thereafter, the owner and operator of the EGUs in
an MPS Group must not cause or allow to be discharged into the
atmosphere combined annual SO2 emissions in excess of 34,500
tons from all EGUs.''
    In subsection 225.233(e)(2)(D), IEPA amended MPS Rule by adding a
requirement which applies only to EGUs at the Joppa facility. The rule
stipulates that, ``beginning in calendar year 2019, continuing in each
year thereafter, the owner or operator of Joppa Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
and 6 must not cause or allow to be discharged into the atmosphere
combined annual SO2 emissions in excess of 19,860 tons.''
    Finally, IEPA revised MPS Rule by deleting subsection 225.233(e)(3)
in its entirety because it contains the provisions relating to the EGUs
formerly belonging to the Ameren MPS Group. The provisions for the
Ameren Group are being subsumed/incorporated into the applicable
requirements for the new MPS Group identified in subsection 225.233(a).

Subsection 225.233(f): Transfer of EGUs in an MPS Group

    IEPA amended the MPS Rule by adding subsection 225.233(f) to
include requirements governing the transfer of EGUs in an MPS Group.
Subsection 225.233(f)(1) adds requirements for transferring of EGUs in
an MPS Group to a different owner and from the owner acquiring the
EGUs; subsection 225.233(f)(2) adds requirements for allocating the
amounts of emissions that would reduce the mass emission limit for
annual NOX and SO2, ozone season NOX
values corresponding to the EGU or EGUs if they are transferred; and
subsection 225.233(f)(3) adds notification of transfer requirements for
both the transferring and acquiring owners.
    In the case of a transfer, for the MPS Group from which EGUs are
transferred, the combined emissions limitations for the MPS Group set
forth in subsections 225.233(e)(l) and (e)(2), as applicable, must be
adjusted by subtracting from those limitations the applicable
allocation amounts set forth in Columns A (Annual NOX, in
tons per year (TPY)), B (Seasonal NOX, in tons), and C
(Annual SO2, in TPY), in subsection 225.233(f)(2) that are
attributable to the transferred EGUs.
    For a new MPS Group consisting of the acquired EGUs, the owner and
operator of the EGUs in an MPS Group must not cause or allow to be
discharged into the atmosphere combined annual NOX
emissions, combined seasonal NOX emissions, and combined
annual SO2 emissions in

excess of the applicable annual NOX, seasonal
NOX, and annual SO2 limitation from all EGUs. The
applicable annual NOX, seasonal NOX, and annual
SO2 limitations shall be the sum of the allocation amounts
attributable to all EGUs in the MPS Group set forth in Columns A
(Annual NOX, in TPY), B (Seasonal NOX, in tons),
and C (Annual SO2, in TPY), respectively, of subsection
225.233(f)(2).

Subsection 225.233(g): Permanent Shutdown of EGUs in an MPS Group

    IEPA amended the MPS Rule to include requirements to address the
permanent shutdown of EGUs in an MPS Group in subsection 225.233(g).
Subsection 225.233(g) adds requirements for permanent shutdown of one
or more EGUs in an MPS Group no longer subject to the MPS Rule. In the
case of a permanent shutdown of one or more EGUs, the combined
emissions limitations for the MPS Group in subsections 225.233(e)(1)
and (e)(2) must be adjusted by subtracting from those limitations the
applicable allocation amounts set forth in set forth in Columns A
(Annual NOX, in TPY), B (Seasonal NOX, in tons),
and C (Annual SO2, in TPY), respectively, of subsection
225.233(g)(2) to the shutdown EGU or EGUs. The owner and operator must
comply with the adjusted emission limitations beginning with the
compliance period or periods in which the shutdown occurs. The MPS Rule
makes clear that it regulates the emissions of a permanently shut down
unit during the compliance period or periods in which the permanent
shutdown occurs, and the procedures that the owner must comply with to
determine compliance with the adjusted emission limitations, and
notification requirements.

