[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9078-9081]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02707]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68803; File No. SR-NSX-2013-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 11.19 To Extend a Pilot Program Regarding Clearly Erroneous
Executions

February 1, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on January 30, 2013, National Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``NSX[supreg]'' or the ``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
comment 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 extend a pilot program related to Rule
11.19, entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Executions.'' The Exchange also
proposes to adopt new paragraph (j) to Rule 11.19 in connection with
the upcoming operation of the Plan to Address Extraordinary Market
Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS

under the Act (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'' or ``Plan'').\3\ The
Exchange has designated this proposal as non-controversial and provided
the Commission with the notice required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under
the Act.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down
Release'').
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nsx.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 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 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 purpose of this filing is to extend the effectiveness of the
Exchange's current rule applicable to Clearly Erroneous Executions and
to adopt new paragraph (j) to Rule 11.19 in connection with the
upcoming operation of the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan.
Proposal To Extend Pilot
    Portions of Rule 11.19, explained in further detail below, are
currently operating as a pilot program set to expire on February 4,
2013.\5\ The Exchange proposes to extend the pilot program to September
30, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67576 (August 2, 2012),
77 FR 47452 (August 8, 2012) (SR-NSX-2012-11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to NSX Rule 11.19 to provide for uniform treatment: (1) Of
clearly erroneous execution reviews in multi-stock events involving
twenty or more securities; and (2) in the event transactions occur that
result in the issuance of an individual stock trading pause by the
primary market and subsequent transactions that occur before the
trading pause is in effect on the Exchange.\6\ The Exchange also
adopted additional changes to Rule 11.19 that reduced the ability of
the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set forth in Rule
11.19.7 The Exchange believes the benefits to market participants from
the more objective clearly erroneous executions rule should continue on
a pilot basis through September 30, 2013, which is the date that the
Exchange anticipates that the phased implementation of the Limit Up-
Limit Down Plan will be complete. As explained in further detail below,
although the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan is intended to prevent executions
that would need to be nullified as clearly erroneous, the Exchange
believes that certain protections should be maintained while the
industry gains initial experience operating with the Limit Up-Limit
Down Plan, including the provisions of Rule 11.19 that currently
operate as a pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (September 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (September 16, 2010) (SR-NSX-2010-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Limit Up-Limit Down Provision to Rule 11.19
    The Exchange proposes to adopt new paragraph (j) to Rule 11.19, to
provide that the existing provisions of Rule 11.19 will continue to
apply to all Exchange transactions, including transactions in
securities subject to the Plan, other than as set forth in proposed
paragraph (j). Accordingly, other than as proposed below, the Exchange
proposes to maintain and continue to apply the Clearly Erroneous
Execution standards in the same way that it does today. Notably, this
means that the Exchange might nullify transactions that occur within
the price bands disseminated pursuant to the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan
to the extent such transactions qualify as clearly erroneous under
existing criteria. As an example, assume that a Tier 1 security
pursuant to the Plan has a reference price pursuant to both the Plan
and Rule 11.19 of $100.00. The lower pricing band under the Plan would
be $95.00 and the upper pricing band under the Plan would be $105.00.
An execution could occur on the Exchange in this security at $96.00, as
this is within the Plan's pricing bands. However, if subjected to
review as potentially clearly erroneous, the Exchange would nullify an
execution at $96.00 as clearly erroneous because it exceeds the 3%
threshold that is in place pursuant to Rule 11.19(c)(1) for securities
priced above $50.00 (i.e., with a reference price of $100.00, any
transactions at or below $97.00 or above $103.00 could be nullified as
clearly erroneous). Accordingly, this proposal maintains the status quo
with respect to reviews of Clearly Erroneous Executions and the
application of objective numerical guidelines by the Exchange. The
proposal does not increase the discretion afforded to the Exchange in
connection with reviews of Clearly Erroneous Executions.
    The Limit Up-Limit Down Plan is designed to prevent executions from
occurring outside of dynamic price bands disseminated to the public by
the single plan processor as defined in the Limit Up-Limit Down
Plan.\8\ The possibility remains that the Exchange could experience a
technology or systems problem with respect to the implementation of the
price bands disseminated pursuant to the Plan. To address such
possibilities, the Exchange proposes to adopt language to make clear
that if an Exchange technology or systems issue results in any
transaction occurring outside of the price bands disseminated pursuant
to the Plan, an Officer of the Exchange or senior level employee
designee, acting on his or her own motion or at the request of a third
party, shall review and declare any such trades null and void. Absent
extraordinary circumstances, any such action of the Officer of the
Exchange or other senior level employee designee shall be taken in a
timely fashion, generally within thirty (30) minutes of the detection
of the erroneous transaction. When extraordinary circumstances exist,
any such action of the Officer of the Exchange or other senior level
employee designee must be taken by no later than the start of Regular
Trading Hours \9\ on the trading day following the date on which the
execution(s) under review occurred. Although the Exchange will act as
promptly as possible and the proposed objective standard (i.e., whether
an execution occurred outside the band) should make it feasible to
quickly make a determination, there may be circumstances in which
additional time may be needed for verification of facts or coordination
with outside parties, including the single plan processor responsible
for disseminating the price bands and other market centers.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes it necessary to maintain some
flexibility to make a determination outside of the thirty (30) minute
guideline. In addition, the Exchange proposes that a transaction that
is nullified pursuant to new paragraph (j) would be appealable in
accordance with the provisions of

