[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15835-15836]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07542]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0731; FRL-9976-68-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; EPA's Voluntary Natural Gas STAR Methane
Challenge Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``EPA's Voluntary Natural Gas
STAR Methane Challenge Program'' (EPA ICR No. 2547.01, OMB Control No.
2060-NEW) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a
request for approval of a new collection. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal Register (81 FR 90355) on December
14, 2016 during a 60-day comment period, and no comments were received.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A
fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated
burden and cost to the public. 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.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0731, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email
to [email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Justin Pryor, Office of Atmospheric
Programs, Climate Change Division, (6207A), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Natural Gas STAR Methane Challenge Program is a
voluntary program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) that provides an innovative voluntary mechanism through which oil
and natural gas companies can make specific, ambitious commitments to
reduce methane emissions. This Program is an integral part of the EPA's
ongoing commitment to address methane emissions and global climate
change, and was developed through extensive stakeholder engagement and
support from companies and trade organizations in the oil and gas
industry. Methane is the primary component of natural gas and a potent
greenhouse gas. The Program works to encourage oil and natural gas
companies to go above and beyond existing regulatory action and make
meaningful and transparent commitments to yield significant methane
emissions reductions in a quick, flexible, cost-effective way.
Transparency in comprehensively tracking company commitments through
the non-confidential data reported by Methane Challenge partners is a
key feature of the Program, and enables partners to highlight emissions
reductions achieved through voluntary action taken. Implementation of
the Methane Challenge Program's two commitment options, the Best
Management Practice Commitment and the ONE Future Emissions Intensity
Commitment, improves operational efficiency, saves partner companies
money, and enhances the protection of the environment.
    Forms: Methane Challenge Program partners are required to sign and
submit to EPA a Partnership Agreement (PA) that describes the terms of
participation in the Program. The PA forms covered under this ICR
include: Methane Challenge Program Partnership Agreement--Best
Management Practice Commitment; and, Methane Challenge Program
Partnership Agreement--ONE Future Commitment. Partners must complete
and submit a Methane Challenge Implementation Plan within six months of
signing the MOU. The Implementation Plan forms covered under this ICR
include: Methane Challenge Program Implementation Plan Template--BMP
Commitment; and, Methane Challenge Program Implementation Plan
Template--ONE Future Commitment. After one full calendar year of
participation in the Program, EPA requires partners to submit a
specific set of data documenting the previous year's methane emissions,
activity data, and reduction activities. The annual reporting forms
covered under this ICR include: Best Management Practice Commitment
Reporting Forms. The annual reporting forms for the ONE Future
Commitment Option are to be developed but will follow the requirements
set forth in the following document, available on the program website:
Supplemental Technical Information for ONE Future Commitment Option.
Upon becoming a partner in the Methane Challenge Program, companies are
given an opportunity to draft and submit a Historical Actions Fact
Sheet, which provides information on historical methane reduction
actions taken prior to joining Methane Challenge. A two-page fact sheet
template is made available to partner companies and allows entry of up
to five key methane mitigation activities, including text, photos, and
graphics. Submitting this document is not a requirement of the Methane
Challenge Program partnership. The fact sheet covered under this ICR
is: Historical Actions Fact Sheet Template.
    Respondents/affected entities: The Natural Gas STAR Methane
Challenge Program is open to companies in the oil production, and
production, gathering and boosting, processing, transmission and
storage, and distribution segments of the natural gas industry.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 58 (total projected partners over
the three-year ICR period).
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated annual burden: 2,978 hours. Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated annual cost: $268,952, which includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-07542 Filed 4-11-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51796-51801]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20340]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70213; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2013-81]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the Fees
for Display Use of the NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades Market Data
Products and Making Certain Technical Changes to the Fee Schedule