Subsection 225.233(h): Temporary Shutdown of EGUs in an MPS Group

    IEPA amended the MPS Rule to include requirements to address the
temporary shutdown of one or more EGUs in an MPS Group in subsection
225.233(h). Subsection 225.233(h) contains the requirements for
temporary shutdown of one or more EGUs in an MPS Group that do not
produce electricity for sale during an entire compliance period.
Similar to the requirements for permanent shutdown, the combined
emissions limitations for the MPS Group in subsections 225.233(e)(1)
and (e)(2) must be adjusted by subtracting from those limitations the
applicable allocation amounts set forth in set forth in Columns A
(Annual NOX, in TPY), B (Seasonal NOX,, in tons),
and C (Annual SO2, in TPY), respectively, of subsection
225.233(h)(2) to the shutdown EGU or EGUs. The rule describes what a
``temporary shutdown'' means, and the procedures that the owner must
follow to determine compliance with the adjusted emission limitations,
and notification requirements.

Subsection 225.233(j): Recordkeeping

    IEPA amended the MPS Rule to include a requirement to address
recordkeeping in subsection 225.233(j). Subsection 225.233(j) adds the
requirement that, beginning on January 1, 2019, and continuing each
year thereafter, the owner and operator of the EGUs in an MPS Group
must keep and maintain all records necessary to demonstrate compliance
with Section 225.233. Also, the rule specifies that the records to be
maintained shall include, but not be limited to, all emissions
monitoring information gathered in accordance with 40 CFR 75, and
copies of all reports and compliance certifications required under
subsection 225.233(k).

Subsection 225.233(k): Reporting

    IEPA amended the MPS Rule to include a requirement to address
reporting to demonstrate compliance with the rule in subsection
225.233(k). Subsection 225.233(k), adds a requirement that beginning in
year 2020, and continuing each year thereafter, the owner and operator
of the EGUs in an MPS Group to submit reports to IEPA demonstrating
compliance with MPS NOX and SO2 emission
standards, transfer of EGUs, and the permanent and temporary shutdown
of EGUs.

Subsection 225.233(l): EGU Shutdown

    IEPA amended the MPS Rule by adding subsection 225.233(l) to
include requirements to address the appropriate steps to permanently
shutdown EGUs. Subsection 225.233(l) adds a provision that outlines for
the owner or operator of the EGUs specified in subsection
225.233(a)(4)(A) the necessary procedures for documentation and
notification to be given to the regional transmission operator,
Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), in order to obtain
MISO approval to permanently cease operating one or more EGUs from the
MPS Group with an aggregate capacity of at least 2,000 megawatts
generation.

III. What is EPA's analysis of the State's submittal?

    EPA is proposing to approve the revisions discussed above because
the revisions meet all applicable requirements of the CAA, consistent
with section 110(k)(3) of the CAA and the regional haze rule.
Furthermore, the revisions do not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or
any other applicable CAA requirement, consistent with section 110(l) of
the CAA.

A. The Revisions Do Not Interfere With the Regional Haze Rules Approved
in the Illinois SIP

    The proposed SIP revision does not interfere with the regional haze
rules approved in the Illinois SIP. Illinois relied on emission
reductions of NOX and SO2 already achieved
through implementation of the MPS Rule in its SIP submittal to EPA for
the regional haze SIP rules. Illinois has shown that the proposed SIP
revisions will not result in an increase of emissions of NOX
or SO2.
    EPA has analyzed the historical emissions data from the subject
facilities and assessed the impacts of the proposed amendments to the
MPS Rule. The proposed amendments replace fleet-wide rate-based
standards in the current MPS Rule with fleet-wide mass emission limits.
This change in the method of measurement of emissions for compliance
will result in lower allowable emissions from the operating EGUs that
comprise the proposed combined MPS Group. The allowable emissions under
the proposed mass-based emissions limits are being reduced to a level
within the range of the actual emissions from the affected EGUs in the
combined MPS Group during the years that the state implemented the most
stringent rate-based emission limits in the current SIP.
    Under the current MPS Rule the maximum allowable emissions of
NOX and SO2 are not specified, but these
allowable emissions have been calculated using the rated capacity of
each of the units that will operate in the proposed combined MPS Group
and the emission rate that applies to each such unit currently under
the MPS Rule. The proposed amendments would limit the combined MPS
Group to 34,500 tons of SO2 annually rather than the
calculated 66,354 tons of allowable annual emissions under the current
MPS Rule. The proposed amendments would also limit the combined MPS
Group to 19,000 tons of NOX annually rather than the
calculated 32,841 tons of allowable annual emissions under the current
MPS Rule. Finally, the proposed amendments would limit the combined MPS
Group to 11,500 tons of NOX during the ozone season rather
than the calculated 13,766 tons of allowable

