[Federal Register: January 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 4)]
[Notices]
[Page 958-959]
[DOCID:fr06ja06-72]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53045; File No. SR-PCX-2005-132]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Obligations of Lead Market Makers

December 30, 2005.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 30, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or
``PCX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange filed the proposed rule change as a ``non-controversial''
rule change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\3\ which rendered the
proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to delete PCX Rule 6.82(c)(15) in its
entirety. The Exchange also proposes to amend Commentary .02 to PCX
Rule 6.82. The text of the proposed rule change is available on PCX's
Web site, http://www.pacificex.com, at PCX's Office of the Secretary,

and at the Commission's Public Reference Section.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to delete PCX Rule 6.82(c)(15), a
sub-paragraph of Obligations of Lead Market Makers. Along with the
deletion of PCX Rule 6.82(c)(15), the PCX proposes to amend Commentary
.02 to PCX Rule 6.82, which addresses PCX Rule 6.82(c)(15). This rule,
dealing with the handling of public customer orders that are not
automatically executed on the PCX because there is a better-displayed
bid or offer on another exchange, is scheduled to be operative on
January 1, 2006.
    Under PCX Rule 6.82(c)(15), when a public customer order is not
automatically executed on the PCX due to a better bid or ask price
being displayed on another exchange, a Lead Market Maker (``LMM'') is
obligated, as soon as practical, to address the order by either
executing the public customer order at a price that matches the best
available price displayed at any other exchange or by routing the
public customer order via intermarket linkage (``Linkage'') for
execution at any other exchange displaying the best price in the market
at the time. Outbound Linkage orders on the PCX are still handled via
manual interaction with the Linkage system. Manual interaction with the
Linkage system can be a time consuming process that potentially could
result in the delay of a public customer order being executed at a
better price available at a competing exchange. By deleting PCX Rule
6.82(c)(15), in the event that an LMM does not execute the order at the
better price displayed on another exchange, the LMM would not be
required to send the order to the competing exchange via Linkage.
Public customer orders that are not executed on the PCX could still be

rejected to the initiating brokerage firm for rerouting to a competing
exchange.
    Due to delays in technology development, the PCX has not been able
to implement an automated outbound Linkage function into the PCX Plus
trading system. The PCX is presently developing a new enhanced options
trading system, called the OX System. Included in the design plans for
the OX System is functionality that will route outbound Linkage orders
to other exchanges via an automated process.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \4\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(5) of the Act \5\ 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, and to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the proposed rule change: (i) Does not significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) by its terms,
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, if consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, the proposed rule
change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\6\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay period for ``non-controversial'' proposals and make the
proposed rule change effective and operative upon filing. The
Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest,
because PCX Rule 6.82(c)(15) has never become operative (as its
operative date was January 1, 2006), and deleting a rule that has never
become operative has no real effect and thus raises no issues of
regulatory concern. For this reason, the Commission designates the
proposal to be effective and operative upon filing with the
Commission.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For the purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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 the furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-PCX-2005-132 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-132. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549. 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-PCX-2005-132 and should be
submitted on or before January 27, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-20 Filed 1-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14359-14360]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6059]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2010-0003; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1147]

Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On October 5, 2010, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that included erroneous Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
location descriptions for Pollard Creek Tributary No. 5 in Palo Pinto
County, Texas. The location description for the proposed BFE of 1,032
feet, referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988, should
have located the proposed BFE as being just upstream of Northeast 23rd
Street; and the location description for the proposed BFE of 1,049
feet, referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988, should
have located the proposed BFE as being approximately 850 feet upstream
of Northeast 23rd Street.

DATES: Comments pertaining to the location descriptions for the Pollard
Creek Tributary No. 5 BFEs are to be submitted on or before June 14,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-
1147, to 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 (e-
mail) rodriguez1<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed determinations of Base (1% annual-chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs for communities participating
in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are minimum requirements.
They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter
requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed elevations are
used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and
also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium
rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final,
and for the contents in those buildings.

Correction

    In the proposed rule published at 75 FR 61377, in the October 5,
2010, issue of the Federal Register, FEMA published a table under the
authority of 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ``Palo Pinto County,
Texas, and Incorporated Areas'' addressed the flooding source Pollard
Creek Tributary No. 5.
    The proposed rule listed the location description for the proposed
BFE of 1,032 feet, referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of
1988, as being approximately 850 feet upstream of 23rd Street. The
correct location of this proposed BFE is just upstream of Northeast
23rd Street. The proposed rule also listed the location description for
the proposed BFE of 1,049 feet, referenced to the North American
Vertical Datum of 1988, as being just upstream of 23rd Street
Northeast. The correct location of this proposed BFE is approximately
850 feet upstream of 23rd Street.
    This proposed rule correction is reopening the comment period for
Pollard Creek Tributary No. 5, for the locations of the proposed BFEs
of 1,032 feet and 1,049 feet, both referenced to the North American
Vertical Datum of 1988, due to the error in listing the location
descriptions for these BFEs in the previously published proposed rule
at 75 FR 61377.