August 15, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on August 1, 2013, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') 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 self-regulatory
organization. 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 amend the fees for display use of the NYSE
Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades market data products and make certain
technical changes to the fee schedule. The changes will be operative on
August 1, 2013. 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the fees for display use of the NYSE
Arca BBO \4\ and NYSE Arca Trades \5\ market data products and make
certain technical changes to the fee schedule. The changes will be
operative on August 1, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NYSE Arca BBO is an NYSE Arca-only market data feed that
allows a vendor to redistribute on a real-time basis the same best-
bid-and-offer information that the Exchange reports under the
Consolidated Quotation (``CQ'') Plan for inclusion in the CQ Plan's
consolidated quotation information data stream. The data feed
includes the best bids and offers for all securities that are traded
on the Exchange and for which NYSE Arca reports quotes under the CQ
Plan.
    \5\ NYSE Arca Trades is an NYSE Arca-only market data feed that
allows a vendor to redistribute on a real-time basis the same last
sale information that the Exchange reports under the Consolidated
Tape Association (``CTA'') Plan for inclusion in the CTA Plan's
consolidated data streams and certain other related data elements.
Specifically, NYSE Arca Trades includes the real-time last sale
price, time, size, and bid-ask quotations for each security traded
on the Exchange and a stock summary message. The stock summary
message updates every minute and includes NYSE Arca's opening price,
high price, low price, closing price, and cumulative volume for the
security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently charges $10 per month for professional users
and $5 per month for non-professional users for display use of NYSE
Arca BBO.\6\ Alternatively, the Exchange charges $0.005 per quote for
display use of NYSE Arca BBO for non-professional users, capped at $5
per month per non-professional user.\7\ The Exchange currently charges
$10 per month for professional users for display use of NYSE Arca
Trades. The Exchange currently does not offer NYSE Arca Trades for non-
professional users under a per-user fee structure.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange applies the same criteria for qualification as
a ``non-professional subscriber'' as the CTA and CQ Plan
participants use. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62188 (May
27, 2010), 75 FR 31484 (June 3, 2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-23).
    \7\ Id. The cap is referenced in this filing, although it does
not currently appear in the fee schedule.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59598 (Mar. 18,
2009), 74 FR 12919 (Mar. 25, 2009) (SR-NYSEArca-2009-05). When NYSE
Arca Trades was initially offered, the Exchange had not observed a
demand for non-professional use because an alternative product was
available. See id. The Exchange now offers two last sale market data
products for distribution to non-professional users, NYSE Arca
Trades Digital Media and NYSE Arca Realtime Reference Prices Digital
Media. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69299 (Apr. 4, 2013),
78 FR 21436 (Apr. 10, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also charges an access fee of $750 per month for NYSE
Arca BBO and an access fee of $750 for NYSE Arca Trades. However, a
single access fee applies for clients receiving both NYSE Arca BBO and
NYSE Arca Trades.
    Vendors that redistribute NYSE Arca Trades data pay a
redistribution fee of $750 per month.
    The Exchange proposes to lower the professional user fees for
display use of NYSE Arca BBO from $10 per month to $4 per month, lower
the non-professional user fees for display use of NYSE Arca BBO from $5
per month to $0.25 per month, and eliminate the per quote option for
display use of NYSE Arca BBO for non-professional users. The Exchange
also proposes to lower the professional user fee for display use of
NYSE Arca Trades from $10 per month to $4 per month and introduce a fee
for display use of NYSE Arca Trades by non-professional users of $0.25
per month.
    The Exchange also proposes to establish a $175,000 per month
enterprise fee for an unlimited number of professional and non-
professional users for NYSE Arca BBO and a $175,000 per month
enterprise fee for an unlimited number of professional and non-
professional users for NYSE Arca Trades. A single enterprise fee will
apply for vendors receiving both NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades.
    As an example, under the current fee structure, if a firm had 9,000
professional users who each received NYSE Arca Trades at $10 per month
and NYSE Arca BBO at $10 per month, then the firm currently pays
$180,000 per month in professional user fees. Under the proposed
enterprise fee, the firm will pay a flat fee of $175,000 for an
unlimited number of professional and non-professional users for both
products.
    A vendor that pays the enterprise fee would not have to report the
number of such users on a monthly basis.\9\ However, every six months,
a vendor must provide the Exchange with a count of the total number of
natural person users of each product, including both professional and
non-professional users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Most professional users currently are subject to a per
display device count, except for a small number of professional
users that have qualified for the Exchange's Unit-of-Count Policy.
See SR-NYSEArca-2010-23, supra n.6; SR-NYSEArca-2009-05, supra n.8.
That policy continues to apply to such professional users for
display use only if the proposed enterprise fee does not apply. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69315 (Apr. 5, 2013), 78 FR
21668 (Apr. 11, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-37).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to make certain technical corrections
to clarify its fee schedule and to delete operative dates that are no
longer needed.
    The purpose of the foregoing changes is to encourage greater use of
NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades by making them more affordable, to
compete more effectively with similar products in the marketplace, and
to clarify the fee schedule. The Exchange is eliminating the per quote
option for display use of NYSE Arca BBO for non-professional users
because non-professional users are not electing to use it. The Exchange
is not aware of any significant problems that persons affected are
likely to have in complying with the proposed rule change.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the market-based approach of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''). The decision of the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in NetCoalition
v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010), upheld reliance by the
Commission upon the existence of competitive market mechanisms to set
reasonable and equitably allocated fees for proprietary market data:

    In fact, the legislative history indicates that the Congress
intended that the market system ``evolve through the interplay of
competitive forces as unnecessary regulatory restrictions are
removed'' and that the SEC wield its regulatory power ``in those
situations where competition may not be sufficient,'' such as in the
creation of a ``consolidated transactional reporting system.''

Id. at 535 (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 94-229 at 92 (1975), as reprinted in
1975 U.S.C.C.A.N. 323). The court agreed with the Commission's
conclusion that ``Congress intended that `competitive forces should
dictate the services and practices that constitute the U.S. national
market system for trading equity securities.''' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ NetCoalition, 615 F.3d at 535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained below in the Exchange's Statement on Burden on
Competition, the Exchange believes that there is substantial evidence
of competition in the marketplace for data and that the Commission can
rely upon such evidence in concluding that the fees established in this
filing are the product of competition and therefore satisfy the
relevant statutory standards.\11\ In addition, the existence of
alternatives to NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades, including real-time
consolidated data, free delayed consolidated data, and proprietary data
from other sources, as