Rule 11.19(e)(2). In addition, the Exchange proposes to make clear that
in the event that a single plan processor experiences a technology or
systems problem that prevents the dissemination of price bands, the
Exchange would make the determination of whether to nullify
transactions based on Rule 11.19(a)-(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Limit Up-Limit Down Release, supra note 3.
    \9\ Regular Trading Hours commence at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time.
See NSX Rule 1.5(R).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that cancelling trades that occur outside of
the price bands disseminated pursuant to the Plan is consistent with
the purpose and intent of the Plan, as such transactions are not
intended to occur in the first place. If transactions do occur outside
of the price bands and no exception applies--which necessarily would be
caused by a technology or systems issue--then the Exchange believes the
appropriate result is to nullify such transactions.
 2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\10\ In particular,
the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ because
it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system. The Exchange believes that the pilot
program promotes just and equitable principles of trade in that it
promotes transparency and uniformity across markets concerning review
of transactions as clearly erroneous. More specifically, the Exchange
believes that the extension of the pilot would help assure that the
determination of whether a clearly erroneous trade has occurred will be
based on clear and objective criteria, and that the resolution of the
incident will occur promptly through a transparent process. The
proposed rule change would also help assure consistent results in
handling erroneous trades across the U.S. markets, thus furthering fair
and orderly markets, the protection of investors and the public
interest. Although the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan will be operational
during the same time period as the proposed extended pilot, the
Exchange believes that maintaining the pilot for at least through the
phased implementation of the Plan is operational will help to protect
against unanticipated consequences. To that end, the extension will
allow the Exchange to determine whether Rule 11.19 is necessary once
the Plan is operational and, if so, whether improvements can be made.
Further, the Exchange believes it consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest to adopt objective criteria to
nullify transactions that occur outside of the Plan's price bands when
such transactions should not have been executed but were due to a
systems or technology issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
implicates any competitive issues. To the contrary, the Exchange
believes that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') and other national securities exchanges are also filing
similar proposals, and thus, that the proposal will help to ensure
consistent rules across market centers.

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    Because the 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 if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \14\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \15\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, as
it will allow the pilot program to continue uninterrupted, thereby
avoiding the investor confusion that could result from a temporary
interruption in the pilot program. For this reason, the Commission
designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 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.