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

    Dated: March 7, 2011.
Sandra K. Knight,
Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Mitigation,
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-6059 Filed 3-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 15519]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06566]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0634; FRL-9941-50]

Cancellation of Pesticides for Non-Payment of Year 2015
Registration Maintenance Fees; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of November 13,
2015, concerning the cancellation of pesticides for non-payment of year
2015 registration maintenance fees. This document is being issued to
correct Table 2 of the cancellation notice by removing two entries
which were inadvertently included.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mick Yanchulis, Information Technology
and Resources Management Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this
action may be of particular interest to persons who produce or use
pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0634, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What does this correction do?

    This notice is being issued to correct Table 2 of the cancellation
notice. This correction removes 2 entries which were inadvertently
included.
    FR Doc. 2015-28765 published in the Federal Register of November
13, 2015 (80 FR 70206) (FRL-9934-46) is corrected as follows:
    1. On page 70208, in the first column, in Table 2, remove the
complete entry for: ``069836-00001.''
    2. On page 70208, in the first column, in Table 2, remove the
complete entry for: ``069836-00002.''

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: March 17, 2016.
Delores J. Barber,
Director, Information Technology and Resource Management Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2016-06566 Filed 3-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43687-43689]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15759]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78186; File No. SR-MSRB-2016-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the Content Outline for the Municipal Advisor
Representative Qualification Examination (Series 50)

June 28, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\
notice is hereby given that on June 15, 2016 the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (the ``MSRB'' or ``Board'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by the MSRB. The MSRB has designated the proposed rule change as
``constituting a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with
respect to the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing
rule'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(1)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of
this filing by the Commission.\5\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
    \5\ See also letter to Diane G. Klinke, General Counsel, MSRB,
from Belinda Blaine, Associate Director, Division of Market
Regulation, SEC, dated July 24, 2000, attached as Exhibit 3b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The MSRB filed with the Commission proposed revisions to the
content outline for the Municipal Advisor Representative Qualification
Examination (Series 50) (the ``proposed rule change''). The MSRB
proposes to implement the revised Series 50 examination program on
September 12, 2016. The proposed revisions to the content outline
update the material to reflect changes to the laws, rules and
regulations covered by the examination and to incorporate the functions
and associated tasks currently performed by a Municipal Advisor
Representative. As a result of recent changes to MSRB rules, revisions
to the Series 50 content outline are necessary to indicate the current
rule requirements and rule citations. In addition, the Board is
proposing to make changes to the format of the content outline. The
MSRB is not proposing in this filing any textual changes to its rules.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the MSRB's Web
site at www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/SEC-Filings/2016-Filings.aspx, at the MSRB's principal office, 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 MSRB included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The MSRB has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Section 15B(b)(2)(L)(iii) of the Act requires the MSRB to establish
professional standards for municipal advisors.\6\ The Act further
requires associated persons of municipal advisors to pass such
examinations as the Board may establish to demonstrate that such
individuals meet the standards as the Board finds necessary or
appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors
and municipal entities or obligated persons.\7\ A professional
qualification examination is intended to determine whether an
individual meets the MSRB's basic qualification standards for a
particular registration category. The examination measures a
candidate's knowledge of the business activities, as well as the
regulatory requirements, including MSRB rules, SEC rules, rule
interpretations and other federal law, applicable to a particular
registration category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(L)(iii).
    \7\ See Section 15B(b)(2)(A)(iii) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78o-
4(b)(2)(A)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MSRB Rule G-3(d) defines a municipal advisor representative as a
natural person associated with a municipal advisor who engages in
municipal advisory activities on the municipal advisor's behalf, other
than a person performing only clerical, administrative, support or
similar functions. Pursuant to MSRB Rule G-3(d), every Municipal
Advisor Representative is required to pass the Municipal Advisor
Representative Qualification Examination prior to acting in such
capacity.
    The Series 50 examination will consist of 100 multiple-choice
questions. Candidates are allowed 180 minutes to complete the
examination.\8\ Consistent with other financial regulatory
qualification examinations, candidates may receive (at the option of
their firm) an informational breakdown of their performance on each
section of the examination and their pass/fail status at the completion
of the testing session. The passing score for the Series 50 examination
is 71%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Prior to beginning the examination, candidates will receive
a tutorial on how to complete the computerized examination.
Candidates will be given 30 minutes to complete the tutorial in
addition to the 180 minutes allowed to complete the examination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current Content Outline
    The Series 50 examination content outline has been prepared to
assist municipal advisor representative candidates in preparing for the
Series 50 examination and is available on the MSRB's Web site. The
Series 50 examination content outline describes the following five
topical sections comprising the examination:
    (1) Understanding SEC and MSRB Rules Regarding Municipal Advisors
(12 questions);
    (2) Understanding Municipal Finance (35 questions);
    (3) Performing Issuer's Credit Analysis and Due Diligence (12
questions);
    (4) Structuring, Pricing and Executing Municipal Debt Products (31
questions); and
    (5) Understanding Requirements Related to the Issuance of Municipal
Debt (10 questions).
    The reference materials section of the Series 50 examination
content outline is intended to provide candidates with a list of
resources, which when used in conjunction with the Series 50
examination content outline, can assist candidates in preparing for the
Series 50 examination. The reference materials were recommended by
municipal advisors as having been helpful resources in carrying out the
job functions of a municipal advisor. The reference materials are not
intended to be all-inclusive, nor are the reference materials intended
to specifically represent content that may be covered on the
examination.
Proposed Revisions
    As a result of recent changes to MSRB rules, revisions to the
Series 50 content outline are necessary to indicate the current rule
requirements and rule citations. A summary of the changes to the
content outline for the Series 50 examination, detailed by major topic
headings, is provided below:
Introduction
     The passing score of 71% as approved by the Board was
added to the introduction section of the outline.
Function 1: Understanding SEC and MSRB Rules Regarding Municipal
Advisors
1.1.3 MSRB Rules Governing Activities of Municipal Advisors (e.g.,
Professional Qualification; Fiduciary Duty; Recordkeeping)
     The rule reference to ``MSRB Rule G-32 Disclosure in
Connection with Primary Offerings'' is being removed from the outline.
     The rule reference to ``MSRB Rule G-20 Gifts, Gratuities,
Non-Cash Compensation and Expenses of Issuance'' is being added to the
content outline to reflect the applicability of Rule G-20 to municipal
advisors.
     The rule reference to ``MSRB Rule G-37 Political
Contributions and Prohibitions on Municipal Securities Business and
Municipal Advisory Business'' is being added to the content outline to
reflect the applicability of Rule G-37 to municipal advisors.
     The rule reference to ``MSRB Rule G-42 Duties of Non-
Solicitor Municipal Advisors'' is being added to the content outline to
reflect the applicability of Rule G-42 to municipal advisors.
Function 2: Understanding Municipal Finance
2.1.5 Rating Agencies
     The reference to ``(major (three)'' rating agencies is
being removed from the content outline.
Sample Questions
     Sample questions 2, 3, and 4 were replaced with updated
sample questions.
2. Statutory Basis
    Section 15B(b)(2)(A) of the Act authorizes the MSRB to prescribe
standards of training, experience, competence, and such other
qualifications for associated persons of municipal advisors as the
Board finds necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the
protection of investors and municipal entities or obligated persons.\9\
Section 15B(b)(2)(A)(i)-(iii) of the Act also provides that the Board
may appropriately classify municipal advisors and persons associated
with municipal advisors and require persons in any such class to pass
tests prescribed by the Board.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(A).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(A)(i)-(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 15(B)(b)(2)(A) of the Act \11\ in that the
revisions will ensure that certain key concepts and rules are tested on
the Series 50 examination in order to test the competency of
individuals seeking to qualify as Municipal Advisor Representatives
with respect to their knowledge of MSRB rules and the municipal
securities market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The MSRB does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any

burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The updated Series 50
examination content outline aligns with the functions and associated
tasks currently performed by Municipal Advisor Representatives and
tests knowledge of the most current laws, rules, and regulations and
skills relevant to those functions and associated tasks. As such, the
proposed rule change would make the Series 50 examination more
efficient and effective.

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

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

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and paragraph (f)(1) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\13\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-MSRB-2016-08 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MSRB-2016-08. 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 MSRB. 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-MSRB-2016-08 and should be
submitted on or before July 26, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-15759 Filed 7-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83937-83938]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28388]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC21-10-000.
    Applicants: NextEra Energy Transmission, LLC, GridLiance West LLC,
GridLiance High Plains LLC, GridLiance HeartLand LLC.
    Description: Response to December 10, 2020 Deficiency Letter of
NextEra Energy Transmission, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5243.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: EC21-35-000.
    Applicants: Lone Valley Solar Park I LLC, Lone Valley Solar Park II
LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Lone Valley Solar Park I LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5242.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/21.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2819-006; ER10-2358-007; ER10-2431-007; ER14-
1390-005; ER14-1397-005; ER14-413-004; ER19-1778-002.
    Applicants: ALLETE, Inc., ALLETE Clean Energy, Inc., Chanarambie
Power Partners, LLC, Glen Ullin Energy Center, LLC, Lake Benton Power
Partners LLC, Storm Lake Power Partners I LLC, Storm Lake Power
Partners II, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Central Region of
ALLETE, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5241.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/16/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-55-001.
    Applicants: OhmConnect, Inc.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of OhmConnect,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5246.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2768-001.
    Applicants: Greensville County Solar Project, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Amended Market-Based Rate Tariff to
be effective 2/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-281-001.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Services Tariff v. 2--Revised
(Amendment 1) to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-667-000.
    Applicants: Glen Ullin Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Glen Ullin Energy Center,
LLC Revised MBR Tariff Filing to be effective 2/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5165.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-669-000.
    Applicants: Morongo Transmission LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Initial Transmission Owner
Tariff and Transmission Revenue Requirement Filing to be effective 12/
31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-670-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Otter
Tail Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-12-17_SA 3604 OTP-MPC
T20-02 TIA (Concrete 115kV) to be effective 12/10/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5022.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-671-000.
    Applicants: New York State Reliability Council, L.L.C.
    Description: Informational Filing of the Revised Installed Capacity
Requirement for the New York Control Area by the New York State
Reliability Council, L.L.C.