described below, further ensures that the Exchange cannot set
unreasonable fees, or fees that are unreasonably discriminatory, when
vendors and subscribers can elect such alternatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Section 916 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the ``Dodd-Frank Act'') amended
paragraph (A) of Section 19(b)(3) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3),
to make clear that all exchange fees for market data may be filed by
exchanges on an immediately effective basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the NetCoalition decision noted, the Commission is not required
to undertake a cost-of-service or ratemaking approach, and the Exchange
incorporates by reference into this proposed rule change its analysis
of this topic in another rule filing.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63291 (Nov. 9,
2010), 75 FR 70311 (Nov. 17, 2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-97).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\13\ in general, and
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, in that it
provides an equitable allocation of reasonable fees among its members,
issuers, and other persons using its facilities and is not designed to
permit unfair discrimination among customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 11(A) of the Act \15\ in that it is consistent
with (i) fair competition among brokers and dealers, among exchange
markets, and between exchange markets and markets other than exchange
markets and (ii) the availability to brokers, dealers, and investors of
information with respect to quotations for and transactions in
securities. Furthermore, the proposed rule change is consistent with
Rule 603 of Regulation NMS,\16\ which provides that any national
securities exchange that distributes information with respect to
quotations for or transactions in an NMS stock do so on terms that are
not unreasonably discriminatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4), (5).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \16\ See 17 CFR 242.603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that lowering the professional and non-
professional user fees for NYSE Arca BBO and lowering the professional
user fee for NYSE Arca Trades is reasonable because it will make the
products more affordable and result in their greater availability to
professional and non-professional users. The Exchange believes that
introducing a non-professional fee for NYSE Arca Trades is reasonable
because it provides an additional method for retail investors to access
NYSE Arca last sale data and provides the same last sale data that is
available to professional users, an option heretofore unavailable.\17\
The Exchange believes it is reasonable to eliminate the per quote
option for non-professional users of NYSE Arca BBO because non-
professional users have not elected this option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra n.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed fees are
reasonable when compared to fees for comparable products offered by at
least one other exchange and under the CTA and CQ Plans. Specifically,
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') offers NASDAQ Basic, which
includes best bid and offer and last sale data, for a monthly fee of
$10 per professional subscriber and $0.50 per non-professional
subscriber; alternatively, a broker-dealer may purchase an enterprise
license at a rate of $100,000 per month for distribution to an
unlimited number of non-professional subscribers only.\18\ The
Exchange's proposed per-user fees are lower than NASDAQ's fees. While
the Exchange's enterprise fee is higher, the Exchange will permit
broader distribution of its data for this fee, i.e., to both
professional and non-professional users. Under the current CTA Plan,
Tape B market data includes NYSE Arca and certain other exchanges'
data. Monthly fees for professional users range from $13.60-$14.60 for
consolidated last sale data and $13.65-$15.60 for bid-ask data; the
monthly fee for each non-professional subscriber is $1.00 for both last
sale and bid-ask data.\19\ A monthly enterprise fee of $500,000 is
available under which a U.S. registered broker-dealer may distribute
data to an unlimited number of its own employees and its
nonprofessional subscriber brokerage account customers. Participants in
the CTA and CQ Plans recently submitted an immediately effective filing
with rate changes that are expected to be implemented September 1,
2013.\20\ The Exchange is proposing professional and non-professional
user fees and enterprise fees that are substantially less than the fees
currently charged and proposed for the CTA and CQ Plans. In contrast to
NASDAQ and the CTA and CQ Plans, the Exchange also will permit
enterprise distribution by a non-broker-dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See NASDAQ Rule 7047.
    \19\ See CTA Plan dated July 25, 2012 and CQ Plan dated August
23, 2010, available at https://cta.nyxdata.com/CTA.
    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. Release No. 70010
(July 19, 2013) (File No. SR-CTA/CQ-2013-04). Monthly fees will be
$24 for professional subscribers and $1 for non-professional
subscribers for Tape B last sale and bid-ask data, and the monthly
enterprise fee described above will be increased to $520,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed enterprise fees for NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades
also are reasonable because they could result in a fee reduction for
vendors with a large number of professional and non-professional users,
as described in the example above. If a vendor has a smaller number of
professional users of NYSE Arca BBO and/or NYSE Arca Trades, then it
may continue using the per user structure and benefit from the per user
fee reductions. By reducing prices for vendors with a large number of
professional and non-professional users, the Exchange believes that
more vendors may choose to offer NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades,
thereby expanding the distribution of this market data for the benefit
of investors. The Exchange also believes that offering an enterprise
fee will expand the range of options for offering NYSE Arca BBO and
NYSE Arca Trades and will allow vendors greater choice in selecting the
most appropriate level of data and fees for the professional and non-
professional users they are servicing.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed enterprise fees are
reasonable because they will simplify billing for certain recipients
that have large numbers of professional and non-professional users.
Firms that pay the proposed enterprise fees will not have to report the
number of users on a monthly basis as they currently do, but rather
will only have to count natural person users every six months; this is
a significant reduction in administrative burdens and is a significant
value. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to charge a single
enterprise fee for clients receiving both NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca
Trades because the Exchange has charged a single access fee for both
products since 2010,\21\ and the products will continue to be offered
separately for vendors and users that so choose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See SR-NYSEArca-2010-23, supra n.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because they will be charged uniformly to
vendors and users that select these products. The Exchange notes that
the fee structure of differentiated professional and non-professional
fees has long been used by the Exchange for other products, by other
exchanges for their products, and by the CTA and CQ Plans in order to
reduce the price of data to retail investors and make it more broadly
available.\22\ The Exchange further believes that offering NYSE Arca
Trades to non-professional users with the same data available to
professional users