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-NSX-2013-06 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2013-06. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule

change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 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; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NSX-2013-06 and should be submitted on or before
February 28, 2013.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-02707 Filed 2-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 102 (Thursday, May 26, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33453-33454]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12397]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2015-0801; A-1-FRL-9946-93-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; ME; Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions From Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing and Surface Coating
Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of Maine. These revisions establish Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) requirements for reducing volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing and surface coating
operations. The intended effect of this action is to approve these
requirements into the Maine SIP. This action is being

taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 27, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2015-0801 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, the 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. The 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: David L. Mackintosh, Air Quality
Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100 (Mail code OEP05-2),
Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action
rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on
this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
    For additional information, see the direct final rule which is
located in the Rules Section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: May 11, 2016.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2016-12397 Filed 5-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2431-2433]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00399]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2021-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2075]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before April 12, 2021.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2075, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
exception occurred on : 2021-00399.htm
exception occurred on : 2021-00399.htm
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) patrick[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section

110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and
44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security,Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Imperial County, California and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 18-09-0018S Preliminary Date: August 31, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Imperial County  Imperial County Planning and
                                          Development Services, 801 Main
                                          Street, El Centro, CA 92243.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Riverside County, California and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 18-09-0018S Preliminary Date: August 31, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Riverside        Riverside County Flood Control
 County.                                  and Water Conservation
                                          District, 1995 Market Street,
                                          Riverside, CA 92501.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           San Diego County, California and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 18-09-0018S Preliminary Date: August 31, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of San Diego        Department of Public Works
 County.                                  Flood Control, 5510 Overland
                                          Avenue, Suite 410 MS 0326, San
                                          Diego, CA 92123.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Arenac County, Michigan (All Jurisdictions)
        Project: 14-05-2549S Preliminary Date: November 14, 2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Au Gres........................  City Hall, 124 West Huron Road,
                                          Au Gres, MI 48703.
Township of Arenac.....................  Arenac Township Hall, 2596
                                          Arenac State Road, Standish,
                                          MI 48658.
Township of Au Gres....................  Township Hall, 1865 South
                                          Swenson Road, Au Gres, MI
                                          48703.
Township of Sims.......................  Sims Township Office, 4489 East
                                          Huron Road, Au Gres, MI 48703.
Township of Standish...................  Township Hall, 4997 Arenac
                                          State Road, Standish, MI
                                          48658.
Township of Whitney....................  Whitney Township Hall, 1515
                                          North Huron Road, Tawas City,
                                          MI 48763.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Iosco County, Michigan (All Jurisdictions)
          Project: 14-05-2537S Preliminary Date: April 30, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------

City of East Tawas.....................  East Tawas Community Center,
                                          760 Newman Street, East Tawas,
                                          MI 48730.
City of Tawas City.....................  City Hall, 550 West Lake
                                          Street, Tawas City, MI 48764.
Township of Alabaster..................  Alabaster Township Hall, 1716
                                          South U.S. 23, Tawas City, MI
                                          48763.
Township of Au Sable...................  Township Hall, 4420 North U.S.
                                          23, Au Sable, MI 48750.
Township of Baldwin....................  Baldwin Township Hall, 1119
                                          Monument Road, Tawas City, MI
                                          48763.
Township of Oscoda.....................  Iosco County Public Safety
                                          Building, 1808 North U.S. 23,
                                          East Tawas, MI 48730.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Rice County, Minnesota and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 12-05-2135S Preliminary Date: November 15, 2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Faribault......................  City Hall, Council Chambers,
                                          208 First Avenue Northwest,
                                          Faribault, MN 55021.
City of Nerstrand......................  City Hall, 221 Main Street,
                                          Nerstrand, MN 55053.
Township of Bridgewater................  Bridgewater Township Hall, 500
                                          Railway Street South, Dundas,
                                          MN 55019.
Unincorporated Areas of Rice County....  Rice County Government Services
                                          Building, 320 Northwest Third
                                          Street, Faribault, MN 55021.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Logan County, Ohio and Incorporated Areas
           Project: 11-05-1562S Preliminary Date: May 29, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Logan County...  Logan County Office Building,
                                          100 South Madriver Street,
                                          Bellefontaine, OH 43311.
Village of Lakeview....................  Lakeview Municipal Building,
                                          126 North Main Street,
                                          Lakeview, OH 43331.
Village of Russells Point..............  Logan County Office Building,
                                          100 South Madriver Street,
                                          Bellefontaine, OH 43311.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2021-00399 Filed 1-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


 A separate batch report must be submitted for each batch of MVNRLM produced or imported during the compliance period per 40 CFR 80.593 and 80.604.