    Filed Date: 12/15/20.
    Accession Number: 20201215-5228.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/5/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-672-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Description: Pre-Arranged/Pre-Agreed (Settlement and Settlement
Agreement) Filing of Duke Energy Florida, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/16/20.
    Accession Number: 20201216-5248.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/6/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-673-000.
    Applicants: PA Solar Park II, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Reactive Power Compensation
Tariff Filing to be effective 12/18/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5071.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-674-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-12-17 EIM Entity
Agreement--Tacoma to be effective 3/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-675-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2021 RS Filing to be
effective 1/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-676-000.
    Applicants: NSTAR Electric Company.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation of SEMASS Design,
Engineering and Construction Agreement to be effective 12/17/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5139.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-677-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-12-17_NSP-MKPC-TCRA-
598-0.1.0-Filing to be effective 2/16/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/17/20.
    Accession Number: 20201217-5142.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/7/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 17, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28388 Filed 12-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20102-20103]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07771]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0745; FRL-9797-7]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Reformulated Gasoline Commingling Provisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), ``Reformulated Gasoline
Commingling Provisions'' (EPA ICR No.2228.04, OMB Control No. 2060-
0587) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below. This is a ``RENEWAL'' of the ICR, which is currently approved
through August 31, 2013. 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: Comments must be submitted on or before June 3, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0745 online using www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the
Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center in Washington, DC (EPA/DC). The
docket is located in the EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW., Room 3334, and is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time, Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, or by
mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    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: Geanetta Heard, Fuels Compliance
Center, 6406J Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER> fax number:
202-343-2800; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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, EPA 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.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have

practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. EPA will consider the comments received and
amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be
submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue
another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR
to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: EPA would like to continue collecting notifications from
gasoline retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumer related to
commingling of ethanol blended and non-ethanol blended reformulated
gasoline. The test results will allow EPA to monitor compliance with
the Reformulated Gasoline Commingling Provisions. We inform respondents
that they may assert claims of business confidentiality (CBI) for
information they submit in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2203.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Gasoline stations, Gasoline stations
with convenience stores, Gasoline stations without convenience stores.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: mandatory Sections 114 and 208
of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7414 and 7542.
    Estimated number of respondents: 84,050.
    Frequency of response: Annually.
    Total estimated burden: 21,013 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $357,221 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The change in burden from the prior ICR is
due in part to better numbers extracted from business and industry
economic statistics that assisted in calculating the numbers of
respondents. These better numbers reduced the party size by 13,650
members. The number of responses also declined from 110,700 to 84,050 a
difference of 26,650 reports which reduced the industry burden hours
from 27,675 to 21,013. We also found that the original cost per
response was overstated by a factor of 2. With the decline of
respondents, burden hours and responses, and revisit cost per response,
the cost to renew this ICR is $357,221 a difference of $528,379
calculated from the prior collection approved by OMB.

    Dated: March 27, 2013.
Byron Bunker,
 Director, Compliance Division.
[FR Doc. 2013-07771 Filed 4-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 52)]
[Notices]
[Page 14240]
[DOCID:fr17mr08-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL07-86-003, EL07-88-003, EL07-92-003, EL07-100-002]

Ameren Services Company and Northern Indiana Public Service
Company, Complainant v. Midwest Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Respondent; Great Lakes Utilities, et al., Complainant v. Midwest
Independent System Operator, Inc., Respondent; Wabash Valley Power
Assoc., Inc., Complainant v. Midwest Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Respondent; E.ON. U.S. LLC, Complainant v. Midwest Independent System
Operator, Inc., Respondent; Notice of Filing

March 10, 2008.
    Take notice that on March 3, 2008, Midwest Independent System
Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) filed revisions to its Open Access
Transmission, Energy and Operating Reserve Markets Tariff reflecting an
alternative mechanism for allocating Revenue Sufficiency Guarantee
charges and costs (consistent with Midwest ISO's February 1, 2008
informational filing).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll-free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 24, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-5233 Filed 3-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64942-64946]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25456]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87573; File No. SR-NYSECHX-2019-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Chicago, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Adopting
Rules Relating to Order Audit Trail System Requirements

November 19, 2019.
    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 November 6, 2019, the NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE
Chicago'' or the ``Exchange'') 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 adopt rules relating to Order Audit Trail
System requirements, and amend Article 11, Rule 4 in anticipation of
the Exchange's transition to trading to the Pillar trading platform.
The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt rules relating to Order Audit Trail
System (``OATS'') requirements, and amend Article 11, Rule 4 in
anticipation of the Exchange's transition to trading to the Pillar
trading platform.\4\ Pillar is an integrated trading technology
platform designed to use a single specification for connecting to the
equites and options markets operated by the Exchange and its
affiliates, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), NYSE American, LLC (``NYSE
American''), NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE National''), and New York
Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') (the ``Affiliated Exchanges'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange has announced that, subject to rule approvals,
it will transition to trading on Pillar on November 4, 2019. See
Trader Update, available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-chicago/NYSE_Chicago_Migration.pdf. The Exchange
originally filed the proposed rule change on October 31, 2019 (SR-
NYSECHX-2019-17) and withdrew such filing on November 6, 2019, and
is now submitting this proposed rule change to include additional
specificity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    In July 2018, the Exchange and its direct parent company were
acquired by NYSE Group, Inc. (``Transaction'').\5\ As a result of the
Transaction, the Exchange became part of a corporate family including
the Affiliated Exchanges. Following the Transaction, the Exchange
continued to operate as a separate self-regulatory organization with
rules, membership rosters and listings distinct from the rules,
membership rosters and listings of the other Affiliated Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83635 (July 13,
2018), 83 FR 34182 (July 19, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004); see also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83303 (May 22, 2018), 83 FR
24517 (May 29, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange recently adopted the rule numbering framework of NYSE
National rules, which are organized in 13 Rules.\6\ In addition, the
Exchange has amended its rules to support the transition of trading in
Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C-listed securities from its current trading
platform to a fully automated price-time priority allocation model that
operates on the Pillar trading