annual emissions under the current MPS Rule. Note that these
comparisons only consider the EGUs that will be in the new proposed MPS
Group, rather than including all units that were part of both existing
MPS Groups but have subsequently ceased operation.
    In addition, EPA finds by comparison that the maximum allowable
NOX and SO2 emissions from the EGUs for the
proposed combined new MPS Group under the proposed mass emission limits
will be less than the projected emissions as approved in the Illinois
SIP for regional haze. The total of projected emissions set forth in
the Illinois SIP for regional haze from all EGUs included in both
current MPS Groups is 55,953 tons of SO2 and 27,951 tons of
NOX annually. These differences reflect a total of 21,453
tons of SO2 emissions and 8,951 tons of NOX
emissions less than projected in the Illinois SIP for regional haze. As
such, the proposed mass-based emission limits for the combined new MPS
Group are sufficient to limit total emissions of NOX and
SO2 pollutants to less than the levels that were determined
to be necessary to achieve the visibility improvement goals discussed
in the Regional Haze SIP submittals, which satisfies the requirements
under section 110(l) of the CAA.
    Last, EPA finds that the proposed amendments strengthen the MPS
Rule as a result of including additional requirements to ensure that
the combined new MPS Group of EGUs do not exceed the annual
NOX and SO2 emissions limits, and the ozone
season NOX emission limits.

B. The Revisions Do Not Interfere With Any Applicable CAA Requirement
Under Section 110(l) of the CAA

    Under section 110(l) of the CAA, EPA shall not approve a SIP
revision if it would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in
section 171 of the CAA) or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
The proposed SIP revisions would not interfere with any applicable CAA
requirements based on technical analysis submitted by IEPA.
    As discussed above, IEPA has shown that the revision will result in
a reduction of NOX and SO2 emissions, which are
the pollutants of concern. Furthermore, the emission standards under
the amended MPS Rule are more stringent, replacing the rate-based
annual emission limits for NOX and SO2, and
NOX for the ozone season, with mass-based emission limits
for determining compliance.
    Therefore, the proposed revisions are approvable under section
110(l) because: (1) The proposed changes to the SIP will make the
emissions limits for NOX and SO2 more stringent;
(2) the proposed changes will result in a significant decrease in
emissions of NOX, and SO2; and (3) the changes
are consistent with Illinois' long-term strategy for making reasonable
progress toward meeting the visibility goals of section 169A of the CAA
contained in the state's regional haze rules.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Illinois SIP to amend
all the provisions of MPS Rule, Section 225.233, except for subsections
225.233(c), (d), and (i). IEPA submitted the proposed revisions to the
MPS Rule on January 23, 2020.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference revisions to Title 35 of Illinois Administrative Code Rule
Part 225--Control of Emissions from Large Combustion Sources, Multi-
Pollutant Standards--Section 225.233, except for subsections
225.233(c), (d), and (i), effective August 23, 2019. EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: March 1, 2021.
Cheryl Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2021-04749 Filed 3-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37670-37671]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15314]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9518-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA regulations are listed
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Westlund<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and please refer to the appropriate EPA
Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests

OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR Number 2311.01; Pesticide Program Public Sector Collections
(FIFRA Sections 18 amp; 24(c)); 40 CFR parts 162 and 166; was approved
on 05/14/2012; OMB Number 2070-0182; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved
with change.
    EPA ICR Number 1039.13; Monthly Progress Reports (Renewal); 48 CFR
1552.211; was approved on 05/15/2012; OMB Number 2030-0005; expires on
05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 0801.18; Requirements for Generators, Transporters,
and Waste Management Facilities under the RCRA Hazardous Waste Manifest
System (Renewal); 40 CFR parts 262, 263, 264 and 265; was approved on
05/15/2012; OMB Number 2050-0039; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved
without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1167.10; NSPS for Lime Manufacturing; 40 CFR part 60
subparts A and HH; was approved on 05/15/2012; OMB Number 2060-0063;
expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1748.09; State Small Business Stationary Source
Technical and Environmental Compliance Assistance Programs (SBTCP)
Annual Reporting Form (Renewal); was approved on 05/15/2012; OMB Number
2060-0337; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1127.10; NSPS for Hot Mix Asphalt Facilities; 40 CFR
part 60 subparts A and I; was approved on 05/15/2012; OMB Number 2060-
0083; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1811.07; NESHAP for Polyether Polyols Production; 40
CFR part 63 subparts A and PPP; was approved on 05/15/2012; OMB Number
2060-0415; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1081.10; NESHAP for Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from
Glass Manufacturing Plants; 40 CFR part 61 subparts A and N; was
approved on 05/15/2012; OMB Number 2060-0043; expires on 05/31/2015;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 2326.02; Effluent Guidelines and Standards for the
Airport Deicing Category (Final Rule); 40 CFR 449.10(a); was approved
on 05/16/2012; OMB Number 2040-0285; expires on 03/31/2015; Approved
without change.
    EPA ICR Number 0959.14; Facility Ground-Water Monitoring
Requirements (Renewal); 40 CFR 264.98, 264.99 and 264.100, 265.90,
265.91, 265.92, 265.93 and 265.94; was approved on 05/17/2012; OMB
Number 2050-0033; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1964.05; NESHAP for Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat
Production; 40 CFR part 63 subparts A and HHHH; was approved on 05/29/
2012; OMB Number 2060-0496; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without
change.
    EPA ICR Number 0246.11; Contractor Cumulative Claim and
Reconciliation (Renewal); was approved on 05/29/2012; OMB Number 2030-
0016; expires on 05/31/2015; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1695.12; Emissions Certification and Compliance
Requirements for Marine and Nonroad Spark-ignition Engines (Transfer
Burden from 2060-0321); 40 CFR parts 90, 1048, 1051, 1065 and 1065; 40
CFR 91.105, 91.107, 91.121, 91.122, 91.124, 91.208, 91.209, 91.504(a),
91.509(e), 91.804, and 91.805; was approved on 05/30/2012; OMB Number
2060-0338; expires on 08/31/2012; Approved without change.

Withdrawn and Continue

    EPA ICR Number 2127.02; Conditional Exclusions from Solid Waste and
Hazardous Waste for Solvent-Contaminated Wipes (Final Rule); Withdrawn
from OMB on 05/01/2012.

Short Term Approval

    EPA ICR Number 2288.03; Pesticides Data Call In Program; was
granted a short term approval by OMB on 05/30/2012; OMB Number 2070-
0174; expires on 11/30/2012.

John Moses,
Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-15314 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 220 (Thursday, November 14, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61819]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24687]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0272; FRL-10002-12-Region 9]

Air Plan Approval; California; South Coast Air Quality Management
District; Stationary Source Permits; Withdrawal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is withdrawing a
direct final rule published on September 20, 2019 because relevant
adverse comments were received. The rule pertained to EPA approval of a
revision to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA will
take a final action on the proposed action in a separate subsequent
final rulemaking.

