[Federal Register: April 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 81)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 22303-22307]
[DOCID:fr25ap08-13]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[USCG-2008-0220]
RIN 1625-AA08

Regattas and Marine Parades; Great Lakes Annual Marine Events

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend special local regulations
for annual regattas and marine parades in the Captain of the Port
Detroit zone. This proposed rule is intended to ensure safety of life
on the navigable waters immediately prior to, during, and immediately
after regattas or marine parades. This proposed rule will establish
restrictions upon, and control movement of, vessels in a specified area
immediately prior to, during, and immediately after regattas or marine
parades.

DATES: Comments and related materials must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 27, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2008-0220 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT Jeff Ahlgren, Waterways Management,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110 Mount Elliot Ave., Detroit, MI
48207;<PHONE_NUMBER>.

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have
provided. We have an agreement with the Department of Transportation
(DOT) to use the Docket Management Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy
Act'' paragraph below.

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0220), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you include your name, mailing address, and
an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your
document to ensure that you can be identified as the submitter. This
also allows us to contact you in the event further information is
needed or if there are questions. For example, if we cannot read your
submission due to technical difficulties and you cannot be contacted;
your submission may not be considered. You may submit your comments and
material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket
Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES; but please submit
your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them by
mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/
2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you
submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the
Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov at
any time, click on ``Search for Dockets,'' Enter the docket number for
this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0220) in the Search box, and click ``Go>>''.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received into
any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment
(or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Department of
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to Commander, Coast Guard Sector
Detroit at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will
hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal
Register.

Background and Purpose

    This proposed rule will remove the specific entries from table 1
found in 33 CFR 100.901, Great Lakes annual marine events that apply to
regattas and marine parades in the Captain of the Port Detroit zone and
list each regatta or marine parade as a subpart. This proposed rule
will also add several regattas and marine parades not previously listed
in 33 CFR part 100 and remove several events that no longer occur
annually or are not regattas or marine parades.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule is intended to ensure safety of life on the
navigable waters immediately prior to, during, and immediately after
regattas or marine parades. This proposed rule will establish
restrictions upon and control the movement of vessels through a
specified area immediately prior to, during, and immediately after
regattas or marine parades.
    The Captain of the Port Detroit will cause notice of enforcement of
the special local regulations established by this section to be made by
all appropriate means to the affected segments of the public. Such
means of notification will include, but is not limited to, Broadcast
Notice to Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners. The Captain of the
Port Detroit will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners notifying the
public when enforcement of the special local regulations is terminated.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary.
    The Coast Guard's use of these special local regulations will be
periodic in nature, of short duration, and designed to minimize the
impact on navigable waters. These special local regulations will only
be enforced immediately before and during the time the marine events
are occurring. Furthermore, these special local regulations have been
designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the
waterways not affected by the special local regulations. The Coast
Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the
activation of these special local regulations.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners of operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in the areas designated as special local
regulations in paragraphs (4) through (13) during the dates and times
the special local regulations are being enforced.
    These special local regulations would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons. The special local regulations in this proposed rule
would be in effect for short periods of time, and only once per year.
The special local regulations have been designed to allow traffic to
pass safely around the zone whenever possible and vessels will be
allowed to pass through the zones with the permission of the Captain of
the Port.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this proposed rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact LT Jeff Ahlgren,
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Detroit, 110 Mount Elliot
Ave., Detroit, MI 48207;<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule calls for no new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such
expenditure, we nevertheless discuss its effects elsewhere in this
preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule will not affect the taking of private property
or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
may disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American
Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal
Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal
concerns. We have determined that these safety zones and fishing rights
protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that this
proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Nevertheless, Indian
Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this proposed
rule or options for compliance are encouraged to contact the point of
contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is not likely to
have a significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' supporting this preliminary
determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

    1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as
follows: 33 U.S.C. 1233.

Sec.  100.901  [Amended]

    2. Amend Sec.  100.901 Table 1 as follows:
    a. Under the heading ``Group Detroit, MI'' remove the entries: Bay
City Fireworks Display, Detroit APBA Gold Cup Race, Buick Watersports
Weekend, Cleveland National Air Show, International Bay City River
Roar, International Freedom Festival Fireworks, International Freedom
Festival Tug Across the River, Parade of

Lights, Port Clinton Offshore Grand Prix, Port Huron to Mackinac Island
Race, Thunder on the River Hydroplane Race, Toledo 4th of July
Fireworks, and Toledo Labor Day Fireworks;
    b. Remove the heading ``Group Detroit, MI''.

Sec.  100.902  [Removed and Reserved]