platform.\7\ As part of this transition, the Exchange will continue to
support Institutional Brokers, as provided for under Article 17, and is
updating the Brokerplex system, which is described in Article 17, Rule
5, to interface with the Pillar trading platform.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85297 (March 12,
2019), 84 FR 9854 (March 18, 2019) (SR-NYSECHX-2019-03) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness) (``Framework Filing'').
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87264 (October 9,
2019), 84 FR 55345 (October 16, 2019) (SR-NYSECHX-2019-08) (Approval
Order).
    \8\ The term ``Institutional Broker'' is defined in Article 1,
Rule 1(n) to mean a member of the Exchange who is registered as an
Institutional Broker pursuant to the provisions of Article 17 and
has satisfied all Exchange requirements to operate as an
Institutional Broker on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in the Framework Filing, Rule 0 currently provides
that the Exchange and FINRA are parties to a Regulatory Services
Agreement (``RSA'') pursuant to which FINRA has agreed to perform
certain regulatory functions of the Exchange on behalf of the
Exchange.\9\ The Exchange notes that pursuant to the RSA, FINRA will
perform certain regulatory surveillance of trading activity on the
Exchange and conduct various regulatory services on behalf of the
Exchange, similar to what FINRA has contracted to do for the Affiliated
Exchanges. Notwithstanding the RSA, the Exchange will retain legal
responsibility for the regulation of its members and its market and the
performance of FINRA as its regulatory services provider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Rule 0 (Regulation of the Exchange and Participants).
The rule also provides that notwithstanding the fact that the
Exchange has entered into an RSA with FINRA to perform certain of
the Exchange's functions, the Exchange shall retain ultimate legal
responsibility for, and control of, such functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of both the transition to the Pillar trading platform and
the regulatory relationship with FINRA, the Exchange proposes to amend
specified rules relating to regulatory reporting requirements. First,
the Exchange proposes to add new Rules 6.7400 through 6.7470 that are
based on NYSE National OATS rules relating to order audit trail system
requirements. These OATS requirements are in turn based on the FINRA
OATS requirements, and will facilitate the regulatory relationship with
FINRA. Second, the Exchange proposes to decommission one of the systems
for Institutional Brokers to report certain trading activity on away
markets, as specified in Article 11, Rule 4. With this proposed change,
Institutional Brokers will continue to be required to report this
trading activity, but will no longer be able to submit this data via
regulatory drop copies into Brokerplex.
Proposed Rule 6.7400 (Order Audit Trail System)
    The Exchange proposes OATS rules based on NYSE National Rules
6.7400 Series, which in turn are based on the FINRA Rules 7400 Series.
The proposed NYSE Chicago Rule 6.7400 Series would consist of proposed
Rules 6.7410 through 6.7470, which are based on NYSE National Rules
6.7410 through 6.7470 without any substantive differences. The Exchange
proposes non-substantive differences throughout the Rule 6.7400 Series
to refer to the Exchange instead of NYSE National.
     Proposed Rule 6.7410 (Definitions) would set forth
definitions used for purposes of the Rule 6.7400 Series and is based on
NYSE National Rule 6.7410 without any substantive differences other
than to refer to Exchange members as Participants rather than ETP
Holders.
     Proposed Rule 6.7420 (Applicability) would specify that
the requirements of the Rule 6.7400 Series are applicable to all
Participants and their associated persons and to all NMS Stocks that
trade on the Exchange, and is based on NYSE National Rule 6.720 without
any differences other than to refer to Exchange members as Participants
rather than ETP Holders.
     Proposed Rule 6.7430 (Synchronization of ETP Holder
Business Clocks) would require Participants to synchronize business
clocks used for purposes of recording the date and time of specified
events, and is based on NYSE National Rule 6.7430 without any
differences other than to refer to Exchange members as Participants
rather than ETP Holders.
     Proposed Rule 6.7440 (Recording of Order Information)
would require Participants to comply with FINRA Rule 7440 as if such
rule were part of the Exchange's rules and is based on NYSE National
Rule 6.7440 without any substantive differences other than to refer to
Exchange members as Participants rather than ETP Holders.
     Proposed Rule 6.7450 (Order Data Transmission
Requirements) would require Participants to comply with FINRA Rule 7450
as if such rule were part of the Exchange's rules and is based on NYSE
National Rule 6.7450 without any substantive differences other than to
refer to Exchange members as Participants rather than ETP Holders.
     Proposed Rule 6.7460 (Violation of Order Audit Trail
System Rules) would provide that failure of a Participant or associated
person to comply with the requirements of proposed Rules 6.7410 through
6.7460 may be considered conduct that is inconsistent with high
standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of
trade. This proposed rule is based on NYSE National Rule 6.7460 with a
non-substantive difference to cross reference Article 9, Rule 2,
instead of NYSE National Rule 11.3.1 and to refer to an Exchange member
as a Participant rather than an ETP Holder.
     Proposed Rule 6.7470 (Exemption to the Order Recording and
Data Transmission Requirements) would provide for how a Participant may
apply for an exemption from the Rule 6.7400 Series and is based on NYSE
National Rule 6.7470-E without any differences other than to refer to
an Exchange member as a Participant rather than an ETP Holder. Proposed
Rule 6.7470(c) provides that the rule would be in effect until November
15, 2019, the date prescribed by the National Market System Plan
Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail (``CAT NMS Plan'').
    The Exchange does not currently require its Participants to
maintain order information pursuant to an order tracking system and
therefore, does not have the OATS rules or similar rules in its
rulebook. The Exchange does not believe that requiring Participants to
comply with the OATS requirements would impose an undue burden on such
Participants or its associated persons. In fact, Participants that are
also FINRA members (``Dual Members'') are already be subject to FINRA's
OATS requirements. Similarly, because the Affiliated Exchanges have
rules based on the FINRA OATS requirements, Participants that are not
members of FINRA, but are members of the Affiliated Exchanges will
already be subject to such OATS requirements.\10\ To the extent an
Exchange Participant is not also a member of FINRA, one of the
Affiliated Exchanges, or Nasdaq (which also requires compliance with
FINRA OATS requirements), the Exchange believes that the OATS
requirements for non-FINRA members are not onerous, as order
information pursuant to those rules need only be submitted upon
request.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Affiliated Exchanges all have substantially similar
requirements and the proposed rules are similar to the rules adopted
by the Affiliated Exchanges. See NYSE Rules 7410 through 7470; NYSE
Arca Rules 6.7410-E through 6.7470-E; NYSE American Rules 7410-
Equities through 7470-Equities; and NYSE National Rules 6.7410
through 6.7470. See also Nasdaq Rule 7400A Series.
    \11\ See proposed Rule 6.7450(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, Institutional Brokers will not have to undertake any
additional obligations under the proposed OATS requirements because the
Exchange will be providing an OATS-compliant system for Institutional
Brokers by

