[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 183 (Monday, September 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59361-59365]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20703]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89879; File No. SR-NYSE-2020-73]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Establish Procedures for
the Allocation of Cabinets to its Co-Located Users

September 15, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on September 2, 2020, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 establish procedures for the allocation of
cabinets to its co-located Users. The proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to establish procedures for the allocation of
cabinets to its co-located \4\ Users.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
62960 (September 21, 2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-
NYSE-2010-56).
    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 76008 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60190
(October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-40). As specified in the New York
Stock Exchange Price List (``Price List''), a User that incurs co-
location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto
would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location
service charged by the Exchange's affiliates NYSE American LLC, NYSE
Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., and NYSE National, Inc. (together,
the ``Affiliate SROs''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
70206 (August 15, 2013), 78 FR 51765 (August 21, 2013) (SR-NYSE-
2013-59). Each Affiliate SRO has submitted substantially the same
proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See
SR-NYSEAMER-2020-66, SR-NYSEArca-2020-82, SR-NYSECHX-2020-26, and
SR-NYSENAT-2020-28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    Presently, Users have two options for cabinets with power:
Dedicated cabinets and partial cabinets. Both options use power and
house Users' servers and other equipment. When a User purchases a new
cabinet, whether dedicated or partial, the Exchange provides the
cabinet with power, and the User pays an initial fee and a monthly fee
based on the number of kilowatts (``kW'') contracted for the cabinet.
The Exchange allocates cabinets on a first-come/first-serve basis.
    The Exchange also offers a third cabinet option, cabinets for which
power is not utilized (``PNU cabinets''). PNU cabinets are reserved
cabinet space that can be converted to a dedicated cabinet when the
User requests it.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70913 (November 21,
2013), 78 FR 70987 (November 27, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-74) (``PNU
Cabinet Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Cabinet Allocation Procedure
    The Exchange believes that it would be prudent for it to put in
place measures for the allocation of cabinets (the ``Cabinet
Allocation'') that could be used if, in the future, a situation arises
where the Exchange cannot satisfy all User demand for cabinets.\7\ The
proposed Cabinet Allocation is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange believes that the proposed procedures are
consistent with the Nasdaq procedures for allocating cabinets if
Nasdaq's inventory shrinks to zero. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 62397 (June 28, 2010), 75 FR 38860 (July 6, 2010) (SR-
NASDAQ-2010-019) (``Nasdaq Cabinet Waitlist Procedures'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Cabinet Purchasing Limits:
    a. The Exchange would place the following limits on Users' ability
to purchase new cabinets (``Purchasing Limits'') if the Exchange's
unallocated cabinet inventory is at or below 40 cabinets (the ``Cabinet
Threshold''):
    i. A User with PNU cabinets would be required to either convert its
PNU cabinets into dedicated cabinets or relinquish its PNU cabinets
before being permitted to purchase new cabinets.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See PNU Cabinet Filing, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ii. The Exchange would limit the purchase of new cabinets
(dedicated and partial) to a maximum of four dedicated cabinets, each
with a maximum of 8 kW, per User.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A User may opt to purchase a mixture of dedicated and
partial cabinets. In such a case, it would still be subject to the
maximum, whether expressed in dedicated cabinets, partial cabinets,
or a mixture thereof. The maximum is the equivalent of eight partial
cabinets, at 2 kW each. The Nasdaq procedures similarly limit the
purchase of cabinets if available cabinet inventory falls to 40
cabinets or fewer. Nasdaq Cabinet Waitlist Procedures, supra note 7,
at 38861 (``Should available cabinet inventory shrink to 40 cabinets
or less, the Exchange will limit new cabinet orders to a maximum of
4 cabinets each, and all new cabinets will be limited to a maximum
power level of 5 kW.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    iii. A User would have to wait 30 days from the date of its signed
order form before purchasing new cabinets again.
    b. If the Cabinet Threshold is reached, the Exchange would cease
offering new PNU cabinets to all Users.
    2. Waitlist:
    a. The Exchange would create a waitlist if the available cabinet
inventory is zero, or if a User requests, in writing, a number of
cabinets that, if provided, would cause the available cabinet inventory
to be below zero.
    b. The Exchange would place Users seeking cabinets on a waitlist,
as follows: \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The waitlist provisions are based on the Nasdaq Cabinet
Waitlist Procedures and the procedures in General Note 3 of the
Price List. See id. at 38861; Securities Exchange Act Release No.
79730 (January 4, 2017), 82 FR 3045 (January 10, 2017) (SR-NYSE-
2016-92).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    i. A User with PNU cabinets would not be placed on the waitlist if
the User could meet its new cabinet request by converting its PNU
cabinets to dedicated cabinets. A User would only be placed on the
waitlist for the portion of its new cabinet request that exceeds its
existing PNU cabinets, subject to the Purchasing Limitations.
    ii. A User would be placed on the waitlist based on the date its
signed order is received. A User may only have one order for new
cabinets on the waitlist at a time, and the order would be subject to
the Purchasing Limits.
    iii. As cabinets become available,\11\ the Exchange would offer
them to the User at the top of the waitlist. If the User's order is
completed, it would be removed from the waitlist. If the User's order
is not completed, it would remain at the top of the waitlist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Cabinets may become available if, for example, a User
vacates a dedicated or partial cabinet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    iv. A User would be removed from the waitlist (a) at the User's
request or (b) if the User turns down an offer of a cabinet of the same
size it requested in its order. If the Exchange offers the User a
cabinet of a different size than the User requested in its order, the
User may turn down the offer and remain at the top of the waitlist
until its order is completed.
    v. A User that is removed from the waitlist but subsequently
submits a new written order for cabinets would be added to the bottom
of the waitlist.
    3. Termination of Purchasing Limits and Waitlist: When unallocated
cabinet inventory is more than 10 cabinets, the Exchange would cease
use of the waitlist. When unallocated cabinet inventory is more than 40
cabinets, the Exchange would discontinue the Purchasing Limits.
Proposed New General Notes
    The Exchange proposes to add a new General Note 7 to the Exchange's
Price