    3. Remove and reserve Sec.  100.902.
    4. Add Sec.  100.911 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.911  Bay City Airshow, Bay City, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the Saginaw River bound on the south by a line extending from
a point of land on the western shore at position 43[deg]32.2' N;
083[deg]53.3' W, east to a point of land on the eastern shore located
at position 43[deg]32.2' N; 083[deg]53.2' W, and bounded on the north
by a line extending from a point of land on the western shore at
position 43[deg]33.4' N; 083[deg]54.5' W, east to a point of land on
the eastern shore located at position 43[deg]33.4' N; 083[deg]54.3' W.
(NAD 83). This area is south of Middle Ground Island near Clements
Municipal Airport.
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective date: Two days during the second week in August. The
exact dates and times for this event will be determined annually.
    5. Add Sec.  100.912 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.912  Detroit Belle Isle Grand Prix, Detroit, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the Detroit River near Belle Isle, bounded by a line
extending from a point of land on the southern shore of Belle Isle
located at position 42[deg]20'00'' N; 082[deg]59'45'' W, to 50 yards
offshore at position 42[deg]19'57''; 082[deg]59'43'', and continuing at
a distance of 50 yards around the western end of Belle Isle to the
Belle Isle Bridge, maintaining a constant distance of 50 yards from the
shoreline and terminating at position 42[deg]20'28''; 082[deg]59'43'';
on the northern side of Belle Isle, adjacent to a point on land at
position 42[deg]20'24'' N; 082[deg]59'48'' W (NAD 83). This area wraps
around the downstream end of Belle Isle.
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The last weekend in August. The exact dates and
times for this event will be determined annually.
    6. Add Sec.  100.913 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.913  ACORA Garwood Classic Offshore Race, Algonac, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of St. Clair River's North Channel, Algonac, Michigan, bounded
by a north/south line beginning at a point of land adjacent to Allen
Boats, Algonac, MI (position 42[deg]37'05'' N, 082[deg]33'34'' W)
extending to a point of land on Harsens Island (position 42[deg]36'49''
N, 082[deg]33'34'' W) extending east along the shoreline of Harsens
Island to north/south line beginning at position 42[deg]37'16'' N,
082[deg]31'11'' W (approx. 500 ft west of the Russell Island buoy)
extending north to a point at position 42[deg]37' 28'' N, 082[deg]31'
11'' W (approx. 300 ft offshore from the Russell Boat Club), then west
along the shoreline of Algonac, MI stopping at the point of origin.
(NAD 83).
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The first weekend in August. The exact dates
and times for this event will be determined annually.
    7. Add Sec.  100.914 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.914  Trenton Rotary Roar on the River, Trenton, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the Detroit River, Trenton, Michigan, bounded by an east/west
line beginning at a point of land at the northern end of Elizabeth Park
in Trenton, MI, located at position 42[deg]8.2' N; 083[deg]10.6' W,
extending east to a point near the center of the Trenton Channel
located at position 42[deg]8.2' N; 083[deg]10.4' W, extending south
along a north/south line to a point at the Grosse Ile Parkway Bridge
located at position 42[deg]7.7' N; 083[deg]10.5' W, extending west
along a line bordering the Grosse Ile Parkway Bridge to a point on land
located at position 42[deg]7.7' N; 083[deg]10.7' W, and along the
shoreline to the point of origin. (NAD 83). This area is in the Trenton
Channel between Trenton and Grosse Isle, MI.
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The third week in July. The exact dates and
times for this event will be determined annually.
    8. Add Sec.  100.915 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.915  St. Clair River Classic Offshore Race, St. Clair, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the St. Clair River, St. Clair, Michigan, bounded by latitude
42[deg]52'00'' N to the north; latitude 42[deg]49'00'' N to the south;
the shoreline of the St. Clair River on the west; and the international
boundary line on the east (NAD 83).
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The last week in July. The exact dates and
times for this event will be determined annually.
    9. Add Sec.  100.916 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.916  Chris Craft Silver Cup Races, Algonac, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the St. Clair River, North Channel, Algonac, Michigan,
bounded on the north by a line starting at the northern end of Russel
Island at position 42[deg]37.0' N; 082[deg]31.4' W extending across the
channel to Algonac to a point at position 42[deg]37.4' N; 082[deg]31.5'
W, and bounded on the south by a line starting north of Grande Point
Cut on Russel Island at position 42[deg]36.3' N; 082[deg]32.5' W
extending across the channel to Algonac to a point at position
42[deg]36.5' N; 082[deg]32.6' W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The third week in August. The exact dates and
times for this event will be determined annually.
    10. Add Sec.  100.917 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.917  The Old Club Cannonade, Harsens Island, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of Lake St. Clair in an area bound by the coordinates starting
at the cannon firing position located at 42[deg]32.5' N; 082[deg]40.1'
W extending west to the Old Channel Light located at position
42[deg]32.5' N; 082[deg]41.6' W angling northeast to position
42[deg]33.5' N; 082[deg]40.6' W then angling southeast to the point of
origin creating a triangle shaped safety zone. (NAD 83). This area is
near the southern end of Harsens Island in Muscamoot Bay.
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area

without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The third week in October. The exact dates and
times for this event will be determined annually.
    11. Add Sec.  100.918 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.918  Detroit APBA Gold Cup, Detroit, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the Detroit River, Belle Isle, Michigan, bound on the west by
the Belle Isle Bridge (position 42[deg]20'20'' N, 083[deg]00'00'' W to
42[deg]20'24'' N, 083[deg]59'45'' W), and on the east by a north-south
line drawn through Waterworks Intake Crib Light (Light List Number
8350; position 42[deg]21'06'' N, 082[deg]58'00'' W) (NAD 83).
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The first or second week in June. The exact
dates and times for this event will be determined annually.
    12. Add Sec.  100.919 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.919  International Bay City River Roar, Bay City, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the Saginaw River bounded on the north by the Liberty Bridge,
located at 43[deg]36.3' N, 083[deg]53.4' W, and bounded on the south by
the Veterans Memorial Bridge, located at 43[deg]35.8' N, 083[deg]53.6'
W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The third or fourth week in June. The exact
dates and times for this event will be determined annually.
    13. Add Sec.  100.920 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.920  Tug Across the River, Detroit, MI.

    (a) Regulated Area. A regulated area is established to include all
waters of the Detroit River, Detroit, Michigan, bounded on the south by
the International boundary, on the west by 083[deg]03' W, on the east
by 083[deg]02' W, and on the north by the U.S. shoreline (DATUM: NAD
83). This position is located on the Detroit River in front of Hart
Plaza, Detroit, MI.
    (b) Special Local Regulations. The regulations of Sec.  100.901
apply. No vessel may enter, transit through, or anchor within the
regulated area without the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.
    (c) Effective Date. The third or fourth week in June. The exact
dates and times for this event will be determined annually.