updating Brokerplex to automatically capture and report to FINRA the
OATS requirements.\12\ Accordingly, if an Institutional Broker has not
previously been a member of either FINRA or an Affiliated Exchange that
has OATS requirements, such Institutional Broker will be able to comply
with the OATS requirements. The Exchange-provided OATS system for
Institutional Brokers will be available contemporaneous with the
transition to trading on the Pillar trading platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In preparation for the transition to trading to Pillar,
Institutional Brokers have successfully tested the OATS-compliant
Brokerplex.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that requiring Participants to comply with
the OATS rules will further promote cross-market surveillance and
enhance FINRA's ability to conduct surveillance and investigations for
the Exchange under the RSA. The proposed sub-numbering of the OATS
Rules (i.e., 7410-7470) mirrors the rule numbers for the OATS rules on
FINRA, NYSE, and NYSE National.
Proposed Decommissioning of Exchange-Provided Regulatory Reporting
Systems
    The Exchange currently provides a system that facilitates the
ability for Participants to provide reports of specified off-exchange
trading activity to the Exchange, as described in Interpretation and
Policies .01 to Article 11, Rule 4. The only Participants that use this
regulatory reporting system are the Institutional Brokers. With the
transition to Pillar, the Exchange proposes to decommission this
regulatory reporting system and amend the rules that require use of
this specific system. This proposed rule change does not change in any
way Institutional Brokers' obligations to maintain records of off-
exchange trading activity and report such activity to the Exchange.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Article 11, Rule 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, Interpretation and Policies .01 to Article 11, Rule 4
provides that Participants shall not use any electronic means of
communication for sending orders from the Exchange to trade in another
market or trading venue (which is defined as a ``layoff service''),
until the Participant or the layoff service provider has established a
process for providing the Exchange with specific information relating
to the off-Exchange trading activity on a real time basis in an
electronic format acceptable to the Exchange.\14\ Only Institutional
Brokers use such layoff services to engage in single-sided order
executions on away markets; such services are unrelated to either
qualified contingent trading or contingent trading. The Exchange uses
the current Brokerplex system to support reporting of these regulatory
``drop copies'' from a layoff service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52534 (September
29, 2005), 70 FR 58500 (October 6, 2005) (Order Approving Proposed
Rule Change and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3 Thereto and Notice of
Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 4
Thereto Relating to a Prohibition on Using a Layoff Service Unless
the Service Provides Required Information to the Exchange) (SR-CHX-
2004-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With the transition to Pillar, the Exchange proposes to
decommission the system in Brokerplex that receives regulatory drop
copies of off-exchange trading from a layoff service, as described in
Interpretation and Policies .01 to Article 11, Rule 4. The Exchange
therefore proposes to amend Interpretation and Policies .01 to Article
11, Rule 4 to delete the requirement that Institutional Brokers provide
the specified information on a real-time basis in an electronic format
acceptable to the Exchange. In lieu of the current system, the Exchange
proposes that it will require any Institutional Broker that engages in
this trading activity to provide reports of such activity in a format
acceptable to the Exchange within a time frame designated by the
Exchange, which generally would be not later than trade date plus one
day.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See NYSE Chicago IM-19-06, dated October 29, 2019,
available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-chicago/rule-interpretations/2019/Chicago%20Number%2019-06%2010.29.19.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, with this proposed rule change, Institutional Brokers
will continue to be subject to the requirements of Article 11, Rule 4,
which specifies the records that Institutional Brokers must report
relating to specified off-exchange trading activity. The proposed rule
change eliminates only the interface with Brokerplex to submit these
regulatory drop copies on a real-time basis. Such reports would still
be required to be submitted to the Exchange, albeit in a different
format. Because the Exchange does not currently utilize this data to
perform this surveillance in real-time, the Exchange believes that it
will be able to maintain its existing surveillance coverage with
respect to this trading activity and use the new reports that will be
provided by Institutional Brokers to monitor this activity. In other
words, the Exchange does not need real-time submission of this
information to conduct this surveillance.
    In addition, with respect to Institutional Brokers that are also
members of FINRA, because such firms would be subject to OATS