List setting forth the proposed Purchasing Limits, as follows:
    7. Cabinet Purchasing Limits. If unallocated cabinet inventory is
at or below 40 cabinets (``Cabinet Threshold''), the following limits
on the purchase of new cabinets (``Purchasing Limits'') will apply:
     A User with PNU cabinets will be required to either
convert its PNU cabinets into dedicated cabinets or relinquish its PNU
cabinets before being permitted to purchase new cabinets.
     The Exchange will limit a User's purchase of new cabinets
(dedicated and partial) to a maximum of four dedicated cabinets, each
with a maximum of 8 kW.
     A User will have to wait 30 days from the date of its
signed order form before purchasing new cabinets again.
     If the Cabinet Threshold is reached, the Exchange will
cease offering new PNU cabinets to all Users.
     When unallocated cabinet inventory is more than 40
cabinets, the Exchange will discontinue the Purchasing Limits.
    The Exchange proposes to add a new General Note 8 to the Exchange's
Price List setting forth the proposed Waitlist, as follows:
    8. Cabinet Waitlist. The Exchange will create a waitlist if the
available cabinet inventory is zero, or if a User requests, in writing,
a number of cabinets that, if provided, would cause the available
cabinet inventory to be zero. The Exchange will place Users seeking
cabinets on a waitlist, as follows:
     A User with PNU cabinets will not be placed on the
waitlist if the User could meet its new cabinet request by converting
its PNU cabinets to dedicated cabinets. A User will only be placed on
the waitlist for the portion of its new cabinet request that exceeds
its existing PNU cabinets, subject to the Purchasing Limitations.
     A User will be placed on the waitlist based on the date
its signed order is received. A User may only have one order for new
cabinets on the waitlist at a time, and the order is subject to the
Purchasing Limits.
     As cabinets become available, the Exchange will offer them
to the User at the top of the waitlist. If the User's order is
completed, it will be removed from the waitlist. If the User's order is
not completed, it will remain at the top of the waitlist.
     A User will be removed from the waitlist (a) at the User's
request or (b) if the User turns down an offer of a cabinet of the same
size it requested in its order. If the Exchange offers the User a
cabinet of a different size than the User requested in its order, the
User may turn down the offer and remain at the top of the waitlist
until its order is completed.
     A User that is removed from the waitlist but subsequently
submits a new written order for cabinets will be added back to the
bottom of the waitlist.
     When unallocated cabinet inventory is more than 10
cabinets, the Exchange will cease use of the waitlist.
    The proposed change would apply the same way to all types and sizes
of market participants. As is currently the case, the purchase of any
colocation service is completely voluntary and the Price List is
applied uniformly to all Users. The proposed change is not otherwise
intended to address any other issues relating to co-location services
and/or related fees, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that
Users would have in complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\13\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. In addition, it is designed to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable and Equitable
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
and equitable for the following reasons.
    The Exchange believes that User demand for cabinets will continue.
In this context, the Exchange believes that it would be reasonable for
it to put in place the proposed Cabinet Allocation to establish the
allocation of cabinets on an equitable basis. The Cabinet Allocation
would establish a rational, objective procedure that would be applied
uniformly by the Exchange to all Users that requested new cabinets.
    The Exchange believes that the Cabinet Allocation's two-tier
structure of establishing, first, a purchasing limitation on order
size, and second, a waitlist, would be a reasonable method to respond
to increasing demand for cabinets in the future, and would be
consistent with the Nasdaq procedures for allocating cabinets if
Nasdaq's cabinet inventory shrinks to zero.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Nasdaq Cabinet Waitlist Procedures, supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Cabinet Threshold is
reasonable and equitable. Based on experience, the Exchange believes
that the Cabinet Threshold is sufficiently low that it would not be
triggered easily.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed Purchasing Limits are
reasonable and equitable. Based on its experience with co-location and
purchasing trends over the last few years, the Exchange believes that
in most cases the number of cabinets that a User would be allowed to
buy under the proposed Purchasing Limits would be sufficient to allow
the User to use its system to access the markets while leaving a margin
for potential growth.
    Further, the Exchange believes that, by establishing a waitlist on
the basis of the date it receives signed orders, limiting the size and
number of orders a User may have on the waitlist at any one time, and
removing a User from the waitlist if it turns down a cabinet that is
the size that it requested, the Cabinet Allocation is reasonably
designed to prevent Users from utilizing the waitlist as a method to
obtain a greater portion of the cabinets available, thereby
facilitating a more equitable distribution of cabinets. Similarly, the
Exchange believes that by requiring a 30-day delay before a User
subject to the Purchasing Limits could purchase cabinets again, the
Cabinet Allocation is reasonably designed to prevent a User from
obtaining a greater portion of the cabinets available.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is reasonable and
equitable because the Exchange would only place limits on Users'
ability to purchase new cabinets if cabinet inventory fell to specific
thresholds. Similarly, the Exchange believes that the proposed change
is reasonable and equitable because the waitlist would only be created
if unallocated cabinet inventory fell to zero, and because there would
be an established threshold for cessation of the waitlist.