results in greater equity among data recipients. The Exchange believes
that eliminating the per quote non-professional user fee for NYSE Arca
BBO is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because non-
professional users have not elected this option and the Exchange will
continue offering other methods by which non-professional users can
access this data. Finally, the Exchange believes that it is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory to establish an enterprise fee because
it reduces the Exchange's costs and administrative burdens in tracking
and auditing large numbers of users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 20002, File
No. S7-433 (July 22, 1983) (establishing nonprofessional fees for
CTA data); NASDAQ Rules 7023(b), 7047.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed technical corrections to the fee schedule will benefit
vendors and users by making the fee schedule clearer and easier to
understand.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed fees are
reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\23\ 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. An exchange's ability to price its proprietary
data feed products is constrained by (1) the inherent contestability of
the market for proprietary data and actual competition for the sale of
such data, (2) the joint product nature of exchange platforms, and (3)
the existence of alternatives to proprietary data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Existence of Actual Competition. The market for proprietary
data products is currently competitive and inherently contestable
because there is fierce competition for the inputs necessary to the
creation of proprietary data and strict pricing discipline for the
proprietary products themselves. Numerous exchanges compete with each
other for listings and order flow and sales of market data itself,
providing virtually limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish
to compete in any or all of those areas, including producing and
distributing their own market data. Proprietary data products are
produced and distributed by each individual exchange, as well as other
entities, in a vigorously competitive market.
    Competitive markets for listings, order flow, executions, and
transaction reports provide pricing discipline for the inputs of
proprietary data products and therefore constrain markets from
overpricing proprietary market data. The U.S. Department of Justice
also has acknowledged the aggressive competition among exchanges,
including for the sale of proprietary market data itself. In announcing
that the bid for NYSE Euronext by NASDAQ OMX Group Inc. and
IntercontinentalExchange Inc. had been abandoned, Assistant Attorney
General Christine Varney stated that exchanges ``compete head to head
to offer real-time equity data products. These data products include
the best bid and offer of every exchange and information on each equity
trade, including the last sale.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Press Release, U.S. Department of Justice, Assistant
Attorney General Christine Varney Holds Conference Call Regarding
NASDAQ OMX Group Inc. and IntercontinentalExchange Inc. Abandoning
Their Bid for NYSE Euronext (May 16, 2011), available at http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/atr/speeches/2011/at-speech-110516.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is common for broker-dealers to further exploit this recognized
competitive constraint by sending their order flow and transaction
reports to multiple markets, rather than providing them all to a single
market. As a 2010 Commission Concept Release noted, the ``current
market structure can be described as dispersed and complex'' with
``trading volume . . . dispersed among many highly automated trading
centers that compete for order flow in the same stocks'' and ``trading
centers offer[ing] a wide range of services that are designed to
attract different types of market participants with varying trading
needs.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Concept Release on Equity Market Structure, Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 61358 (Jan. 14, 2010), 75 FR 3594 (Jan. 21,
2010) (File No. S7-02-10). This Concept Release included data from
the third quarter of 2009 showing that no market center traded more
than 20% of the volume of listed stocks, further evidencing the
dispersal of and competition for trading activity. Id. at 3598.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, in the case of products that are distributed through
market data vendors, the market data vendors themselves provide
additional price discipline for proprietary data products because they
control the primary means of access to certain end users. These vendors
impose price discipline based upon their business models. For example,
vendors that assess a surcharge on data they sell are able to refuse to
offer proprietary products that their end users do not or will not
purchase in sufficient numbers. Internet portals, such as Google,
impose price discipline by providing only data that they believe will
enable them to attract ``eyeballs'' that contribute to their
advertising revenue. Similarly, vendors will not offer NYSE Arca BBO or
NYSE Arca Trades unless those products will help them maintain current
users or attract new ones. For example, a broker-dealer will not choose
to offer NYSE Arca BBO or NYSE Arca Trades to its retail customers
unless the broker-dealer believes that the retail customers will use
and value the data and the provision of such data will help the broker-
dealer maintain the customer relationship, which allows the broker-
dealer to generate profits for itself. Professional users will not
request NYSE Arca BBO or NYSE Arca Trades from market data vendors
unless they can use the data for profit-generating purposes in their
businesses. All of these operate as constraints on pricing proprietary
data products.
    Joint Product Nature of Exchange Platform. Transaction execution
and proprietary data products are complementary in that market data is
both an input and a byproduct of the execution service. In fact, market
data and trade executions are a paradigmatic example of joint products
with joint costs. The decision whether and on which platform to post an
order will depend on the attributes of the platforms where the order
can be posted, including the execution fees, data quality, and price
and distribution of their data products. The more trade executions a
platform does, the more valuable its market data products become.
    The costs of producing market data include not only the costs of
the data distribution infrastructure, but also the costs of designing,
maintaining, and operating the exchange's transaction execution
platform and the cost of regulating the exchange to ensure its fair
operation and maintain investor confidence. The total return that a
trading platform earns reflects the revenues it receives from both
products and the joint costs it incurs. Moreover, an exchange's broker-
dealer customers view the costs of transaction executions and market
data as a unified cost of doing business with the exchange.
    Other market participants have noted that the liquidity provided by
the order book, trade execution, core market data, and non-core market
data are joint products of a joint platform and have common costs.\26\
The Exchange agrees