requirements, any trading on a layoff service would be reported via
OATS and available to FINRA as well.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\16\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\17\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Rule 6.7400 Series,
relating to Order Audit Trail System, would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because the proposed rule series is based on the approved rules
of NYSE National, which are based on FINRA's OATS rules. The Exchange
further believes that the proposed OATS rules would promote just and
equitable principles of trade as such rules would further promote
cross-market surveillance and enhance FINRA's ability to conduct
surveillance and investigations for the Exchange under the RSA. The
Exchange does not believe that adding the OATS rules to the Exchange
would impose a burden on Exchange Participants because Participants
that are members of FINRA, one of the Affiliated Exchanges, or Nasdaq,
are already subject to OATS requirements under the rules of those SROs.
To the extent an Exchange Participant is not also a member of FINRA,
one of the Affiliated Exchanges, or Nasdaq, such member would not be
subject to ongoing reporting requirements under the proposed OATS
rules, and therefore it would not be onerous for such Participants to
comply if OATS information were requested in the course of a regulatory
inquiry. Finally, because the Exchange will be providing an OATS-
compliant system for Institutional Brokers, if an Institutional Broker
has not previously been a member of either FINRA or an Affiliated
Exchange that has OATS requirements, such Institutional Broker will be
able to comply with the OATS requirements.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Article 11,
Rule 4 would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system because the proposed rule
change simply decommissions the use of an exchange system that accepts
regulatory drop copies that would no longer be available once the
Exchange transitions to trading to the Pillar trading platform. The
Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change would promote
just and equitable principles of trade because Institutional Brokers
would still be required to maintain records of off-exchange trading
activity as specified in that Rule and report such activity to the
Exchange. Because Institutional Brokers would still be providing the
Exchange with this data, the Exchange would not be changing its
surveillances relating to this trading activity. In addition, because
the Exchange does not conduct such surveillances in real time, it does
not need real-time submission of data to perform these surveillances.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issue but rather to provide for
rules to support the transition to trading on the Exchange to the
Pillar trading platform. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
environment in which its unaffiliated exchange competitors operate
multiple affiliated exchanges that operate under common rules. By
basing its rules on those of its affiliated exchanges, the Exchange
will provide Participants with consistency across affiliated exchanges,
thereby enabling the Exchange to compete with unaffiliated exchange
competitors that similarly operate multiple exchanges on the same
trading platform.
    In addition, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule
change will impose any burden on competition on Participants that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because the Exchange has proposed non-trading rules based on those of
its affiliates, e.g., OATS rules. For those Participants that are
already members of FINRA, an affiliated exchange, or Nasdaq, such
Participants are already familiar with such rules in connection with
their membership on those SROs. In addition, the Exchange will be
providing an OATS-compliant system for Institutional Brokers;
therefore, if an Institutional Broker has not previously been a member
of either FINRA or an Affiliated Exchange that has OATS requirements,
such Institutional Broker will be able to comply with the OATS
requirements. Moreover, these proposed rules would provide for greater
harmonization among SROs of the rules for investigations and
disciplinary matters, resulting in less burdensome and more efficient
regulatory compliance for common members and facilitating the
Exchange's performance of its regulatory functions. The proposed OATS
rules would also facilitate FINRA's performance of cross-market
surveillances on behalf of the Exchange.
    The Exchange does not believe that amending the regulatory ``drop
copy'' rule would impose a burden competition on Institutional Brokers
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. The proposed rule, which will apply equally to all
Institutional Brokers, merely deletes the requirement that
Institutional Brokers provide information related to their off-exchange
trading activity on a real-time basis in an electronic format
acceptable to the Exchange. Institutional Brokers would continue to be
required to maintain records of their off-exchange trading activity and
in lieu of the current system, Institutional Brokers would be required
to provide reports of such activity in a format acceptable to the
Exchange within a time frame designated by the Exchange.