The Proposed Rule Change Would Protect Investors and the Public
Interest
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would perfect
the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system
and, in general, protect investors and the public interest for the
following reasons.
    The Exchange believes that User demand for cabinets will continue.
In this context, the proposed rule change would allow the Exchange to
protect investors and the public interest, first, by setting limits on
Users' ability to purchase cabinets, and second, by using a waitlist to
allocate any unallocated cabinets on a first come-first served rolling
basis.
    Based on experience, the Exchange believes that the Cabinet
Threshold is sufficiently low that it would not be triggered easily,
which would protect investors and the public interest. Similarly, the
Exchange believes that in most cases the number of cabinets that a User
would be allowed to buy under the proposed Purchasing Limits would be
sufficient to allow the User to use its system to access the markets
while leaving a margin for potential growth, which would protect
investors and the public interest.
    In addition, the proposed Cabinet Allocation would protect
investors and the public interest in that it is designed to prevent
Users from utilizing the Purchasing Limit and waitlist procedures to
obtain a greater portion of the cabinets available, thereby
facilitating a more equitable distribution.
    The proposed rule change would protect investors and the public
interest because the proposed new General Notes would articulate
rational, objective procedures and would serve to reduce any potential
for confusion on how cabinets would be allocated if a shortage in
unallocated cabinets were to arise in the future, and would thereby
make the Price List more transparent and reduce any potential
ambiguity.
The Proposed Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is not unfairly
discriminatory for the following reasons.
    The proposed change would apply equally to all types and sizes of
market participants. If the Cabinet Allocation were in place, all Users
would be able to identify the permitted cabinet options and the
procedures that would apply to them in the event that unallocated
cabinet supply runs low in the future. The Cabinet Allocation would
assist the Exchange in accommodating demand for co-location services,
and cabinets in particular, on an equitable basis.
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\15\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change would place
any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate. The proposed change would not apply differently to
distinct types or sizes of market participants. Rather, it would apply
to all Users equally.
    The Exchange believes that, if triggered, the imposition of the
Cabinet Allocation would not impose a burden on a User's ability to
compete that is not necessary or appropriate. The Exchange believes
that User demand for cabinets will continue in the future. In this
context, the Exchange believes that it would be reasonable for it to
put in place the proposed Cabinet Allocation to establish a method for
allocating cabinets on an equitable basis. The Exchange would only
follow the Cabinet Allocation and place limits on Users' ability to
purchase new cabinets if unallocated cabinet inventory fell to the
proposed Cabinet Threshold. Similarly, the Exchange would only create
the waitlist if unallocated cabinet inventory fell to zero. Based on
its experience with co-location and purchasing trends over the last few
years, the Exchange believes that in most cases the number of cabinets
that a User would be allowed to buy under the proposed Purchasing
Limits would be sufficient to allow the User to use its system to
access the markets while leaving a margin for potential growth.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed new General Notes would
articulate rational, objective procedures and would serve to reduce any
potential for confusion on how cabinets would be allocated if a
shortage in unallocated cabinets were to arise in the future, and would
thereby make the Price List more transparent and reduce any potential
ambiguity.
    Use of any co-location service is completely voluntary, and each
market participant is able to determine whether to use co-location
services based on the requirements of its business operations.
Intermarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change would impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges and other vendors (i.e., Hosting Users) offer co-location
services as a means to facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their operations. Accordingly, fees charged
for co-location services are constrained by the active competition for
the order flow of, and other business from, such market participants.
    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically, in
Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would protect investors and the public
interest because the proposed new General Notes would articulate
rational, objective procedures and would serve to reduce any potential
for confusion on how cabinets would be treated in the case of a
shortage in unallocated cabinets, and would thereby make the Price List
more transparent and reduce any potential ambiguity.
    For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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

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

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2020-73 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-NYSE-2020-73. 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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for 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 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2020-73, and should be submitted on
or before October 13, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-20703 Filed 9-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 16, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 241)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74696-74700]
[DOCID:fr16de05-16]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 710

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0047; FRL-7732-6]
RIN 2070 AC61

TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Partially Exempted Chemicals List
Addition of Certain Aluminum Alkyl Chemicals

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY:  EPA is taking direct final action to amend the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting
(IUR) regulations by adding 10 aluminum alkyl chemicals to the list of
chemical substances in Sec.  710.46(b)(2)(iv) which are exempt from
reporting processing and use information required by Sec.
710.52(c)(4). EPA has determined that the IUR processing and use
information for these chemicals is of low current interest.
Manufacturers and importers of the chemicals listed in Sec.
710.46(b)(2)(iv) must continue to report manufacturing information.

DATES:  This direct final rule is effective on February 14, 2006
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January
17, 2006. If, however, EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a
Federal Register document to withdraw the direct final rule before the
effective date.

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0047, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal:http://www.regulations.gov/.

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Website:http://www.epa.gov/edocket/. EDOCKET, EPA's

electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method
for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA
East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0047. The DCO is open from
8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the DCO is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2005-0047. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.epa.gov/edocket/, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET,
regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the regulations.gov
websites are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA
without going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If
you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit EDOCKET on-line or see theFederal Register of May 31,
2002 (67 FR 38102) (FRL-7181-7).
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov web site. (EDOCKET, EPA's electronic public docket

and comment system was replaced on November 25, 2005, by an enhanced
federal-wide electronic docket management and comment system located
athttp://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-line instructions.)

Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the OPPT
Docket, EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Rm. B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA
Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in the EPA
Docket Center, is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For general information contact:
Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance
Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    For technical information contact: Susan Sharkey, Project Manager,
Economics, Exposure and Technology Division (7406M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:(202)
564-8789; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be affected by this action if you manufacture (defined by
statute at 15 U.S.C. 2602(7) to include import) chemical substances,
including inorganic chemical substances, subject to reporting under the
Inventory Update Rule (IUR) at 40 CFR part 710. Any use of the term
``manufacture'' in this document will encompass import, unless
otherwise stated.
    Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
    Chemical manufacturers and importers subject to IUR reporting,
including chemical manufacturers and importers of inorganic chemical
substances (NAICS codes 325, 32411).

    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions at 40 CFR 710.48. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the technical contact person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?

    In addition to using EDOCKET (http://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may

access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings athttp://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
 A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 710

is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two athttp://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.

C. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit confidential business information
(CBI) to EPA through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the rulemaking by docket ID number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and
page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives, and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    EPA is required under TSCA section 8(b), 15 U.S.C. 2607(b), to
compile and keep current an inventory of chemical substances
manufactured or processed in the United States. This inventory is known
as the TSCA Chemical Substances Inventory (the TSCA Inventory). In
1977, EPA promulgated a rule (42 FR 64572, December 23, 1977) under
TSCA section 8(a), 15 U.S.C. 2607(a), to compile an inventory of
chemical substances in commerce at that time. In 1986, EPA promulgated
the initial IUR regulation under TSCA section 8(a) at 40 CFR part 710
(51 FR 21438, June 12, 1986) to facilitate the periodic updating of the
TSCA Inventory and to support activities associated with the
implementation of TSCA. In 2003, EPA promulgated extensive amendments
to the IUR regulation (68 FR 848, January 7, 2003) (FRL-6767-4) (2003
Amendments) to collect manufacturing, processing, and use exposure-
related information, and to make certain other changes. Minor
corrections to the IUR regulation were made in July of 2004 (69 FR
40787, July 7, 2004) (FRL-7332-3).
    TSCA section 8(a)(1) authorizes the EPA Administrator to promulgate
rules under which manufacturers and processors of chemical substances
and mixtures (referred to hereinafter as chemical substances) must
maintain such records and submit such information as the Administrator
may reasonably require. TSCA section 8(a) generally excludes small
manufacturers and processors of chemical substances from the reporting
requirements established in TSCA section 8(a). However, EPA is
authorized by TSCA section 8(a)(3) to require TSCA section 8(a)
reporting from small manufacturers and processors with respect to any
chemical substance that is the subject of a rule proposed or
promulgated under TSCA section 4, 5(b)(4), or 6, or that is the subject
of an order under TSCA section 5(e), or that is the subject of relief
that has been granted pursuant to a civil action under TSCA section 5
or 7. The standard for determining whether an entity qualifies as a
small manufacturer for purposes of 40 CFR part 710 generally is defined
in 40 CFR 704.3. Processors are not currently subject to the
regulations at 40 CFR part 710.

B. What is the Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) Regulation?

    The data reported under the IUR regulation are used to update the
information maintained on the TSCA Inventory. EPA uses the TSCA
Inventory and data reported under the IUR regulation to support many
TSCA-related activities and to provide overall support for a number of
EPA and other Federal health, safety, and environmental protection
activities. The IUR regulation, as amended by the 2003 Amendments,
requires U.S. manufacturers (including importers) of chemicals listed
on the TSCA Inventory to report to EPA every 4 years the identity of
chemical substances manufactured for a commercial purpose during the
reporting year in quantities of 25,000 pounds or more at any single
site they own or control. The IUR regulation generally excludes several
categories of substances from its reporting requirements, i.e.,
polymers, microorganisms, naturally occurring chemical substances, and
certain natural gas substances. Sites are required to report
information such as company name, site location and other identifying
information, identity and production volume of the reportable chemical
substance, and manufacturing exposure-related information associated
with each reportable chemical substance, including the physical form
and maximum concentration of the chemical substance and the number of
potentially exposed workers.
    Manufacturers (including importers) of larger volume chemicals
(i.e., 300,000 lbs. or more manufactured during the reporting year at
any site) are additionally required to report certain processing and
use information (40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)). This information includes
process or use category, NAICS code, industrial function category,
percent production volume associated with each process or use category,
number of use sites, number of potentially exposed

workers, and consumer/commercial information such as use category, use
in or on products intended for use by children, and maximum
concentration.
    For the 2006 submission period, inorganic chemicals, regardless of
production volume, are partially exempt (i.e., submitters do not report
the processing and use information listed in 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)).
After the 2006 reporting period, the partial exemption for inorganic
chemicals will no longer be applicable and submitters will report all
information on inorganic chemical substances. In addition, specifically
listed petroleum process streams and other specifically listed chemical
substances are partially exempt, and manufacturers of such substances
are not required to report processing and use information during the
2006 submission period as well as subsequent submission periods.