    Dated: April 4, 2008.
John E. Crowley, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E8-8864 Filed 4-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 13, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64398-64401]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19676]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0047; FRL-10013-69-OAR]
RIN 2060-AU18

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Residual Risk and Technology Review;
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correcting amendments.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting a
final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on March 26, 2020. The
EPA finalized the residual risk and technology review (RTR) conducted
for the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfills source category regulated
under national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP). This action corrects inadvertent errors in the cross-
referencing and formatting in the Federal Register; as well as
clarifies two operational and reporting requirements in the March 26,
2020, final rule. This action also revises the heading of 40 CFR part
60, subpart WWW as described in the March 26, 2020, Federal Register
document. The corrections and clarifications described in this action
do not affect the substantive requirements of the regulations or the
results of the RTR conducted for the MSW Landfills source category.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 12, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this final action,
contact Andrew Sheppard, Natural Resources Group, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (E143-03), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; and email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA is making the following corrections
to the final MSW Landfills NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAA) as
published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2020 (85 FR 17244).
    The EPA is correcting cross-referencing errors that were the result
of extensive changes to the structure and content of the MSW Landfills
NESHAP during the RTR. The initial restructuring is described in the
proposed RTR for the MSW Landfills NESHAP (84 FR 36670, July 29, 2019).
Further changes to the MSW Landfills NESHAP occurred between proposal
and promulgation and those changes are described in the final RTR for
the MSW Landfills NESHAP (85 FR 17244, March 26, 2020). Operating
facilities cannot comply with certain requirements of the rule as
written because the requirements include citations to paragraphs in the
rule that do not exist, do not contain the cited content, and/or are
inconsistent with the same requirements as they were previously
promulgated in section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). As described in
the preambles to the proposed and final MSW Landfills NESHAP rules,
landfills are subject to regulations under CAA sections 111 (40 CFR
part 60, subparts Cf and XXX) and 112 (40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAA).
The rules were written to promote consistency among MSW Landfills
regulations under the CAA. See section IV.D of the preamble to the
proposed rule at 84 FR 36689 (July 29, 2019) and section III.D of the
preamble to the final rule at 85 FR 17248 (March 26, 2020). Therefore,
where requirements are the same, the regulatory text was copied from 40
CFR part 60, subpart XXX and adapted to cite corresponding references
in 40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAA. During this process, some errors were
made due to differences in the structures of the two rules. With this
action, the EPA is correcting the following errors. These corrections
do not change the requirements with which landfills must comply.
    First, the EPA is correcting two formatting errors.
     40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW. Revise the heading of subpart
WWW to read: Subpart WWW--Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills That Commenced Construction, Reconstruction, or
Modification on or After May 30, 1991, but Before July 18, 2014. This
change is consistent with the discussion in the preamble to the final
rule (85 FR at 17248), but the change was inadvertently not made to the
relevant title in the regulatory text. This action implements the
revision.
     40 CFR 63.1983(h)(2)(ii). Remove paragraph (ii). Paragraph
(i) is not subordinate to 40 CFR 63.1983(h)(2); rather, it follows 40
CFR 63.1983(h) as 40 CFR 63.1983(i); therefore, there is no need to
reserve a paragraph (ii). The proposed regulatory text was correctly
printed in the proposed rule at 84 FR 36721 (July 29, 2019).
    Additionally, the EPA is correcting the following cross-referencing
errors.
     40 CFR 63.1947(c)(2). Correct the reference from 40 CFR
63.1980(e) and (f) to 40 CFR 63.1982(c) and (d). The reference
specifies procedures to use to determine bioreactor moisture content
but refers to paragraphs that no longer exist. The requirements in 40
CFR 63.1947(c)(2) were originally promulgated in 40 CFR 63.1945(a)(2)
in 2003 and referred to the requirements that are now found in
63.1982(c) and (d). The content of the requirements was not changed in
the 2020 amendments to the MSW Landfills NESHAP and/or this correction.
     40 CFR 63.1959(a)(3)(i), 40 CFR 63.1959(c)(3)(i), and 40
CFR 63.1959(e)(1). Correct the references from 40 CFR 63.1981(i) to 40
CFR 63.1981(l)(1). These three standards refer to procedures for the
submittal of performance test reports, but the reference leads to
requirements for an initial report instead of ongoing requirements to
submit reports electronically. Section III.D.9 of the preamble to the
final rule stated that performance tests must be submitted
electronically using the requirements in 40 CFR 63.1981(l)(1).
Additionally, matching requirements in 40 CFR 60.764(a)(3)(i), 40 CFR
60.764(b)(3)(i), and 40 CFR 60.764(e)(1), respectively, refer to the
electronic reporting requirements of 40 CFR 60.767(i)(1), which match
those of 40 CFR 63.1981(l)(1).
     40 CFR 63.1959(a)(4)(i)(A). Correct the reference from 40
CFR 63.1981(e) to 40 CFR 63.1981(d). The standard discusses the
procedures for submitting a gas collection and control system design
plan if a landfill's emissions exceed the stated threshold according to
one method of calculation, but the reference does not include the
intended procedures. Corresponding requirements for plan submittal
using different calculation methods in 40 CFR 63.1959(a)(2)(ii)(A), 40
CFR 63.1959(a)(3)(iv)(A), and 40 CFR 63.1959(b)(2)(i) all refer to 40
CFR 63.1981(d). Additionally, the requirements in 40 CFR
63.1959(a)(4)(i)(A) align with those of 40 CFR 60.764(a)(4)(i)(A),
which refer to requirements that match those in 40 CFR 63.1981(d).
     40 CFR 63.1959(b)(2)(iii)(A). Correct the reference from
``paragraph (f) of this section'' to ``paragraph (e) of