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 foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \18\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \20\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \21\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so
that the proposed rule change can become effective contemporaneously
with the transition to the Pillar trading platform. For this reason,
the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates
the proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \22\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has 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-NYSECHX-2019-19 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSECHX-2019-19. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSECHX-2019-19, and should be submitted
on or before December 16, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-25456 Filed 11-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


1 See 69 FR 4566. For specific discussion of NOx state budgets, see 69 FR 4620.

2 See 69 FR 32684.

3 The technical support document and memorandum are titled, respectively, " State Emission Budget Calculation Technical Support Document for the Proposed Clean Air Interstate Rule   Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" and " Revised State Acid Rain and EIA Heat Input Totals   48 States and the District of Columbia."

1 MEMORANDUM TO: Docket FROM: EPA, Clean Air Markets Division SUBJECT: Correction to State NOx Budgets Proposed in the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Clean Air Interstate Rule DATE: July 23, 2004 In the January 30, 2004 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( NPR) 1, EPA proposed to distribute the 28 State ( and D. C.) regional NOx budgets based on each State's average heat input   using heat input data from Acid Rain Program units   over the years 1999 through 2002. EPA summed the average heat input from each of the applicable jurisdictions to obtain a regional total average annual heat input. Then, each State received a pro rata share of the regional NOx emissions budget based on the ratio of its average annual heat input to the regional total average annual heat input.

In the June 10, 2004 Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( SNPR) 2, EPA again proposed to apportion state budgets using heat input, but to supplement the Acid Rain Program data with annual heat input data from the U. S. Energy Information Administration ( EIA) to reflect heat input from non Acid Rain units. Additionally, EPA noted that it was including updated Acid Rain Program data for 2002 in the calculation of state budgets. The docket contains a technical support document and a memorandum that describe in detail the heat input data used in the calculation of state budgets, entitled as well as the data in spreadsheet form ( EPA docket entries OAR 2003 0052 1407,  1408, and  1409). 3 These items are also available on the Clean Air Interstate Rule Technical Information website. < http:// www. epa. gov/ air/ interstateairquality/ technical. html>

EPA inadvertently made an error in the calculation of state NOx budgets in the SNPR ( 69 FR 32749 32750). This memorandum provides revised state NOx budgets. Specifically, EPA is making the following revision:

The heat input data used to calculate state NOx budgets in the SNPR included updated 2 Acid Rain Program for 2002, but did not include the EIA heat input data that EPA had proposed to include as a supplement to the Acid Rain Program data. The revised state NOx budgets presented in this memorandum were calculated using heat input data for Acid Rain Program units for 1999 2002, supplemented with EIA heat input data to account for affected non Acid Rain Program units.

EPA notes that it is not revising the methodology it proposed to calculate state NOx budgets, but rather is making a revision based solely on an error in applying the methodology. Table 1 presents the state NOx budgets proposed in the SNPR and the revised state budgets.

Table 1. State NOx Budgets Proposed in the SNPR and Revised State NOx Budgets State Budgets in SNPR ( tons) Revised State Budgets ( tons)

State 2010 2015 2010 2015 Alabama 67,422 56,185 64,359 53,632 Arkansas 24,919 20,765 23,537 19,614 Delaware 5,089 4,241 4,812 4,010 District of Columbia 215 179 212 177 Florida 115,503 96,253 115,263 96,053 Georgia 63,575 52,979 61,026 50,855 Illinois 73,622 61,352 69,623 58,019 Indiana 102,295 85,246 100,223 83,519 Iowa 30,458 25,381 28,915 24,096 Kansas 32,436 27,030 30,689 25,574 Kentucky 77,938 64,948 73,710 61,425 Lousiana 47,339 39,449 50,783 42,319 Maryland 26,607 22,173 26,367 21,972 Massachusetts 19,630 16,358 24,395 20,329 Michigan 60,212 50,177 63,252 52,710 Minnesota 29,303 24,420 28,255 23,546 Mississippi 21,932 18,277 21,007 17,506 Missouri 56,571 47,143 53,918 44,931 New Jersey 9,895 8,246 17,608 14,674 New York 52,503 43,753 59,897 49,914 North Carolina 55,763 46,469 55,095 45,913 Ohio 101,704 84,753 96,389 80,324 Pennsylvania 84,552 70,460 87,279 72,733 South Carolina 30,895 25,746 29,575 24,646 Tennessee 47,739 39,783 45,193 37,661 Texas 224,314 186,928 233,447 194,539 Virginia 31,087 25,906 33,658 28,049 West Virginia 68,235 56,863 65,104 54,253 Wisconsin 39,044 32,537 37,210 31,008 Total 1,600,799 1,333,999 1,600,799 1,333,999 3 Additionally, as was discussed in the SNPR, EPA is taking comment on the data and methodology used to calculate state emission budgets. Any further changes or corrections to the data as a result of public comment would result in further revisions to the state emission budgets.