with and adopts those discussions and the arguments therein. The
Exchange also notes that the economics literature confirms that there
is no way to allocate common costs between joint products that would
shed any light on competitive or efficient pricing.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62887 (Sept. 10,
2010), 75 FR 57092, 57095 (Sept. 17, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-121);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62907 (Sept. 14, 2010), 75 FR
57314, 57317 (Sept. 20, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-110); and Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 62908 (Sept. 14, 2010), 75 FR 57321, 57324
(Sept. 20, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-111) (``all of the exchange's costs
are incurred for the unified purposes of attracting order flow,
executing and/or routing orders, and generating and selling data
about market activity. The total return that an exchange earns
reflects the revenues it receives from the joint products and the
total costs of the joint products.''); see also August 1, 2008
Comment Letter of Jeffrey S. Davis, Vice President and Deputy
General Counsel, NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., Statement of Janusz Ordover
and Gustavo Bamberger (``because market data is both an input to and
a byproduct of executing trades on a particular platform, market
data and trade execution services are an example of `joint products'
with `joint costs.'''), attachment at pg. 4, available at
www.sec.gov/comments/34-57917/3457917-12.pdf.
    \27\ See generally Mark Hirschey, Fundamentals of Managerial
Economics, at 600 (2009) (``It is important to note, however, that
although it is possible to determine the separate marginal costs of
goods produced in variable proportions, it is impossible to
determine their individual average costs. This is because common
costs are expenses necessary for manufacture of a joint product.
Common costs of production--raw material and equipment costs,
management expenses, and other overhead--cannot be allocated to each
individual by-product on any economically sound basis. . . . Any
allocation of common costs is wrong and arbitrary.''). This is not
new economic theory. See, e.g., F. W. Taussig, ``A Contribution to
the Theory of Railway Rates,'' Quarterly Journal of Economics V(4)
438, 465 (July 1891) (``Yet, surely, the division is purely
arbitrary. These items of cost, in fact, are jointly incurred for
both sorts of traffic; and I cannot share the hope entertained by
the statistician of the Commission, Professor Henry C. Adams, that
we shall ever reach a mode of apportionment that will lead to
trustworthy results.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Analyzing the cost of market data product production and
distribution in isolation from the cost of all of the inputs supporting
the creation of market data and market data products will inevitably
underestimate the cost of the data and data products. Thus, because it
is impossible to obtain the data inputs to create market data products
without a fast, technologically robust, and well-regulated execution
system, system costs and regulatory costs affect the price of both
obtaining the market data itself and creating and distributing market
data products. It would be equally misleading, however, to attribute
all of an exchange's costs to the market data portion of an exchange's
joint products. Rather, all of an exchange's costs are incurred for the
unified purposes of attracting order flow, executing and/or routing
orders, and generating and selling data about market activity. The
total return that an exchange earns reflects the revenues it receives
from the joint products and the total costs of the joint products.
    The level of competition and contestability in the market is
evident in the numerous alternative venues that compete for order flow,
including 12 equities self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') markets,
as well as internalizing broker-dealers (``BDs'') and various forms of
alternative trading systems (``ATSs''), including dark pools and
electronic communication networks (``ECNs''). Competition among trading
platforms can be expected to constrain the aggregate return that each
platform earns from the sale of its joint products, but different
platforms may choose from a range of possible, and equally reasonable,
pricing strategies as the means of recovering total costs. For example,
some platforms may choose to pay rebates to attract orders, charge
relatively low prices for market data products (or provide market data
products free of charge), and charge relatively high prices for
accessing posted liquidity. Other platforms may choose a strategy of
paying lower rebates (or no rebates) to attract orders, setting
relatively high prices for market data products, and setting relatively
low prices for accessing posted liquidity. In this environment, there
is no economic basis for regulating maximum prices for one of the joint
products in an industry in which suppliers face competitive constraints
with regard to the joint offering.
    Existence of Alternatives. The large number of SROs, BDs, and ATSs
that currently produce proprietary data or are currently capable of
producing it provides further pricing discipline for proprietary data
products. Each SRO, ATS, and BD is currently permitted to produce
proprietary data products, and many currently do or have announced
plans to do so, including but not limited to the Exchange, NYSE, NYSE
MKT, NASDAQ OMX, BATS, and Direct Edge.
    The fact that proprietary data from ATSs, BDs, and vendors can
bypass SROs is significant in two respects. First, non-SROs can compete
directly with SROs for the production and sale of proprietary data
products. Second, because a single order or transaction report can
appear in an SRO proprietary product, a non-SRO proprietary product, or
both, the amount of data available via proprietary products is greater
in size than the actual number of orders and transaction reports that
exist in the marketplace. Because market data users can thus find
suitable substitutes for most proprietary market data products, a
market that overprices its market data products stands a high risk that
users may substitute another source of market data information for its
own.
    Moreover, consolidated data provides two additional measures of
pricing discipline for proprietary data products that are a subset of
the consolidated data stream. First, the consolidated data is widely
available in real-time at $0.50-$1 per month for non-professional
users. Second, consolidated data is also available at no cost with a
15- or 20-minute delay. Because consolidated data contains marketwide
information, it effectively places a cap on the fees assessed for
proprietary data that is simply a subset of the consolidated data (such
as NYSE Arca Trades and NYSE Arca BBO). The mere availability of low-
cost or free consolidated data provides a powerful form of pricing
discipline for proprietary data products that contain data elements
that are a subset of the consolidated data by highlighting the optional
nature of proprietary products.
    Those competitive pressures imposed by available alternatives are
clearly evident in the Exchange's proposed pricing. As noted above, the
Exchange's proposed per-user fees are lower than NASDAQ's fees. While
the Exchange's enterprise fee is higher, the Exchange will permit
broader distribution of its data, i.e., to both professional and non-
professional users.\28\ The Exchange's proposed user and enterprise
fees are less (in most cases substantially less) than the fees charged
by the CTA and CQ Plans, and the Exchange's enterprise fee also permits
distribution by a non-broker-dealer.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See supra n.18.
    \29\ See supra nn.19-20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the competition and price discipline described
above, the market for proprietary data products is also highly
contestable because market entry is rapid and inexpensive. The history
of electronic trading is replete with examples of entrants that swiftly
grew into some of the largest electronic trading platforms and
proprietary data producers: Archipelago, Bloomberg Tradebook, Island,
RediBook, Attain, TrackECN, BATS Trading and Direct Edge. Today, BATS
and Direct Edge provide certain market data at no charge on their Web
sites in order to attract more order flow, and use revenue rebates from
resulting additional executions to maintain low execution charges for
their users.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ This is simply a securities market-specific example of the
well-established principle that in certain circumstances more sales
at lower margins can be more profitable than fewer sales at higher
margins; this example is additional evidence that market data is an
inherent part of a market's joint platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, data products are valuable to professional users only if
they can be used for profit-generating purposes in their businesses and
valuable to non-professional users only insofar as they provide
information that such users

expect will assist them in tracking prices and market trends and making
order routing and trading decisions.\31\ The Exchange believes that the
proposed lower user fees and the enterprise fees, which may permit
wider distribution of last sale and quote information at a lower cost
to vendors with a large number of professional and non-professional
users, may encourage more users to demand and more vendors to choose to
offer NYSE Arca BBO and NYSE Arca Trades, thereby benefitting
professional and non-professional users, including public investors.
The Exchange also believes that offering NYSE Arca Trades for non-
professional users on a per user basis and providing the same
information as is provided to professional users will create more
choices for vendors that will allow them to offer products with the
appropriate level of information at a range of prices, thereby
encouraging wider distribution of the data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Rule 603(c) of Regulation NMS requires vendors to make the
consolidated core data feeds available to customers when trading and
order-routing decisions can be implemented. See 17 CFR 242.603(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In establishing the proposed fees, the Exchange considered the
competitiveness of the market for proprietary data and all of the
implications of that competition. The Exchange believes that it has
considered all relevant factors and has not considered irrelevant
factors in order to establish fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably
discriminatory fees and an equitable allocation of fees among all
users. The existence of numerous alternatives to the Exchange's
products, including real-time consolidated data, free delayed
consolidated data, and proprietary data from other sources, ensures
that the Exchange cannot set unreasonable fees, or fees that are
unreasonably discriminatory, when vendors and subscribers can elect
these alternatives or choose not to purchase a specific proprietary
data product if its cost to purchase is not justified by the returns
any particular vendor or subscriber would achieve through the purchase.