this section.'' The requirements reference an exception to the
requirements of 40 CFR 63.11(b). This exception is stated explicitly in
40 CFR 63.1959(e), not (f). The text in 40 CFR 63.1959(b)(2)(iii)(A)
mirrors that in 40 CFR 60.762(b)((2)(iii)(A), which references 40 CFR
60.764(e) for the exception. The requirements in 40 CFR 60.764(e) align
with those in 40 CFR 63.1959(e).
     40 CFR 63.1960(a). Correct the reference from ``paragraphs
(a)(1) through (6) of this section,'' to ``paragraphs (a)(1) through
(5) of this section.'' Paragraph (a)(6) does not exist. This reference
was copied from corresponding text in 40 CFR 60.765(a). The
requirements in 40 CFR 60.765(a) are found in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(6), but paragraph (a)(4) is reserved. The reserved paragraph was
removed from 40 CFR 63.1960(a) but the corresponding change in
numbering for the reference was not made.
     40 CFR 63.1960(a)(3)(i)(B). Correct the reference from 40
CFR 63.1983(e)(5) to 40 CFR 63.1983(e)(4). The reference refers to a
specific report, whose requirements are included in 40 CFR
63.1983(e)(4). Additionally, the text in 40 CFR 63.1983(e)(4) refers
back to 40 CFR 63.1960(a)(3)(i)(B). These requirements mirror those in
40 CFR 60.765(a)(3)(ii), which references 40 CFR 60.768(e)(4). The
corresponding requirements for 40 CFR 60.768(e)(4) are found in 40 CFR
63.1983(e)(4).
     40 CFR 63.1960(a)(5). Correct the reference from 40 CFR
63.1981(c)(3) to 40 CFR 63.1981(d)(3). These requirements discuss the
need for alternative collection systems to demonstrate compliance with
the MSW Landfills standards. The original reference is for a report on
emissions, instead of the design plan that requires the demonstration
of sufficiency of alternatives. The requirements in 40 CFR
63.1960(a)(5) mirror those in 40 CFR 60.765(a)(6), which refers to 40
CFR 60.767(c)(3). The requirements in 40 CFR 60.767(c)(3) match those
in 40 CFR 63.1981(d)(3).
     40 CFR 63.1960(b). Correct the reference from 40 CFR
63.1981(b) to 40 CFR 63.1981(d). The requirements discuss the timing of
installation for system components included in the landfill's design
plan, but the reference points to a report for landfill capacity
instead of the design plan. The requirements in 40 CFR 63.1960(b) match
those in 40 CFR 60.765(b), which refers to 40 CFR 60.767(c). The
requirements corresponding to those in 40 CFR 60.767(c) are found in 40
CFR 63.1981(d).
     40 CFR 63.1960(e)(2). Correct the reference from 40 CFR
63.1958(c)(1) to 40 CFR 63.1958(e)(1). The text in 40 CFR 63.1960(e)
describes the requirements for MSW landfills during periods of start-
up, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). At proposal, the regulatory text
incorrectly referenced operational standards for temperature instead of
SSM events in two places. While one of the references was corrected in
the final rule, the second was overlooked and is being corrected here.
See Section IV.D.3 of the preamble to the final rule (at 85 FR 17255,
March 26, 2020).
     40 CFR 63.1961(f). Correct the reference from 40 CFR
63.1981(i) to 40 CFR 63.1981(h). The requirements for demonstrating
compliance with the surface methane operational standard state that
certain information must be included in the semi-annual report but cite
the paragraph for the initial performance test report instead of the
paragraph containing requirements for semi-annual reporting.
     40 CFR 63.1983(g). Correct the reference from paragraphs
40 CFR 63.1961(a)(1) through (5) to 40 CFR 63.1961(a)(1) through (6).
This section discusses the requirement to keep records of certain gas
collection and control system parameters that are measured during
system operation. While the requirements were revised from 40 CFR
63.1961(a)(1) through (5) in the proposal to 40 CFR 63.1961(a)(1)
through (6) in the final, the corresponding reference was not updated.
The changes to the requirements were discussed in section IV.D.1 of the
preamble to the final rule at 85 FR 17253-17254 (March 26, 2020).
    With this document, the EPA is also clarifying its intent on
certain requirements in the March 26, 2020, final rule where questions
have arisen on implementation.
     40 CFR 63.1958(c). Add text to clarify when the revised
wellhead interior operating standard applies. Prior to compliance with
the amended standards, a landfill owner must operate each interior
wellhead in the collection system as specified in 40 CFR 60.753(c) of
40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW. The requirements in 40 CFR 60.753(c)
require landfill owners to operate each interior wellhead with landfill
gas temperatures less than 55 degrees Celsius and with either a
nitrogen level less than 20 percent or an oxygen level less than 5
percent. As explained in the preamble to the final rule at 85 FR 17248
(March 26, 2020), the amendments to the MSW Landfills NESHAP eliminated
the operational standards for nitrogen and oxygen and increased the
temperature operating standard. The final regulatory text was unclear
as to whether or not the nitrogen and oxygen standards remained in
effect after the compliance date of September 27, 2021. Thus, the
correction clarifies that landfill owners do not need to comply with
the provisions of 40 CFR 60.753(c) of 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW once
they comply with the amended standards.
     Table 1 to Subpart AAAA--Applicability of NESHAP General
Provisions to Subpart AAAA. Revise Footnote 2 to clarify the intent
that landfill owners or operators do not need to submit duplicate
notifications under 40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAA if they have already
submitted notifications under either 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW or
subpart XXX, or a state or federal plan implementing 40 CFR part Cc or
Cf, that contain the same information as required by 40 CFR part 63,
subpart AAAA. This clarification is consistent with the regulatory text
in the introductory paragraph to 40 CFR 63.1981 that states that
submission of parallel reports under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW; 40
CFR part XXX; or a state or federal plan implementing 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Cc or 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf constitutes compliance with
parallel requirements in that section.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing
notice and an opportunity for public comment. The EPA has determined
that there is good cause for making this rule final without prior
proposal and opportunity for comment because, as explained here and in
each bullet above, the changes to the rule are minor technical
corrections, are noncontroversial in nature, and do not substantively
change the requirements of the MSW Landfills NESHAP. Rather, the
changes align the cross-references in the requirements of the MSW
Landfills NESHAP with corresponding cross-references in the
requirements of the Emission Guidelines and New Source Performance
Standards for MSW Landfills in 40 CFR part 60, subparts Cf and XXX.
Additionally, the revisions correct the regulatory text to match other
intended minor revisions described in the preamble to the final rule.
Thus, notice and opportunity for public comment are unnecessary. The
EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 28, 2020.
Anne Austin,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
parts 60 and 63 as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart WWW--Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills That Commenced Construction, Reconstruction, or
Modification on or After May 30, 1991, but Before July 18, 2014

0
2. Revise the heading of subpart WWW to read as set forth above.

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

Subpart AAAA--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

0
3. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

0
4. Section 63.1947 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.1947  When do I have to comply with this subpart if I own or
operate a bioreactor?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Begin operating the gas collection and control system within
180 days after initiating liquids addition or within 180 days after
achieving a moisture content of 40 percent by weight, whichever is
later. If you choose to begin gas collection and control system
operation 180 days after achieving a 40-percent moisture content
instead of 180 days after liquids addition, use the procedures in
Sec. Sec.  63.1982(c) and (d) to determine when the bioreactor moisture
content reaches 40 percent.