 Reports using this form must be submitted annually by August 31st.

 Please check the Diesel Fuel Reporting Forms web site for updated instructions and report form templates: http://epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/dieselfms.htm

 For information on submitting this report using EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) visit:
 http://epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/cdxinfo.htm

 Field
  No.

 Field Name

 Units

 Field Formats, Codes, & Special Instructions
                                       1.
 Report Form ID

 AAAAAAA; Character. Enter DSF0401 for this Diesel
 Fuel Sulfur Batch Report
                                       2.
 Report Type

 A; Character. Submit only one original report, submit any corrections or updates as resubmission(s):

 O: Original
 R: Resubmission
                                       3.
 CBI

 A; Character. Specify if the data contained within the report is claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI) under 40 CFR Part 2, subpart B:

 Y: Confidential Business Information
 N: Non-Confidential Business Information
                                       4.
 Report Date

 MM/DD/YYYY; Character. Enter the date you create this report. If resubmitting, use the current date and not the date on the original report.
                                       5.
 Report Year

 YYYY; Character. The report year is determined by the annual compliance period. If an annual compliance period spans two years, enter the second year (e.g. for the compliance year June 1, 2006 through May 31, 2007 use
 2007).
                                       6.
 Company/Entity ID

 AAAA; Character. Enter the four-digit, EPA-assigned ID
 for the company/entity (refiner, importer, etc.).
                                       7.
 Facility ID

 AAAAA; Character. Enter the five-digit, EPA-assigned ID
 for the facility. Please include any preceding zeros.

  Facility MVNRLM Diesel Fuel Sulfur Report Instructions
  OMB Control No. 2060-0308 Expires 12/31/2011
  Diesel Fuel Sulfur Batch Report
               Issue Date: 09/15/2006
  Report Form ID: DSF0401
                 Revised: 04/14/2009

 Field
  No.

 Field Name

 Units

 Field Formats, Codes, & Special Instructions
                                       8.
 CTA

 A; Character. Credit Trading Area (CTA). For motor vehicle diesel fuel credits only, enter the appropriate credit trading area code as defined in 80.531(a)(5) - Areas are numbered 1 through 7. Enter NA if not applicable.
                                       9.
 Batch Number

 AAAAAA; Character. The facility-assigned, six-digit number identifying the batch this report describes. Please include preceding zeros where applicable.
  10.
 Tax/Dye/Marker
 Status

 AAA; Character. Separately report Taxed/Dyed and Untaxed Clear distillates. Specify if the product delivered was either taxed, dyed or marked (e.g. product leaving a truck rack) or untaxed and clear (product entering D&T).

 TDM: Taxed/Dyed/Marked (non-D&T fuel or fuel leaving
      D&T)
      FUN: Untaxed/Clear (fuel entering D&T or continuing on in D&T)
  11.
 Product Type

 AAAAAA; Character. Enter one product description code from the following list for each batch report.
           DMV1D015:  No. 1 15 ppm Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel as defined under 80.520(a)(1).
           DMV2D015:  No. 2 15 ppm Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel as defined under 80.520(a)(1).
 DMVNP015: Non-petroleum 15 ppm Motor Vehicle Diesel
           Fuel.
           DMV1D500:  No. 1 500 ppm Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel as defined under 80.520(c).
           DMV2D500:  No. 2 500 ppm Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel as defined under 80.520(c).
 DMVNP500: Non-petroleum 500 ppm Motor Vehicle
           Diesel Fuel.
 DNRLM015: 15 ppm Non-Road Locomotive & Marine.
 For Small Refiners Only under 80.554(d). DNRLM500: 500 ppm Non-Road Locomotive & Marine. DNRLMHS:  High sulfur NRLM
 HOMMRK:	Marked and dyed Heating Oil
 HOUMRK:	Unmarked Heating Oil
           DTAB:	(Importers Only) Diesel Treated as Blendstock as defined under 80.512 (do not include in importer compliance calculations).