C. What is the ``Low Current Interest'' Partial Exemption and Petition
Process?

    The 2003 Amendments established a partial exemption in 40 CFR
710.46(b)(2) for certain chemicals for which EPA has determined that
the IUR processing and use information is of ``low current interest.''
The current list of chemical substances which are subject to the low
current interest exemption are identified at 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2)(iv).
Persons who manufacture or import chemical substances listed in 40 CFR
710.46(b)(2)(iv) are not required to report the processing and use
information specified in 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4), but are required to
comply with all other reporting obligations. The public may petition
EPA to add a substance to, or delete a substance from, the list of
chemicals partially exempt from reporting under 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2).
    In determining whether the partial exemption should apply to a
particular chemical substance, EPA will consider the totality of
information available for the chemical substance in question, including
but not limited to information associated with one or more of the
following considerations (see 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2)(ii)):
    (A) Whether the chemical qualifies or has qualified in past IUR
collections for the reporting of the information described in 40 CFR
710.52(c)(4) (i.e., at least one site manufactures 300,000 pounds or
more of the chemical).
    (B) The chemical substance's chemical and physical properties or
potential for persistence, bioaccumulation, health effects, or
environmental effects (considered independently or together).
    (C) The information needs of EPA, other federal agencies,
tribes, states, and local governments, as well as members of the
public.
    (D) The availability of other complementary risk screening
information.
    (E) The availability of comparable processing and use
information.
    (F) Whether the potential risks of the chemical substance are
adequately managed by EPA or another agency or authority.

    It is important to note that the addition of a chemical substance
to the partial exemption list will not necessarily be based on the
potential risks of the chemical, but on the Agency's current assessment
of the need for collecting IUR processing and use information for that
chemical, based upon the totality of information considered during the
petition review process. Additionally, interest in a chemical or a
chemical's processing and use information may increase in the future,
at which time EPA will reconsider the applicability of this partial
exemption for those chemicals.
    A petition to amend the list of chemicals partially exempt from
reporting under 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2) (whether by adding or removing a
chemical to or from the list) must be in writing, must identify the
chemical in question, including a chemical identification number, and
should provide sufficient information for EPA to determine whether
collection of the information in Sec.  710.52(c)(4) for the chemical in
question is of low interest. In an earlier Federal Register document
(70 FR 3658, January 26, 2005) (FRL-7332-2), EPA proposed to further
amend the IUR regulations to clarify the petition requirements. In that
document, EPA explained that a petition must include a written
rationale or justification to support the assertion that collecting
processing and use information for the chemical substance is of low
current interest. In addition, the proposal clarifies that the petition
must be accompanied by relevant documents, and include specific
citations to information in those documents. The proposed amendments
also provide that the petitioner's rationale must include sufficient
information upon which the Agency can assess the current need for IUR
processing and use information and can make a decision concerning the
reporting of that information for the subject chemical. Finally, the
proposal clarifies that the burden of proof is on the petitioner to
demonstrate why a given chemical substance should be considered of low
current interest. The proposed rule has not yet been finalized.

D. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Through this action, EPA is amending the list of chemical
substances that are partially exempt from reporting requirements under
the IUR regulation. EPA received a petition requesting the addition of
the following chemicals to the list of substances in Sec.
710.46(b)(2)(iv) (Ref. 1):
     Aluminum, chlorodiethyl- (CASRN 96-10-6)
     Aluminum, triethyl- (CASRN 97-93-8)
     Aluminum, tris(2-methylpropyl)- (CASRN 100-99-2)
     Aluminum, dichloroethyl- (CASRN 563-43-9)
     Aluminum, trioctyl- (CASRN 1070-00-4)
     Aluminum, tributyl- (CASRN 1116-70-7)
     Aluminum, trihexyl- (CASRN 1116-73-0)
     Aluminum, hydrobis(2-methylpropyl)- (CASRN 1191-15-7)
     Aluminum, di-.mu.-chlorochlorotriethyldi- (CASRN 12075-68-
2)
     Aluminum, trichlorotrimethyldi- (CASRN 12542-85-7)
The original petition submission was supplemented by additional
information submitted by the petitioner in response to clarifying
questions asked by the Agency (Ref. 2). The petitioner supplied
sufficient information for EPA to identify a low current interest in
the processing and use information associated with the 10 aluminum
alkyl chemicals.
    EPA considered the information provided by the petitioner and
determined that there is a low current interest in IUR processing and
use information because exposure to these substances is not likely to
occur due to their high and apparent reactivities, which require the
use of preventive measures when handling the substances in order to
eliminate the possibility of exposure or release. The reaction of these
pyrophoric substances upon contact with air or water is very fast; the
nature of the reaction is readily observable (i.e., flames); and the
reaction results in a transformation of the aluminum alkyl into another
chemical substance once exposed to water or air. Furthermore, use of
these substances is very limited as intermediates in chemical
synthesis. For all of these reasons, EPA determined that, at this time,
collecting IUR processing and use information on these chemicals would
not likely further our understanding of potential risks associated with
them (Ref. 3).
    EPA received 23 non-CBI reports for these 10 chemicals in the 2002
IUR

submission period. Since the 23 reports represent only a portion of the
total number of reports received, EPA is estimating that 25 reports
over 300,000 lbs for these 10 chemicals will be received. Removing the
requirement to report processing and use information for 25 reports
results in a cost savings of $135,776 to $146,546 in the first
reporting cycle and $108,621 to $117,237 in future reporting cycles
(Ref. 5).
    The Agency acknowledges that additional, unidentified information
may exist. If you are in possession of information which is relevant to
the Agency's decision to partially exempt the 10 substances listed in
Unit II.D., please provide comments following the procedure listed in
theADDRESSES unit.

III. Direct Final Rule Procedures

    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comment. This final rule will be effective on February 14, 2006
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comment by
January 17, 2006. If EPA receives adverse comment on this rulemaking,
the Agency will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register and
will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in a future issue of the
Federal Register. The Agency will address the comments as part of that
proposed rulemaking.