0
5. Section 63.1958 is amended by revising paragraph (c) introductory
text to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1958  Operational standards for collection and control
systems.

* * * * *
    (c) Operate each interior wellhead in the collection system as
specified in 40 CFR 60.753(c), until the landfill owner or operator
elects to meet the operational standard for temperature in paragraph
(c)(1) of this section.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 63.1959 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3)(i),
(a)(4)(i)(A), (b)(2)(iii)(A), (c)(3)(i), and (e)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1959  NMOC calculation procedures.

    (a) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance
test (as defined in Sec.  63.7 of subpart A), the owner or operator
must submit the results according to Sec.  63.1981(l)(1).
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) Submit a gas collection and control system design plan within 1
year as specified in Sec.  63.1981(d) and install and operate a gas
collection and control system within 30 months of the first annual
report in which the NMOC emission rate equals or exceeds 50 Mg/yr,
according to paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (A) A non-enclosed flare designed and operated in accordance with
the parameters established in Sec.  63.11(b) except as noted in
paragraph (e) of this section; or
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance
test (as defined in Sec.  63.7), the owner or operator must submit the
results of the performance test, including any associated fuel
analyses, according to Sec.  63.1981(l)(1).
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance
test (as defined in Sec.  63.7), the owner or operator must submit the
results of the performance tests, including any associated fuel
analyses, required by Sec.  63.1959(c) or (e) according to Sec.
63.1981(l)(1).
* * * * *

0
7. Section 63.1960 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text, (a)(3)(i)(B), (a)(5), (b) introductory text, and (e)(2) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.1960  Compliance provisions.

    (a) Except as provided in Sec.  63.1981(d)(2), the specified
methods in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section must be used
to determine whether the gas collection system is in compliance with
Sec.  63.1959(b)(2)(ii).
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) If corrective actions cannot be fully implemented within 60
days following the positive pressure measurement for which the root
cause analysis was required, the owner or operator must also conduct a
corrective action analysis and develop an implementation schedule to
complete the corrective action(s) as soon as practicable, but no more
than 120 days following the positive pressure measurement. The owner or
operator must submit the items listed in Sec.  63.1981(h)(7) as part of
the next semi-annual report. The owner or operator must keep records
according to Sec.  63.1983(e)(4).
* * * * *
    (5) An owner or operator seeking to demonstrate compliance with
Sec.  63.1959(b)(2)(ii)(B)(4) through the use of a collection system
not conforming to the specifications provided in Sec.  63.1962 must
provide information satisfactory to the Administrator as specified in
Sec.  63.1981(d)(3) demonstrating that off-site migration is being
controlled.
    (b) For purposes of compliance with Sec.  63.1958(a), each owner or
operator of a controlled landfill must place each well or design
component as specified in the approved design plan as provided in Sec.
63.1981(d). Each well must be installed no later than 60 days after the
date on which the initial solid waste has been in place for a period
of:
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) Once an owner or operator subject to the provisions of this
subpart seeks to demonstrate compliance with the operational standard
in Sec.  63.1958(e)(1), the provisions of this subpart apply at

all times, including periods of SSM. During periods of SSM, you must
comply with the work practice requirement specified in Sec.  63.1958(e)
in lieu of the compliance provisions in Sec.  63.1960.

0
8. Section 63.1961 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.1961  Monitoring of operations.

* * * * *
    (f) Each owner or operator seeking to demonstrate compliance with
the 500-ppm surface methane operational standard in Sec.  63.1958(d)
must monitor surface concentrations of methane according to the
procedures in Sec.  63.1960(c) and the instrument specifications in
Sec.  63.1960(d). If you are complying with the 500-ppm surface methane
operational standard in Sec.  63.1958(d)(2), for location, you must
determine the latitude and longitude coordinates of each exceedance
using an instrument with an accuracy of at least 4 meters and the
coordinates must be in decimal degrees with at least five decimal
places. In the semi-annual report in Sec.  63.1981(h), you must report
the location of each exceedance of the 500-ppm methane concentration as
provided in Sec.  63.1958(d) and the concentration recorded at each
location for which an exceedance was recorded in the previous month.
Any closed landfill that has no monitored exceedances of the
operational standard in three consecutive quarterly monitoring periods
may skip to annual monitoring. Any methane reading of 500 ppm or more
above background detected during the annual monitoring returns the
frequency for that landfill to quarterly monitoring.
* * * * *

0
9. Section 63.1983 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.1983  What records must I keep?

* * * * *
    (g) Except as provided in Sec.  63.1981(d)(2), each owner or
operator subject to the provisions of this subpart must keep for at
least 5 years up-to-date, readily accessible records of all collection
and control system monitoring data for parameters measured in Sec.
63.1961(a)(1) through (6).
* * * * *

0
10. Amend Table 1 to subpart AAAA of part 63 by revising Footnote 2 to
read as follows:

Table 1 to Subpart AAAA of Part 63

* * * * *

         Table 1 to Subpart AAAA of Part 63--Applicability of NESHAP General Provisions to Subpart AAAA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Applicable to       Applicable to
                                                         subpart AAAA       subpart AAAA no
        Part 63 citation              Description      before September       later than          Explanation
                                                           28,  2021      September 27, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * * * * * * *
\2\ If an owner or operator has complied with requirements that are parallel to the requirements of the part 63
  citation of this table under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW or subpart XXX, or a state or federal plan that
  implements 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cc or Cf, then additional notification for that requirement is not
  required.