 Field
  No.

 Field Name

 Units

 Field Formats, Codes, & Special Instructions
  12.
 Production Date

 MM/DD/YYYY; Character. Date the reported batch was produced or imported. By definition (40 CFR 80.502(d)) a batch is a volume of diesel fuel or distillate whose custody has been transferred to another party.  The production date would be the date the transfer was completed.
  13.
 Batch Volume
   gallons
<PHONE_NUMBER>; Number. Production volume of the reported batch of diesel.

         Electronic Submission Sample Record: DSF0400,O,Y,02/21/2005,2004,1234,12345,6,000001,FUN,DMV015,06/01/2006,10000

                           Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
 The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average
 30 minutes per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
 systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining
 information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

 Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed form to this address.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 203 (Friday, October 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 64374]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25785]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2012-0075]

Notification of Petition for Approval; Port Authority Trans-
Hudson Product Safety Plan

    In accordance with Part 236 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) and 49 U.S.C. 20502(a), this document provides the public notice
that by a document dated September 5, 2012, Port Authority Trans-Hudson
(PATH) has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) seeking
approval for a Product Safety Plan (PSP). FRA assigned the petition
Docket Number FRA-2012-0075.
    PATH is upgrading some of its track circuits with Digicode
microprocessor-based track circuits. The Digicode track circuit is part
of Alstom's Smartway Digital Track Circuit product line and will be
used by PATH for train detection and broken rail detection. While this
product has been successfully implemented elsewhere in the world, it
has only been used on transit systems in the United States, and never
on a U.S. general system railroad. The Digicode track circuits are
functional replacements for the existing track circuits and the product
has been chosen by PATH to replace existing, older technology track
circuits. The existing product is experiencing end-of-life obsolescence
issues and parts are becoming difficult to procure. The implementation
of the Digicode track circuits will provide for higher reliability and
lower overall operating and maintenance costs. PATH asserts that the
PSP demonstrates that Digicode has been designed in a highly safe
manner and meets the requirements of 49 CFR part 236, subpart H-
Standards for Processor-Based Signal and Train Control Systems. The PSP
itself provides the detailed description of the Digicode track circuit
product design.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by December 3, 2012 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 15, 2012.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-25785 Filed 10-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 71 (Monday, April 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20953-20955]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08280]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71897; File No. SR-NYSE-2014-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Rule 13 Governing Pegging Interest

April 8, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 25, 2014, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' 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 amend Rule 13 (Orders and Modifiers)
governing Pegging Interest. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
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 amend Rule 13 (Orders and Modifiers) to
(i) remove DMM interest as eligible to be set as pegging interest; (ii)
remove Market Pegging Interest; and (iii) remove the ability to add an
offset value to be specified for pegging interest.
    The Exchange notes that it recently amended its rules governing
pegging interest to move the rule text that provided for pegging on the
Exchange from Rule 70.26 (Pegging for d-Quotes and e-Quotes) \3\ to
Rule 13 and amend such text to (i) permit DMM interest to be set as
pegging interest; (ii) change references from NBB, NBO and NBBO to PBB,
PBO and PBBO, respectively; (iii) permit pegging interest to peg to the
opposite side of the market (``Market Pegging Interest''); and (iv)
provide for an offset value to be specified for pegging interest.\4\
When it moved the pegging interest rule text to Rule 13, the Exchange
also made several other changes to the rule text so that the proposed
substantive changes could be incorporated in a logical and transparent
manner and to streamline the rule in a non-substantive manner. The
Exchange notes that the proposed rule change would revert rules
governing pegging interest to the prior functionality, but would
maintain the changes to move the rule text to Rule 13, to reference the
PBBO instead of the NBBO, and to streamline the rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ E-Quotes are Floor broker agency interest files. D-Quotes
are e-Quotes for which a Floor broker has entered discretionary
instructions as to size and/or price.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68302 (Nov. 27,
2012), 77 FR 71658 (Dec. 3, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2012-65) (the ``2012
pegging filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2012 pegging filing, the Exchange stated that it would
announce the implementation date of that proposed rule change in a
Trader Update no later than 90 days after publication of the notice in
the Federal Register, and the implementation date would be no later
than 90 days following publication of the Trader Update announcing
publication of the notice in the Federal Register. Following the
effective date of the 2012 pegging filing, the Exchange was undergoing
a number of complex technology changes, including introducing
technology to implement the Regulation NMS Plan to Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility (the