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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \32\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \33\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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) \34\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 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-NYSEARCA-2013-81 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-NYSEARCA-2013-81. 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-NYSEARCA-2013-81and should
be submitted on or before September 11, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20340 Filed 8-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4689-4691]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01667]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76968; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Establishing the
NYSE Arca Order Imbalances Proprietary Market Data Product

January 22, 2016.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1)\1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on January 13, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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 the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances
proprietary market data product. 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 establish the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances
datafeed as a separate, stand-alone market data product. The NYSE Arca
Order Imbalances product would be a real-time datafeed of the
information that the Exchange provides in advance of an auction.
    The Exchange is establishing the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances product
in connection with the implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's
proposed new technology trading platform.\4\ Pillar is the integrated
trading technology platform designed to use a single specification for
connecting to the equities and options markets operated by NYSE Arca
and its affiliates, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') and NYSE MKT
LLC (``NYSE MKT''). NYSE Arca Equities would be the first trading

system to migrate to Pillar. Rule 7.35P(a)(4)(C) provides that the
Exchange will disseminate Auction Imbalance Information via a
proprietary data feed during the times specified in the rule, and
through this filing, the Exchange proposes to establish the NYSE Arca
Order Imbalances feed as the proprietary data feed to which Rule
7.35P(a)(4)(C) refers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 74951 (May 13,
2015), 80 FR 28721 (May 19, 2015) (Notice) and 75494 (July 20,
2015), 80 FR 44170 (July 24, 2015) (Order) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-38)
(``Pillar I Filing''); 75497 (July 21, 2015), 80 FR 45022 (July 28,
2015) (Notice) and 76267 (Oct. 26, 2015), 80 FR 66951 (Oct. 30,
2015) (Order) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-56)(``Pillar II Filing''); 75467
(July 16, 2015), 80 FR 43515 (July 22, 2015) (Notice) and 76198
(Oct. 20, 2015), 80 FR 65274 (Oct. 26, 2015) (Order) (SR-NYSEArca-
2015-58) (``Pillar III Filing''); and 76085 (Oct. 6, 2015), 80 FR
61513 (Oct. 13, 2015) (Notice) and 76869 (Jan. 11, 2016) (Order)
(SR-NYSEArca-2015-86) (``Pillar Auction Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 7.35P(a)(4) defines Auction Imbalance Information as the
information disseminated by the Exchange for an auction. As set forth
in Rule 7.35P, Auction Imbalance information includes, if applicable,
the Total Imbalance, Market Imbalance, Indicative Match Price and
Matched Volume, each as defined in Rule 7.35P(a). The Auction Imbalance
Information would be disseminated on a time frame specified in Rule
7.35P. The NYSE Arca Order Imbalances market data product would provide
Auction Imbalance Information with respect to symbols migrated to the
Pillar platform.
    NYSE Arca order imbalance information, as defined in Rule 7.35, is
currently available through the NYSE ArcaBook and NYSE Arca Integrated
proprietary market data products and would continue to be disseminated
on these data feeds when symbols migrate to Pillar.\5\ When a symbol
migrates to Pillar, the NYSE Arca order imbalance information available
through NYSE ArcaBook and NYSE Arca Integrated proprietary market data
products would be based on Rule 7.35P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Pillar Auction Filing Notice, footnotes 22 and 23. See
also Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59039 (Dec. 2, 2008), 73
FR 74770 (Dec. 9, 2008) (NYSE ArcaBook); and 65669 (Nov. 2, 2011),
76 FR 69311 (Nov. 8, 2011) (NYSE Arca Integrated Data Feed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to offer the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances
product through networks in the Exchange's Mahwah, New Jersey data
center that are available to users of the Exchange's co-location
services. The Exchange also would offer the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances
product through the Exchange's Secure Financial Transaction
Infrastructure (SFTI) network, through which all other users and member
organizations access the Exchange's trading and execution systems and
other proprietary market data products.
    The Exchange will file a separate rule filing to establish the fees
for the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances product. As noted above, the
Exchange is establishing the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances product in
conjunction with the implementation of Pillar, the Exchange's proposed
new technology trading platform,\6\ and the Exchange will announce the
date that the product will be available through an NYSE Market Data
Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See note 4, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) \7\ of the Act, in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) \8\ of the Act, in particular, in that 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, and it is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination among customers, brokers, or
dealers. This proposal is in keeping with those principles in that it
promotes increased transparency through the dissemination of the NYSE
Arca Order Imbalances market data product to those interested in
receiving it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes this proposal is consistent with section
6(b)(5) of the Act because it protects investors and the public
interest and promotes just and equitable principles of trade by
providing investors with new options for receiving market data as
requested by market data vendors and purchasers. The proposed rule
change would benefit investors by facilitating their prompt access to
the real-time information contained in the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances
market data product.
    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs'') and broker dealers increased authority and
flexibility to offer new and unique market data to consumers of such
data. It was believed that this authority would expand the amount of
data available to users and consumers of such data and also spur
innovation and competition for the provision of market data. The
Exchange believes that the NYSE Arca Order Imbalances market data
product is precisely the sort of market data product that the
Commission envisioned when it adopted Regulation NMS. The Commission
concluded that Regulation NMS would itself further the Act's goals of
facilitating efficiency and competition:

    Efficiency is promoted when broker-dealers who do not need the
data beyond the prices, sizes, market center identifications of the
NBBO and consolidated last sale information are not required to
receive (and pay for) such data. The Commission also believes that
efficiency is promoted when broker-dealers may choose to receive
(and pay for) additional market data based on their own internal
analysis of the need for such data.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further notes that the existence of alternatives to
the Exchange's product, including order imbalances products offered by
the Exchange's affiliates, NYSE and NYSE MKT,\10\ and by the Nasdaq
Stock Market (``NASDAQ''),\11\ as well as real-time consolidated data,
free delayed consolidated data, and proprietary data from other
sources, ensures that the Exchange is not unreasonably discriminatory
because vendors and subscribers can elect these alternatives as their
individual business cases warrant. This proposed new data feed provides
investors with new options for receiving market data, which was a
primary goal of the market data amendments adopted by Regulation
NMS.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Act Release Nos. 59543 (March 9, 2009), 74
FR 11159 (March 16, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2008-132) (NYSE Order Imbalances)
and 59743 (April 9, 2009), 74 FR 17699 (April 16, 2009) (SR-
NYSEAmex-2009-11)(NYSE Amex Order Imbalances, n/k/a NYSE MKT Order
Imbalances).
    \11\ See Nasdaq TotalView-ITCH, http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=Totalview2 (last visited November 25, 2015)(displays
the full order book depth for Nasdaq market participants and also
disseminates the Net Order Imbalance Indicator (NOII) for the Nasdaq
Opening and Closing Crosses and Nasdaq IPO/Halt Cross).
    \12\ See Regulation NMS Adopting Release, supra, at 37503.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE Arca Order Imbalances market data product will help to
protect a free and open market by providing additional data to the
marketplace and by giving investors greater choices. In addition, the
proposal would not permit unfair discrimination because the product
will be available to all of the Exchange's customers and broker-dealers
through both SFTI and the Liquidity Center Network.