[FR Doc. 2020-19676 Filed 10-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 7, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69236-69237]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26493]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-415-000]

Arlington Energy Center III, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Arlington Energy Center III, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and

assumptions of liability, is December 21, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 1, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-26493 Filed 12-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 18, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32900-32904]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14984]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81131; File No. SR-MIAX-2017-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend MIAX Options Rules 515, Execution of Orders and Quotes; 515A,
MIAX Price Improvement Mechanism (``PRIME'') and PRIME Solicitation
Mechanism; and 518, Complex Orders

July 12, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On May 12, 2017, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``MIAX Options'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to the provisions of
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to establish three
new types of complex orders--Complex Customer Cross (``cC2C'') Orders,
Complex Qualified Contingent Cross (``cQCC'') Orders, and Complex PRIME
(``cPRIME'') Orders--and to adopt new provisions that relate to the
processing of those new complex order types. The proposed rule change
was published for comment in the Federal Register on June 1, 2017.\3\
The Commission received no comments regarding the proposal.

This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80768 (May 25,
2017), 82 FR 25347 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to establish three new types of complex
orders,\4\ and to adopt new provisions that relate to the processing of
those new complex order types. In particular, the Exchange is proposing
to modify its rules, including its rule related to the MIAX Price
Improvement Mechanism (``PRIME''), to permit the entry and execution of
cC2C Orders, cQCC Orders, and cPRIME Orders, each as discussed more
fully below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For a description of the trading of complex orders on the
Exchange, see Rule 518. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No.
79072 (October 7, 2016), 81 FR 71131 (October 14, 2016) (SR-MIAX-
2016-26).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. cC2C Orders

    The Exchange proposes to define a cC2C Order as a type of complex
order that is comprised of one Priority Customer \5\ complex order to
buy and one Priority Customer complex order to sell the same strategy
at the same price (which must be better than the icMBBO \6\ or the best
net price of the complex order on the Strategy Book \7\ for the
strategy, whichever is more aggressive) and for the same quantity.\8\
The Exchange proposes that cC2C Orders be automatically executed upon
entry provided that the execution is at least $0.01 better than the
icMBBO price or the best net price of a complex order on the Strategy
Book, whichever is more aggressive.\9\ The Exchange will reject a cC2C
Order if, at the time of its receipt, (i) the strategy is subject to a
cPRIME Auction pursuant to proposed Interpretations and Policies .12 to
Rule 515A or to a Complex Auction pursuant to Rule 518(d); or (ii) any
component of the strategy is subject to a SMAT Event as described in
Rule 518(a)(16).\10\ Unlike simple Customer Cross Orders, the Exchange
proposes to not reject a cC2C Order when a component of the strategy is
subject to the managed interest process \11\ pursuant to Rule
515(c).\12\ cC2C Orders will be automatically cancelled if they cannot
be executed,\13\ and may only be entered in the minimum trading
increments applicable to complex orders under Rule 518(c)(1)(i).\14\
The Exchange further proposes to state that Interpretations and
Policies .01 to Rule 520 applies to the entry and execution of cC2C
Orders.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that
(i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place
more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Rule 100.
    \6\ The Implied Complex MIAX Best Bid or Offer (``icMBBO'') is a
calculation that uses the best price from the Simple Order Book for
each component of a complex strategy including displayed and non-
displayed trading interest. For stock-option orders, the icMBBO for
a complex strategy will be calculated using the best price (whether
displayed or non-displayed) on the Simple Order Book in the
individual option component(s), and the National Best Bid and Offer
(``NBBO'') in the stock component. See Rule 518(a)(11). The ``Simple
Order Book'' is the Exchange's regular electronic book of orders and
quotes. See Rule 518(a)(15).
    \7\ The ``Strategy Book'' is the Exchange's electronic book of
complex orders and complex quotes. See Rule 518(a)(17).
    \8\ See proposed Rules 515(h)(3) and 518(b)(5).
    \9\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(3).
    \10\ A Simple Market Auction or Timer, or ``SMAT'' Event, is
defined as any of the following: (i) a PRIME Auction (pursuant to
Rule 515A); (ii) a Route Timer (pursuant to Rule 529); or (iii) a
liquidity refresh pause (pursuant to Rule 515(c)(2)). See Rule
518(a)(16).
    \11\ Under the managed interest process, if the limit price of a
non-routable order locks or crosses the current opposite side NBBO,
the System will display the order one Minimum Price Variation away
from the current opposite side NBBO, and book the order at a price
that will lock the current opposite side NBBO. See Rule 515(c)(ii).
    \12\ The Exchange states that it is not necessary to reject a
cC2C Order in this scenario because, in accordance with the
execution price requirements for cC2C Orders, the order would
already have a guaranteed execution price at the better of $0.01
inside the icMBBO price or at the best net price of a complex order
on the Strategy Book. See Notice, supra note 3, at 25349. See also
proposed Rule 515(h)(3). According to the Exchange, because the
execution price requirements ensure that each participant in the
complex order receives a better price than it would have received if
its order were submitted as a single complex order, it is not
necessary or desirable to preclude the execution of a cC2C Order
where one component is subject to the managed interest process in
the simple market. See Notice, supra note 3, at 25349.
    \13\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(3)(A).
    \14\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(3)(B). Bids and offers on complex
orders and quotes may be expressed in $0.01 increments, and the
component(s) of a complex order may be executed in $0.01 increments,
regardless of the minimum increments otherwise applicable to
individual components of the complex order. See Rule 518(c)(1)(i).
    \15\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(3)(C). Rule 520(b) prevents an
Electronic Exchange Member from executing agency orders to increase
its economic gain from trading against the order without first
giving other trading interest on the Exchange an opportunity to
either trade with the agency order or to trade at the execution
price when the Electronic Exchange Member was already bidding or
offering on the Simple Order Book. It would be a violation of Rule
520(b) for an Electronic Exchange Member to be a party to any
arrangement designed to circumvent Rule 520(b) by providing an
opportunity for a customer or other person (including an affiliate)
to regularly execute against agency orders handled by the Electronic
Exchange Member immediately upon their entry into the System. See
Interpretations and Policies .01 to Rule 520. The term ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' means the holder of a Trading Permit who is not a
Market Maker. See Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will determine, on a class-by-class basis, the option
classes in which cC2C Orders are available for trading on the Exchange,
and will announce such classes to Members via Regulatory Circular.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(3)(D). The term ``Member'' means
an individual or organization approved to exercise the trading
rights associated with a Trading Permit. See Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. cQCC Orders