IV. Materials in the Rulemaking Record

    The public version of the official record for this rulemaking is
contained in two separate dockets that can be accessed as described in
theADDRESSES unit. Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0047 contains the
main rulemaking record. Additionally, certain supporting records are
contained in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0048, as identified in
the listing contained in this unit. This record includes the documents
located in the docket as well as the documents that are referenced in
those documents.
    1. Letter from Kim Boudreaux, Albemarle Corporation, to OPPT
Document Control Officer, EPA, December 24, 2003. Docket document
number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0048-0002.
    2. Letter from Kim Boudreaux, Albemarle Corporation, to OPPT
Document Control Officer, EPA, April 1, 2005. Docket document number
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0048-0005.
    3. USEPA, ``IUR Petition Review Report for aluminum, chlorodiethyl-
(CASRN 96-10-6); aluminum, triethyl- (CASRN 97-93-8); aluminum,tris(2-
methylpropyl)- (CASRN 100-99-2); aluminum, dichloroethyl- (CASRN 563-
43-9); aluminum, trioctyl- (CASRN 1070-00-4); aluminum, tributyl-
(CASRN 1116-70-7); aluminum, trihexyl- (CASRN 1116-73-0);
aluminum,hydrobis(2-methylpropyl)- (CASRN 1191-15-7); aluminum,di-.mu.-
chlorochlorotriethyldi- (CASRN 12075-68-2); aluminum,
trichlorotrimethyldi- (CASRN 12542-85-7),'' April 25, 2005. Docket
document number EPA-HQ-2004-0048-0007.
    4. USEPA, ``Cost Savings Estimate of Adding 10 Aluminum Alkyls to
the 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2) Chemical Substance List,'' OPPT, April 28,
2005.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

    This direct final rule implements minor changes to 40 CFR part 710,
resulting in burden and cost reduction. Since this direct final rule
does not impose any new requirements, it is not subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866,
entitledRegulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This direct final rule does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501et seq.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Since this action makes minor changes to 40 CFR part 710, resulting
in burden reduction, EPA certifies this action will not have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
There will be no adverse impact on small entities resulting from this
action.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).

E. Executive Order 13132

    The Agency has determined that this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132, entitledFederalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This action does not alter the relationships or
distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress.

F. Executive Order 13175

    The Agency has determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal
implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitledConsultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
(65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.'' This direct final rule will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045

    This action does not require OMB review or any other Agency action
under Executive Order 13045, entitledProtection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997).

H. Executive Order 13211

    Because this direct final rule is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this direct
final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995

(NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General of the United
States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 710

    Environmental protection, Aluminum alkyl chemicals, Chemicals,
Hazardous materials, Pyrophoric, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: November 25, 2005.
Chareles M. Auer,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 710--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 710 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 2607(a).

0
2. Section 710.46 is amended by adding the following entries in
ascending order to the table in paragraph (b)(2)(iv) to read as
follows:

Sec.  710.46  Chemical substances for which information is not
required.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  CAS No.                             Chemical
------------------------------------------------------------------------
96-10-6...................................  Aluminum, chlorodiethyl-
97-93-8...................................  Aluminum, triethyl-
100-99-2..................................  Aluminum, tris(2-
                                             methylpropyl)-
                                * * * * *
563-43-9..................................  Aluminum, dichloroethyl-
1070-00-4.................................  Aluminum, trioctyl-
1116-70-7.................................  Aluminum, tributyl-
1116-73-0.................................  Aluminum, trihexyl-
1191-15-7.................................  Aluminum, hydrobis(2-
                                             methylpropyl)-
                                * * * * *
12075-68-2................................  Aluminum, di-.mu.-
                                             chlorochlorotriethyldi-
12542-85-7................................  Aluminum,
                                             trichlorotrimethyldi-
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 05-24138 Filed 12-15-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 116 (Tuesday, June 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 34523]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14074]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2809-030]

KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving
Use of the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 2809-030.
    c. Date Filed: April 30, 2014.
    d. Submitted By: KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC.
    e. Name of Project: American Tissue Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Cobbosseecontee Stream, in Kennebec County,
Maine. No federal lands are occupied by the project works or located
within the project boundary.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Lewis Loon, KEI (Maine) Power
Management (III) LLC, 37 Alfred Plourde Parkway Suite 2, Lewiston, ME
04240;<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: John Baummer at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC filed its request to use
the Traditional Licensing Process on April 30, 2014. KEI (Maine) Power
Management (III) LLC provided public notice of its request on May 27,
2014. In a letter dated June 10, 2014, the Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC's
request to use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, Part
402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act and implementing regulations at
50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating consultation with the Maine
State Historic Preservation Officer, as required by section 106,
National Historical Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations
of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating KEI (Maine) Power
Management (III) LLC as the Commission's non-federal representative for
carrying out informal consultation pursuant to section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act; and consultation pursuant to section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. KEI (Maine) Power Management (III) LLC filed a Pre-Application
Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at
the address in paragraph h.
    o. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an
application for a new license for Project No.2809-030. Pursuant to 18
CFR 16.8, 16.9, and 16.10 each application for a new license and any
competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at
least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All
applications for license for this project must be filed by April 30,
2017.
    p. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: June 10, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-14074 Filed 6-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 102)]
[Notices]
[Page 30413-30414]
[DOCID:fr27my08-79]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1755-DR]

Maine; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Maine (FEMA-1755-DR), dated May 9, 2008, and related
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 16, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Maine is hereby amended to include the following area
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the
catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of May 9, 2008.
    Penobscot County for Individual Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034,

Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management
Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals
and Households In Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidential
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-11693 Filed 5-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50348-50349]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20420]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75692; File No. SR-ICEEU-2015-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Finance Procedures To Add
Clearstream Banking as a Triparty Collateral Service Provider