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

    In accordance with section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\13\ 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. Because other exchanges already offer similar
products, the Exchange's proposed NYSE Arca Order Imbalances market
data product will enhance

competition. The NYSE Arca Order Imbalances product will foster
competition by providing an alternative to similar products offered by
other exchanges, including order imbalances products offered by the
Exchange's affiliates, NYSE and NYSE MKT,\14\ and by NASDAQ.\15\ This
proposed new data feed provides investors with new options for
receiving market data, which was a primary goal of the market data
amendments adopted by Regulation NMS.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \14\ See note 10, supra.
    \15\ See note 11, supra.
    \16\ See Regulation NMS Adopting Release, supra, at 37503.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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, it has become effective pursuant to section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 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 pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \19\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \20\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange
stated that it anticipates migrating symbols to Pillar beginning
February 1, 2016, and that waiver of the operative delay would permit
market data that would be available in existing products for symbols
that have migrated to Pillar to also be available in a stand-alone
product, which would offer an alternative to currently available
proprietary data products. The Commission believes the waiver of the
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative
delay and designates the proposal operative upon filing.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \21\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-10 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-10. 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 available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-10, and should
be submitted on or before February 17, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-01667 Filed 1-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 35 (Friday, February 21, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10049-10050]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03471]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0811; Airspace Docket No. 17-ANM-36]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Alpine, WY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet or more above the surface of the earth at Alpine Airport,
Alpine, WY. The first area extends upward from 700 feet above the
surface and a second area extends upward from 1,200 feet above the
surface. The airspace is designed to accommodate new IFR area
navigation (RNAV) approaches and IFR departure procedures at the
airport, supporting the airport's transition from VFR to IFR operations

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, May 21, 2020. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov//air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you
can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Van Der Wal, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code.

Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would establish
Class E airspace at Alpine Airport, Alpine, WY, to ensure the safety
and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the
airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (84 FR 67383; December 10, 2019) for Docket No. FAA-2019-0811
to establish Class E airspace at Alpine Airport, Alpine, WY. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. One comment was
received. The commenter recommended the airport should be
decommissioned. The comment is not germane to the establishment of
airspace to contain IFR procedures.
    Class E5 airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or
more above the surface at the Alpine Airport, Alpine, WY. The Class E
airspace supports the airport's transition from VFR to IFR operations.
Specifically, it will, to the extent possible, contain IFR departures
until reaching 1,200 feet above the surface and IFR arrivals when
descending below 1,500 feet above the surface.
    The first airspace area extends upward from 700 feet above the
surface within a 4.0-mile radius to the airport, and within 1 mile each
side of the 179[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 4.0-
mile radius to 5.8 south of the airport, and within 1.8 miles each side
of the 321[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 4.0-mile
radius to 10.5 miles northwest of the airport.
    The second airspace area extends upward from 1,200 feet above the
surface within a 13-mile radius of the airport.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANM WY E5 Alpine, WY [New]

Alpine Airport, WY
    (Lat. 43[deg]10'55'' N, long. 111[deg]02'19'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 4.0-mile radius of the airport, and within 1 mile each side
of the 179[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the 4.0-
mile radius to 5.8 miles south of the airport, and 1.8 miles each
side of the 321[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the
4.0-mile radius to 10.5 miles northwest of the airport; and that
airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a
13-mile radius of the Alpine Airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on February 12, 2020.
Shawn M. Kozica,
Group Manager, Western Service Center Operations Support Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-03471 Filed 2-20-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4091-4094]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01375]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2013-0002]

Final Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified
BFEs are made final for the communities listed below. The BFEs and
modified BFEs are the basis for the floodplain management measures that
each community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being
already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for
participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: The date of issuance of the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
showing BFEs and modified BFEs for each community. This date may be
obtained by contacting the office where the maps are available for
inspection as indicated in the table below.

ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each community are available for
inspection at the office of the Chief Executive Officer of each
community. The respective addresses are listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the modified
BFEs for each community listed. These modified elevations have been
published in newspapers of local circulation and ninety (90) days have
elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for
Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    This final rule is issued in accordance with section 110 of the
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part
67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone
areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM available at the
address cited below for each community. The BFEs and modified BFEs are
made final in the communities listed below. Elevations at selected
locations in each community are shown.
    National Environmental Policy Act. This final rule is categorically
excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental
Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been
prepared.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood elevation determinations are
not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-
612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
    Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR
51735.
    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This final rule involves no
policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.
    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This final rule meets
the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67

    Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is amended as follows:

PART 67--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp., p. 376.

Sec.  67.11  [Amended]

0
2. The tables published under the authority of Sec.  67.11 are amended
as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      * Elevation in
                                                                     feet  (NGVD)  +
                                                                    Elevation in feet
                                                                      (NAVD)   Depth in feet
           Flooding source(s)                    elevation             above ground       Communities affected
                                                                    [caret] Elevation
                                                                     in  meters (MSL)
                                                                         Modified