    The Exchange proposes to define a cQCC Order as a type of complex
order that is identified as being part of a qualified contingent
trade\17\ which is comprised of a complex order to buy or sell where
each component is at least 1,000 contracts, coupled with a contra-side
complex order or orders (for the same strategy) totaling an equal
number of contracts.\18\ cQCC Orders are automatically executed upon
entry provided that, with respect to each option leg of the cQCC Order,
the execution (i) is not at the same price as a Priority Customer Order
on the Simple Order Book; and (ii) is at or between the NBBO.\19\ The
Exchange states that, as is currently the case with QCC orders, it will
require that the Member entering a cQCC Order provide certain
information to the Exchange regarding the execution of the stock
component, such as the underlying price, quantity, price delta,
execution time, and executing venue.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ A ``qualified contingent trade'' is a transaction
consisting of two or more component orders, executed as agent or
principal, where: (a) At least one component is an NMS Stock, as
defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Act; (b) all
components are effected with a product or price contingency that
either has been agreed to by all the respective counterparties or
arranged for by a broker-dealer as principal or agent; (c) the
execution of one component is contingent upon the execution of all
other components at or near the same time; (d) the specific
relationship between the component orders (e.g., the spread between
the prices of the component orders) is determined by the time the
contingent order is placed; (e) the component orders bear a
derivative relationship to one another, represent different classes
of shares of the same issuer, or involve the securities of
participants in mergers or with intentions to merge that have been
announced or cancelled; and (f) the transaction is fully hedged
(without regard to any prior existing position) as a result of other
components of the contingent trade. See Interpretations and Policies
.01 to Rule 516.
    \18\ See proposed Rule 518(b)(6).
    \19\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(4).
    \20\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 25350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will reject a cQCC Order if, at the time of receipt of
the cQCC Order, (i) the strategy is subject to a cPRIME Auction
pursuant to proposed Interpretations and Policies .12 to Rule 515A, or
to a Complex Auction pursuant to Rule 518(d); or (ii) any component of
the strategy is subject to a SMAT Event as described in Rule
518(a)(16).\21\ The Exchange will not reject a cQCC Order when a
component of the strategy is subject to the managed interest process
pursuant to Rule 515(c). cQCC Orders will be automatically cancelled if
they

cannot be executed,\22\ and may only be entered in the minimum trading
increments applicable to complex orders under Rule 518(c)(1)(i).\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(4).
    \22\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(4)(A).
    \23\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will determine, on a class-by-class basis, the option
classes in which cQCC Orders are available for trading on the Exchange,
and will announce such classes to Members via Regulatory Circular.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See proposed Rule 515(h)(4)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. cPRIME Orders

    PRIME is a price-improvement mechanism pursuant to which a Member
(``Initiating Member'') electronically submits an order that it
represents as agent (an ``Agency Order'') into a PRIME Auction
(``Auction''). The Initiating Member, in submitting an Agency Order,
must be willing to either (i) cross the Agency Order at a single price
(a ``single-price submission'') against principal or solicited
interest, or (ii) automatically match (``auto-match''), against
principal or solicited interest, the price and size of responses to a
Request for Response (``RFR'') that is broadcast to MIAX Options
participants up to an optional designated limit price.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Rule 515A(a)(2)(i). When the Exchange receives a
properly designated Agency Order for auction processing, an RFR
detailing the option, side, size, and initiating price will be sent
to all subscribers of the Exchange's data feeds. Members may submit
responses to the RFR (specifying prices and sizes). RFR responses
shall be an Auction or Cancel (``AOC'') order or an AOC eQuote. Such
responses cannot cross the disseminated MIAX Best Bid or Offer
(``MBBO'') on the opposite side of the market from the response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described below, the Exchange proposes to add a cPRIME order
type \26\ which will be processed and executed in the same manner in
which simple PRIME Orders are currently processed and executed, except
as otherwise provided in proposed Interpretations and Policies .12 to
Rule 515A or unless the context otherwise requires.\27\ The Exchange
will determine, on a class-by-class basis, the option classes in which
complex orders are available for trading on PRIME on the Exchange, and
will announce such classes to Members via Regulatory Circular.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The Exchange proposes to define a cPRIME Order as a type of
complex order that is submitted for participation in a cPRIME
Auction. See proposed Rule 518(b)(7). A Member may electronically
submit a ``cPRIME Order'' it represents as agent (a ``cPRIME Agency
Order'') against principal or solicited interest for execution (a
``cPRIME Auction''). See proposed Interpretations and Policies
.12(a) to Rule 515A.
    \27\ In addition, MIAX proposes to state that any references to
the NBBO in Rule 515A are inapplicable to cPRIME Auctions. See
proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(a)(v) to Rule 515A. The
Exchange also proposes to modify its simple PRIME Rule to (1) state
clearly that it will reject RFR responses submitted with a price
that is not equal to or better than the initiating price to avoid
handling RFR responses that could not be executed in an Auction
because they are inferior to the initiating price; and (2) delete
unnecessary text stating that an RFR response cannot cross the
disseminated MBBO on the opposite side of the market from the
response, because an Auction will already conclude under Rule
515A(a)(2)(ii)(E) if an RFR response matches the NBBO on the
opposite side of the market from the RFR responses, which cannot be
inferior to the MBBO. See proposed edits to Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(D).
    \28\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12 to Rule 515A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Auction Eligibility and Auction Process
    The initiating price for a cPRIME Agency Order must be better than
the icMBBO for the strategy and any other complex orders on the
Strategy Book.\29\ The Exchange will reject cPRIME Agency Orders
submitted with an initiating price that is equal to or worse than the
icMBBO or any other complex orders on the Strategy Book. The Exchange
also will reject a cPRIME Agency Order if, at the time of receipt of
the cPRIME Agency Order: (i) the strategy is subject to a cPRIME
Auction or to a Complex Auction pursuant to Rule 518(d); (ii) any
component of the strategy is subject to a SMAT Event as described in
Rule 518(a)(16); or (iii) any component of the strategy is subject to
the managed interest process described in Rule 515(c)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(a)(i) to Rule
515A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The RFR period for cPRIME Auctions will be independent from the RFR
for PRIME Auctions and will last for a period of time as set forth in
Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(C).\30\ Members may enter RFR responses on the
opposite side of the market from the cPRIME Agency Order at net prices,
and bids and offers for complex orders may participate in the execution
of an order as provided in Rule 515A.\31\ Bids and offers for the
individual legs of a complex order may also participate; however,
except as provided in proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(c) to
Rule 515A, the order allocation rules contained in Rule 514 will
apply.\32\ If an improved net price for the complex order being
executed can be achieved from bids and offers for the individual legs
of the complex order in the simple market, and the complex order is
otherwise eligible for Legging pursuant to Rule 518(c)(2)(iii), the
Strategy being matched will receive an execution at the better net
price.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(c)(i) to Rule
515A. The Commission notes that, on June 15, 2017, MIAX Options
amended the duration of the RFR period described in Rule
515A(a)(2)(i)(c) such that the RFR period will be a period of time
within a range of no less than 100 milliseconds and no more than 1
second, as determined by the Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 80940 (June 15, 2017), 82 FR 28369 (June 21, 2017)
(order approving SR-MIAX-2017-16).
    \31\ RFR responses shall be an AOC order or an AOC eQuote. See
Rule 515A(a)(2)(i)(D). This applies by reference to cPRIME Auctions
(and cAOC eQuotes and cAOC orders, as defined below). See proposed
Interpretations and Policies .12(a) to Rule 515A.
    \32\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(a)(iii) to
Rule 515A.
    \33\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(a)(iv) to
Rule 515A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. cPRIME Order Execution and Allocation
    The Exchange proposes to not apply the size and bid/ask
differential and conclusion of auction provisions contained in Rule
515A(a)(1)(iii) and (iv) to cPRIME Orders.\34\ Instead, a cPRIME
Auction will conclude at the sooner of the following events, with the
cPRIME Agency Order executing pursuant to the cPRIME Auction allocation
provisions: (1) The end of the RFR period; (2) when an AOC eQuote \35\
or cAOC Order \36\ on the opposite side of the market from the cPRIME
Agency Order locks or crosses the icMBBO or the best net price of a
complex order in the same strategy on the Strategy Book, whichever is
more aggressive; (3) when unrelated interest on the same side of the
market as the cPRIME Agency Order locks or crosses the best price on
the opposite side of the market; (4) when unrelated interest on the
opposite side of the market from the cPRIME Agency Order locks or
crosses the icMBBO or the best net price of a complex order in the same
strategy on the Strategy Book, whichever is more aggressive, or
improves the price of any RFR response; (5) when a simple order or
quote in a component of the strategy on the same side of the market as
the cPRIME Agency Order locks or crosses the NBBO for such component;
or (6) when a simple order or quote in a component of the strategy on
the opposite side of the market from the cPRIME Agency Order locks or
crosses the NBBO for such component or causes the icMBBO