``Plan''),\5\ which began implementation on April 8, 2013, and moving
the Exchange's matching engine to the Universal Trading Platform.
During that time, the Exchange prioritized its technology
implementation schedule to assure timely compliance with the Plan's
implementation schedule. As a result, in the Spring of 2013, the
Exchange moved back the planned implementation of the pegging interest
changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-631) (Approval Order
of the Plan), as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During this same period, the Exchange maintained communications
with Floor brokers and Designated Market Makers (``DMM'') regarding its
technology plans. After taking into consideration both the ongoing
technology changes that the Exchange implemented in 2013, including
implementation of both Phase I of the Plan in April 2013 and
implementation of Phase II of the Plan in August and September of 2013,
and feedback from Floor brokers and DMMs, the Exchange did not
introduce the functionality described in the 2012 pegging filing to
expand pegging interest to DMMs, introduce the Market Pegging Interest,
or make available the ability to add an offset value. The Exchange did,
however, implement the pegging functionality to peg to the PBBO instead
of the NBBO.
    The Exchange now proposes to conform its rules to the pegging
functionality that is currently available. Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to amend Rule 13 governing pegging interest to (i) delete the
reference to DMMs in paragraph (a)(1) of the Rule 13 text governing
pegging interest; (ii) delete paragraph (b) of the Rule 13 text
governing pegging interest, which discusses offset values; and (iii)
delete paragraph (d) of the Rule 13 text governing pegging interest,
which discusses the Market Pegging Interest. The Exchange believes it
is appropriate to maintain the balance of the rule text governing
pegging interest in Rule 13 for the same reasons expressed in the 2012
pegging filing. Specifically, as described in detail in the 2012
pegging filing, the remainder of the Rule 13 rule text governing
pegging interest covers the same functionality as the rule text
previously found in Rule 70.26, but with non-substantive changes to
make the rule text more focused and streamlined.
 2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\6\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\7\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed
rule change is also not designed to permit unfair discrimination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes removing rule text that relates to
functionality that the Exchange did not implement will remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest by assuring that the Exchange's rules are transparent
regarding how the Exchange operates. In addition, the Exchange believes
that maintaining the balance of the rule text in Rule 13 governing
pegging interest promotes clarity and transparency by adding greater
specificity with respect to the interest to which pegging interest may
peg. Additionally, the removal would reduce potential confusion that
may result from having unavailable functionality in the Exchange's
rulebook. In addition, the continuation of the realignment and
consolidation of former Rule 70.26 rule text governing pegging interest
with other orders and modifiers in Rule 13 has resulted in a clearer
rule, which benefits all member organizations as well as others that
read the rule.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
designed to address any competitive issue but rather would delete
unavailable functionality in the Exchange's rulebook, thereby reducing
confusion and making the Exchange's rules easier to understand and
navigate.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \10\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-2014-16 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-2014-16. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 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 such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2014-16 and should be
submitted on or before May 5, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-08280 Filed 4-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P