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Rockland County, New York (All Jurisdictions)
                                             Docket No.: FEMA-B-1214
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demarest Kill..........................  At the West Branch                       +98  Town of Clarkstown.
                                          Hackensack River
                                          confluence.
                                         At the upstream side of                 +247
                                          Little Tor Road.
East Branch Hackensack River...........  At the upstream side of                  +88  Town of Clarkstown.
                                          Old Mill Road.
                                         Approximately 600 feet                  +151  .........................
                                          downstream of Rockland
                                          Lake.
Golf Course Brook......................
                                         At the upstream side of                 +326  Village of Montebello.
                                          Nottingham Drive.
                                         At the upstream side of                 +492  .........................
                                          Spook Rock Road.
Hackensack River.......................  At the Town of Orangetown/               +58  Town of Clarkstown, Town
                                          Town of Clarkstown                            of Orangetown.
                                          corporate limit.
                                         At the downstream side of                +66  .........................
                                          Old Mill Road.
Hudson River...........................  At the Village of Upper                   +7  Village of Upper Nyack.
                                          Nyack/Village of Nyack
                                          corporate limit.
                                         At the Village of Upper                   +7
                                          Nyack/Town of Clarkstown
                                          corporate limit.
Minisceongo Creek......................  At the upstream side of                  +11  Town of Haverstraw,
                                          the dam (near Gagan                           Village of Haverstraw,
                                          Road).                                        Village of West
                                                                                Haverstraw.
                                         Approximately 1,000 feet                +349  .........................
                                          upstream of Thiels Ivy
                                          Road.
Nauraushaun Brook......................  At the Hackensack River                  +57  Town of Clarkstown, Town
                                          confluence.                                   of Orangetown.
                                         Approximately 200 feet                  +297  .........................
                                          upstream of Smith Road.
North Branch Pascack Brook.............  At the Pascack Brook                    +351  Town of Clarkstown, Town
                                          confluence.                                   of Ramapo, Village of
                                                                                New Hempstead, Village
                                                                                of New Square, Village
                                                                                of Spring Valley.
                                         Approximately 250 feet                  +513  .........................
                                          upstream of Greenridge
                                          Way.
Pascack Brook..........................  At the New Jersey state                 +207  Town of Clarkstown, Town
                                          boundary.                                     of Orangetown, Town of
                                                                                Ramapo, Village of
                                                                                Chestnut Ridge, Village
                                                                                of Kaser, Village of
                                                                                Spring Valley.
                                         At the downstream side of               +578  .........................
                                          Grosser Lane.
Sparkill Creek.........................  Approximately 350 feet                   +14  Town of Orangetown,
                                          downstream of Rock Road.                      Village of Piermont.
                                         At the upstream side of                 +124  .........................
                                          Erie Street.
West Branch Hackensack River...........  At the upstream side of                  +88  Town of Clarkstown.
                                          Ridge Road.
                                         At the Town of Ramapo                   +290  .........................
                                          corporate limit.
West Branch Saddle River...............  At the upstream side of                 +325  Town of Ramapo, Village
                                          the New Jersey state                          of Airmont.
                                          boundary.
                                         Approximately 280 feet                  +530  .........................
                                          upstream of Olympia Lane.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
[caret] Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.

                                                    ADDRESSES

Town of Clarkstown
Maps are available for inspection at the Clarkstown Town Hall, 10 Maple Avenue, New City, NY 10956.

Town of Haverstraw
Maps are available for inspection at the Haverstraw Town Hall, 1 Rosman Road, Garnerville, NY 10923.

Town of Orangetown

Maps are available for inspection at the Town of Orangetown Building Department, 20 Greenbush Road, Orangeburg,
 NY 10962.

Town of Ramapo
Maps are available for inspection at the Ramapo Town Hall, 237 State Route 59, Suffern, NY 10901.

Village of Airmont
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 251 Cherry Lane, Airmont, NY 10982.

Village of Chestnut Ridge
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 277 Old Nyack Turnpike, Chestnut Ridge, NY 10977.

Village of Haverstraw
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 40 New Main Street, Haverstraw, NY 10927.

Village of Kaser
Maps are available for inspection at the Kaser Village Hall, 15 Elyon Road, Monsey, NY 10952.

Village of Montebello
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 1 Montebello Road, Montebello, NY 10901.

Village of New Hempstead
Maps are available for inspection at the New Hempstead Village Hall, 108 Old Schoolhouse Road, New City, NY
 10956.

Village of New Square
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 766 North Main Street, New Square, NY 10977.

Village of Piermont
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 478 Piermont Avenue, Piermont, NY 10968.

Village of Spring Valley
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 200 North Main Street, Spring Valley, NY 10977.

Village of Upper Nyack
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 328 North Broadway, Upper Nyack, NY 10960.

Village of West Haverstraw
Maps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 130 Samsondale Avenue, West Haverstraw, NY 10993.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Sullivan County, Pennsylvania (All Jurisdictions)
                                             Docket No.: FEMA-B-1233
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Run................................  At the Muncy Creek                      +965  Township of Davidson.
                                          confluence.
                                         Approximately 1,660 feet               +1153  .........................
                                          upstream of Fairman Road.
Little Loyalsock Creek.................  Approximately 1,150 feet               +1432  Borough of Dushore.
                                          downstream of the Marsh
                                          Run confluence.
                                         Approximately 540 feet                 +1458  .........................
                                          upstream of Main Street.
Loyalsock Creek........................  Approximately 2.6 miles                 +780  Borough of Forksville,
                                          downstream of the                             Township of Elkland,
                                          Ogdonia Creek confluence.                     Township of Forks,
                                                                                Township of Hillsgrove.
                                         At the Little Loyalsock                +1004  .........................
                                          Creek confluence.
Muncy Creek............................  At the Muncy Creek                      +783  Township of Davidson,
                                          Tributary 1 confluence.                       Township of Shrewsbury.
                                         Approximately 0.76 mile                 +988  .........................
                                          upstream of Pecks Road.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
[caret] Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.

                                                    ADDRESSES

Borough of Dushore
Maps are available for inspection at the Municipal Building, 216 Julia Street, Dushore, PA 18614.

Borough of Forksville
Maps are available for inspection at Sullivan County Planning and Community Development, 245 Muncy Street, Suite
 110, Laporte, PA 18626.

Township of Davidson
Maps are available for inspection at the Davidson Township Municipal Building, 20 Michelle Road, Muncy Valley,
 PA 17758.

Township of Elkland
Maps are available for inspection at the Elkland Township Municipal Office Building, 909 Kobbe Road, Forksville,
 PA 18616.

Township of Forks
Maps are available for inspection at the Forks Township Hall, 627 Molyneux Hill Road, Dushore, PA 18614.

Township of Hillsgrove
Maps are available for inspection at the Township Hall, 2232 Route 87, Hillsgrove, PA 18619.

Township of Shrewsbury
Maps are available for inspection at the Shrewsbury Township Building, 1793 Edkin Hill Road, Muncy Valley, PA
 17758.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: December 18, 2013.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-01375 Filed 1-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P