August 13, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On May 5, 2015, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ to
amend its Finance Procedures in order to facilitate CDS Clearing
Members' use of Clearstream Banking as a triparty collateral service
provider. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on May 15, 2015.\3\ On June 29, 2015, the Commission
extended the time period in which to either approve, disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed
rule change to August 13, 2015.\4\ The Commission did not receive
comment letters regarding the proposed change. For the reasons
discussed below, the Commission is granting approval of the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-74922 (May 11, 2015),
80 FR 28035 (May 15, 2015) (File No. SR-ICEEU-2015-009).
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-75320 (June 29,
2015), 80 FR 38488 (July 6, 2015) (File No. SR-ICEEU-2015-009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    ICE Clear Europe proposes to modify the Finance Procedures to allow
Clearstream Banking to serve as a triparty collateral service provider
for initial or original margin provided in respect of all product
categories, including CDS Contracts. Clearstream Banking currently
serves as a triparty collateral service provider solely for original
margin provided in respect of F&O Contracts.
    Specifically, paragraph 3.1 of the Finance Procedures will be
revised to remove the existing restriction that Clearstream Banking may
only act as a triparty collateral service provider with respect to
Original Margin in respect of F&O Contracts. As a result of such

change, Clearstream Banking would be permitted to act as a triparty
collateral service provider for initial or original margin in respect
of any product category, including the CDS product category. (The other
currently authorized triparty collateral service provider, Euroclear
Bank, is similarly eligible to act as such for any product category.) A
correction would also be made in paragraph 3.20 to provide that the
specified instruction deadlines apply to triparty collateral
arrangements with both Euroclear Bank and Clearstream Banking.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \5\ directs the Commission to
approve a proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if the
Commission finds that such proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to such self-regulatory organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
of the Act \6\ requires, among other things, that the rules of a
clearing agency are designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions and
assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the
custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 17A of the Act \7\ and the rules thereunder applicable to
ICE Clear Europe. The proposed rule change will provide Clearing
Members with the option to use Clearstream Banking as a triparty
collateral service provider with respect to initial and original margin
for the CDS (and FX) product categories. According to ICE Clear Europe,
the proposed rule change does not otherwise change the substantive
terms of the service. Based on ICE Clear Europe's representation
regarding its experience with Clearstream Banking as triparty
collateral service provider with respect to original margin for the F&O
product category, the use of Clearstream Banking can be appropriately
extended to other product categories. As such, the Commission believes
that the proposed rule change would allow ICE Clear Europe's Clearing
Members to use an additional triparty collateral service provider that
offers appropriate safeguarding of securities and funds while
maintaining ICE Clear Europe's ability to access initial margin when
appropriate. The Commission therefore finds that the proposed rule
change is designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent applicable,
derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions and to assure the
safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the custody or
control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, in
accordance with section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of section 17A of the Act \9\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\10\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-ICEEU-2015-009) be,
and hereby is, approved.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \11\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-20420 Filed 8-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 161)]
[Notices]
[Page 42357]
[DOCID:fr21au09-116]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2009-0092]

Information Collection Activity: Request for Comments

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Notice and requests for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR)
abstracted below is being forwarded to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for an extension of a currently approved collection. The
Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting
comments was published on June 12, 2009, [FR Vol. 74, No.112, page
28090]. No comments were received.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by September 21, 2009:
DOT/OST Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Perkins, Departmental Office
of Human Resources, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
(202) 366-9447.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Applicant Background Questionnaire.
    OMB Control Number: 2105-0557.
    OST Form Number: OST F 3300.18.
    Abstract: The purpose of the collection is to standardize the
collection of race, ethnicity, sex, national origin, and disability
status from applicants for positions within all DOT Operating
Administrations. This information will assist the DOT in monitoring
programs and will be the basis for several different reports required
by statute.
    Affected Public: Employees upon initial hire and applicants for
positions.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 93,000.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 93,000.
    Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 4650 hours.
    Frequency of Collection: Once.
    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility as described; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate of
burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate, automated,
electronic, mechanical or other technology. Comments should be
addressed to the address in the preamble. All responses to this notice
will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) approval. All comments will also become a matter of
public record.

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 12, 2009.
Patricia Lawton,
DOT Paperwork Reduction Act Clearance Officer, Office of Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-20131 Filed 8-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register: July 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 145)]
[Notices]
[Page 44802]
[DOCID:fr29jy10-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1898-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Pennsylvania; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (FEMA-1898-DR), dated April 16,
2010, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: July 20, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is hereby amended to include the
following area among those areas determined to have been adversely
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of April 16, 2010.

    Montgomery County for Public Assistance.
    Montgomery County for emergency protective measures (Category
B), including snow assistance, under the Public Assistance program
for any continuous 48-hour period during or proximate to the
incident period.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-18590 Filed 7-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21936-21938]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9399]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee--New Task