DATES: Effective November 14, 2019, the EPA withdraws the direct final
rule published at 84 FR 49465, on September 20, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA. On September 20, 2019 we published a
direct final rule to approve a revision to the SCAQMD portion of the
California SIP. Specifically, the revision pertains to SCAQMD Rule 1325
``Federal PM2.5 New Source Review Program.'' The direct
final rule was published without prior proposal because we anticipated
no adverse comments. We stated in the direct final rule that if we
received relevant adverse comments by October 21, 2019, we would
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register. We received a
relevant adverse comment and accordingly are withdrawing the direct
final rule. In a separate subsequent final rulemaking, we will address
the comments received.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
Oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: November 4, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-24687 Filed 11-13-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65699-65701]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22941]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA 2016-0002-N-17]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, FRA seeks approval of the proposed
information collection activities described below. Before submitting
the proposed information collection requests (ICRs) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, FRA is soliciting public
comment on specific aspects of the activities, which are identified in
this notice.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than November 22, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on any or all of the proposed
activities by mail to either: Mr. Robert Brogan, Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Office of Railroad Safety, Regulatory Analysis
Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590; or Ms. Kim Toone,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590. Commenters requesting
FRA to acknowledge receipt of their respective comments must include a
self-addressed stamped postcard stating, ``Comments on OMB Control
Number 2130-XXXX,'' and should also include the title of the collection
of information. Alternatively, comments may be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to Mr. Brogan at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or to Ms. Toone at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please refer to the assigned OMB
control number in any correspondence submitted. FRA will summarize
comments received in response to this notice in a subsequent notice and
include them in its information collection submission to OMB for
approval.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, Office of Railroad Safety, Regulatory
Analysis Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202)
493-6292) or Ms. Kim Toone, Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Office of Information Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>). (These telephone numbers are not
toll free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to
provide 60-days' notice to the public to allow comment on information
collection activities before seeking OMB approval to implement them. 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A); 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), 1320.10(e)(1), 1320.12(a).
Specifically, FRA invites interested respondents to comment on the
following summary of proposed information collection activities
regarding: (1) Whether the information collection activities are
necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions, including whether
the activities will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's
estimates of the burden of the information collection activities,
including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (3) ways for FRA to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and (4) ways
for FRA to minimize the burden of information collection activities on
the public by automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of responses). See 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A), 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1).
    FRA believes soliciting public comment will promote its efforts to
reduce the administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the
collection of information Federal regulations mandate. In summary, FRA
reasons that comments received will advance three objectives: (1)
Reduce reporting burdens; (2) organize information collection
requirements in a ``user-friendly'' format to improve the use of such
information; and (3) accurately assess the resources expended to
retrieve and produce information requested. See 44 U.S.C. 3501.
    Below is a brief summary of the proposed ICRs that FRA will submit
for OMB clearance as the PRA requires:
    Title: Remotely Controlled Switch Operations.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0516.
    Abstract: Upon notification of work to be performed on a track a
remotely controlled switch provides access to, 49 CFR 218.30 and
218.77, require remotely controlled switch operators to ensure the
switches are properly lined to protect workers vulnerable to being
struck by moving cars as they inspect or service rolling equipment on
the track or occupy camp cars on the track. FRA believes the required
notifications promote safety by minimizing mental lapses of workers who
are simultaneously handling several tasks. Sections 218.30 and 218.77
require operators of remotely controlled switches to maintain a record
of each notification requesting Blue Signal Protection for 15 days.
Operators of remotely controlled switches use the information as a
record documenting Blue Signal Protection of workers or camp cars. This
record also serves as a valuable resource for railroad supervisors and
FRA inspectors monitoring regulatory compliance.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Respondent Universe: 763 railroads.

                                                Reporting Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Total annual       Average time per    Total annual
           CFR section             Respondent universe       responses             response        burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
218.30--Blue signal protection of  70 railroads.......  3,600,000            1 minute...........          60,000
 workmen.                                                notifications.
218.77--Protection of occupied     1 railroad.........  575 notifications..  1 minute...........              10
 camp cars.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Responses: 3,600,575.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 60,010 hours.
    Status: Regular Review.
    Title: Bad Order and Home Shop Card.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0519.
    Abstract: Under 49 CFR part 215, railroads are required to inspect
freight cars placed in service and take remedial action when defects
are identified. Part 215 defects have a history of causing accidents or
incidents by being inadvertently left in service when not properly
tagged. A railroad freight car with a part 215 defect may be moved to
another location for repair only after the railroad has complied with
the process under 49 CFR 215.9. Section 215.9 requires railroads to
affix a ``bad order'' tag describing each defect to each side of the
freight car. It is imperative that a defective freight car be tagged
``bad order'' so it can be readily identified and moved to another
location for repair purposes only. At the repair location, the ``bad
order'' tag serves as a notification of the defective condition of the
freight car. Railroads must retain each tag for 90 days to verify
proper repairs were made at the designated location. When inspecting a
freight car, FRA and State inspectors review all pertinent records to
determine railroads' compliance with the movement restrictions of 49
CFR 215.9.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Respondent Universe: 763 railroads.