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of new task assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee (ARAC).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC) a new task to provide advice and recommendations to the FAA
about how to prioritize rulemaking projects. This task addresses, in
part, one of the Department of Transportation's Future of Aviation
Advisory Committee (FAAC) recommendations. This notice informs the
public of a new ARAC activity and solicits membership for the new
Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Haley, Office of Rulemaking,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA established ARAC to provide advice and recommendations to
the FAA Administrator on the FAA's rulemaking activities. ARAC's
objectives are to improve the development of the FAA's regulations by
providing

information, advice, and recommendations related to aviation issues.
    On April 16, 2010, the Secretary of the Department of
Transportation established the Future of Aviation Advisory Committee
(FAAC) to provide information, advice and recommendations to ensure the
competitiveness of the United States aviation industry and its
capability to address the evolving transportation needs, challenges and
opportunities of the United States and global economies. As a result,
the FAAC developed 23 recommendations which were submitted on December
15, 2010. The Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group will specifically
address, in part, Recommendation 22: ``The Secretary should
quickly review the existing regulatory and safety initiative calendar
and provide parameters and criteria for the FAA to prioritize its
current and future rulemaking program. This review should include
industry, or at a minimum seek industry input, and the results should
be made publicly available * * *.''
    The objective of the Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group is to
provide advice and recommendations on developing a framework and
methodologies to assist the FAA in assessing and sequencing potential
rulemaking projects. The FAA will provide the Rulemaking Prioritization
Working Group with a subset of issues to test the prototype. These
issues are potential rulemaking projects from the FAA's four-year
regulatory look-ahead.
    When developing the prototype, the working group should review
models and methodologies as references, including the Commercial
Aviation Safety Team (CAST) methodology. In 1998, the FAA founded the
CAST to develop an integrated, data-driven strategy to reduce the
commercial aviation fatality risk in the United States and promote new
government and industry safety initiatives throughout the world. The
CAST methodology identifies top safety areas through the analysis of
accident and incident data.
    The working group should use the CAST methodology as a reference
and not limit the criteria to safety. While safety is a critical
factor, the working group should consider all drivers that influence
the need to consider rulemaking; e.g., safety, capacity, cost,
environmental impacts, harmonization, operations, and other needs.
    The March 2011 ARAC Executive Committee meeting included a
presentation of solicited ideas and proposed actions for the Executive
Committee members to consider. This notice advises the public that the
FAA has assigned, and the Executive Committee has accepted, a task to
develop a report including recommendations on how to prioritize
rulemaking projects.

The Task

    The FAA has tasked the ARAC working group to provide advice and
recommendations on developing a framework and methodologies to assist
the FAA in assessing and sequencing potential rulemaking projects.
    The working group is expected to develop a report containing
recommendations on how the agency should prioritize rulemaking
projects. This report should document both majority and minority
positions on the findings and the rationale for each position. Any
disagreements should be documented, including the rationale for each
position and the reasons for the disagreement. In developing its
recommendations, the working group shall:
    1. Review FAAC Recommendation 22, which can be found at
http://www.dot.gov/faac/FAAC_Recommendations.pdf.
    2. Define a process to evaluate rulemaking projects.
    3. Evaluate and consider the parameters and criteria of the risk
assessment methodology, ensuring the most effective project receives
the highest priority. This includes considering all drivers of
rulemaking; e.g., safety, capacity, cost, environmental impacts,
harmonization, operations, and other needs.
    4. Explore models and/or methodologies that would be helpful in
developing the risk assessment methodology. This includes reviewing the
CAST methodology, which can be found at http://www.cast-safety.org/index.cfm.
    5. Develop a classification system to rank rulemaking projects.
    6. Develop a model to use as a prototype and test it with the
subset of issues the FAA provides.
    7. Consider ARAC's role after the FAA implements the rulemaking
prioritization methodology.
    Schedule: The recommendations must be forwarded to the ARAC
Executive Committee for review and approval no later than December
2011. The working group may be assigned additional tasks leading to
implementation of parameters and criteria that will assist the FAA in
prioritizing its rulemaking program by December 2012.

ARAC Acceptance of Task

    The ARAC Executive Committee has accepted the task and assigned it
to the Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group. The working group
serves as staff to ARAC and assists in the analysis of the assigned
task. ARAC must review and approve the working group's recommendations.
If ARAC accepts the working group's recommendations, it will send them
to the FAA.

Working Group Activity

    The Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group must comply with the
procedures adopted by ARAC. As part of the procedures, the working
group must:
    1. Recommend a work plan for completion of the task, including the
rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration at the next ARAC
Executive Committee meeting held following publication of this notice.
    2. Provide a status report at each meeting of the ARAC Executive
Committee.
    3. Draft the recommendation report and required analyses and/or any
other related materials or documents.
    4. Present the final recommendations to the ARAC Executive
Committee for review and approval.

Participation in the Working Group

    The Rulemaking Prioritization Working Group will be comprised of
technical experts having an interest in the assigned task. A working
group member need not be a representative or a member of the full
committee. The FAA would like a wide range of members to ensure all
aspects of rulemaking are considered in development of the
recommendations.
    If you wish to become a member of the Rulemaking Prioritization
Working Group, write the person listed under the caption FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT expressing that desire. Describe your interest in
the task and state the expertise you would bring to the working group.
We must receive all requests by May 9, 2011. The Executive Committee
and the FAA will review the requests and advise you whether or not your
request is approved.
    If you are chosen for membership on the working group, you must
actively participate in the working group by attending all meetings,
and providing written comments when requested to do so. You must devote
the resources necessary to support the working group in meeting any
assigned deadlines. You must keep your management chain and those you
may represent advised of working group activities and decisions

to ensure the proposed technical solutions do not conflict with your
sponsoring organization's position when the subject is presented to
ARAC for approval. Once the working group has begun deliberations,
members will not be added or substituted without the approval of the
FAA and the working group chair.
    The Secretary of Transportation determined the formation and use of
ARAC is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.
    ARAC meetings are open to the public. However, ARAC Rulemaking
Prioritization Working Group meetings are not open to the public,
except to the extent individuals with an interest and expertise are
selected to participate. The FAA will make no public announcement of
working group meetings.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 13, 2011.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Executive Director, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2011-9399 Filed 4-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P