                                                Reporting Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Total annual       Average time per    Total annual
           CFR section             Respondent universe       responses             response        burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
215.9--Movement of Defective Cars  763 railroads......  150,000 tags.......  5 minutes..........          12,500
 for Repair--Tagging.
Notifications of Removal of        763 railroads......  75,000               2 minutes..........           2,500
 Defective Car Tags.                                     notifications.
215.11--Designated Inspectors--    763 railroads......  45,000 records.....  1 minute...........             750
 Records.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Responses: 270,000.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 15,750 hours.
    Status: Regular Review.
    Title: Bad Order and Home Shop Card.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0520.
    Abstract: 49 CFR 215.301 sets forth certain requirements for the
stencilling of freight cars. Section 215.301 requires railroads and
private car owners to stencil or otherwise display identification marks
on railroad equipment.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Respondent Universe: 763 railroads.
    Total Estimated Responses: 25,000 stencilled/repainted freight
cars.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 18,750 hours.
    Status: Regular Review.
    Title: Grade Crossing Signal System Safety Regulations.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0534.
    Abstract: FRA believes highway-rail grade crossing (grade crossing)
accidents resulting from warning system failures can be reduced.
Accordingly, FRA's regulations require railroads to take specific
responses if there is an activation failure--when a grade crossing
warning system fails to indicate the arrival of a train at least 20
seconds before the train's arrival at the crossing or to indicate the
presence of a train occupying the crossing. With this information, FRA
can correlate accident data and equipment malfunctions with the types
and ages of equipment. FRA can then identify the causes of activation
failures and investigate them to determine whether periodic
maintenance, inspection, and testing standards are effective.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form Number(s): FRA F 6180.83.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion; record keeping.
    Respondent Universe: 728 railroads.

                                                Reporting Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Total annual       Average time per    Total annual
           CFR section             Respondent universe       responses             response        burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
234.7--Telephone Notification....  728 railroads......  8 phone calls......  15 minutes.........               2
234.9--Grade crossing signal       728 railroads......  600 reports........  15 minutes.........             150
 system failure reports.
234.105.106/107--Notification to   728 railroads......  24,000               15 minutes.........           6,000
 train crew and highway traffic                          notifications.
 control authority.
234.109--Record Keeping..........  728 railroads......  12,000 records.....  10 minutes.........           2,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Responses: 36,608.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 8,152 hours.
    Status: Regular Review.
    Title: Bridge Worker Safety Rules.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0535.
    Abstract: Title 49 U.S.C. 20139 requires FRA to issue rules,
regulations, orders, and standards for the safety of maintenance-of-way
employees on railroad bridges, including standards for ``bridge safety
equipment'' such as nets, walkways, handrails, and safety lines, along
with requirements for using vessels when work is performed on bridges
located over bodies of water. Subpart B of 49 CFR part 214 establishes
minimum workplace safety standards for railroad employees as they apply
to railroad bridges. Specifically, 49 CFR 214.105(c) establishes
standards and practices for safety net systems. Safety nets and net
installations must be drop-tested at the job site after initial
installation and before being used as a fall-protection system, after
major repairs, and at 6-month intervals if left at one site. If a drop-
test is not feasible and is not performed, then the railroad or
railroad contractor, or a designated certified person, must provide
written certification the net complies with the safety standards of 49
CFR 214.105. FRA and State inspectors use the information to enforce
Federal regulations. The information maintained at the job site
promotes safe bridge worker practices.
    Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a), and 5 CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi),
FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or sponsor,
and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless a collection displays a currently valid OMB control
number.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 20, 2016.
Patrick T. Warren,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2016-22941 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 34832]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13958]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No.--2022-2085]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; American
Airlines, Inc.

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of this
notice nor the inclusion nor omission of information in the summary is
intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before July 20, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2021-0494
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nia Daniels,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Timothy R. Adams,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2021-0494.
    Petitioner: American Airlines, Inc.
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: 21.197(a)(1) and (c).
    Description of Relief Sought: American Airlines, Inc. (American)
petitions for an exemption from Title 14, Code of Regulations Sec.
21.197(a)(1) and (c) to allow a ferry under American's D084 Operations
Specifications of unairworthy aircraft, but safe for point of storage.

[FR Doc. 2021-13958 Filed 6-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P