to be equal to or better than the initiating price.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(c)(iii) and
(iv) to Rule 515A.
    \35\ A ``Complex Auction or Cancel eQuote'' or ``cAOC eQuote,''
is an eQuote submitted by a Market Maker that is used to provide
liquidity during a specific Complex Auction with a time in force
that corresponds with the duration of the Complex Auction. See
Interpretations and Policies .02(c)(1) to Rule 518.
    \36\ A Complex Auction-or-Cancel or ``cAOC'' order is a complex
limit order used to provide liquidity during a specific Complex
Auction with a time in force that corresponds with that event. See
Rule 518(b)(3).
    \37\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(d) to Rule
515A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the conclusion of a cPRIME Auction, the Exchange will apply the
order allocation provisions applicable to the simple PRIME Auction,\38\
provided that: (A) All references to contracts will be considered
references to complex strategies; and (B) the last priority allocation
option described in Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii)(L) will not be available for
Initiating Members that submit cPRIME Agency Orders.\39\ The Exchange
further proposes that participants that submit simple orders that are
executed as individual legs of complex orders at the execution price
point will be allocated contracts only after all complex interest at
such price point have received allocations.\40\ Specifically, cPRIME
Orders will be matched first against other complex orders and have
priority over all simple orders that are on the Simple Order Book and
``legged,'' at the execution price.\41\ According to the Exchange, it
proposes to provide priority to complex interest over simple interest
because the initiating price of the cPRIME Agency Order will always be
superior to the net price of simple orders resting on the Simple Order
Book, which would not necessarily be intended to trade with the legs of
the Agency Order.\42\ However, if new interest is received in the
simple market that causes the icMBBO on the opposite side of the market
from the cPRIME Agency Order to be equal to or better than the
initiating price, the cPRIME Auction will conclude before the
expiration of the RFR period and the standard cPRIME execution and
allocation process will commence early.\43\ Regardless of when the
cPRIME Auction ends, contracts at each price point will first be
allocated by matching complex strategies.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Rule 515A(a)(2)(iii). For an example of cPRIME Order
executions with and without the Auto-Match feature, see Examples 3
and 4, Notice, supra note 3, at 25352.
    \39\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(c)(v) to Rule
515A.
    \40\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(c)(ii) to
Rule 515A.
    \41\ The Exchange notes that other exchanges afford priority to
complex interest over simple interest when allocating interest after
a price improvement auction. See Notice, supra note 3, at 25353 n.39
(citing as an example NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'') Rule
1098(e)(vi)(A)(2) and (viii)(C)(3)).
    \42\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 25353.
    \43\ See id. See also Example 5, Notice, supra note 3, at 25352.
    \44\ The term ``complex strategy'' means a particular
combination of components and their ratios to one another. New
complex strategies can be created as the result of the receipt of a
complex order or by the Exchange for a complex strategy that is not
currently in the System. The Exchange may limit the number of new
complex strategies that may be in the System at a particular time
and will communicate this limitation to Members via Regulatory
Circular. See Rule 518(a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Implementation Date
    The Exchange will announce the implementation date of the proposed
rule change by Regulatory Circular to be published no later than 60
days following the operative date of the proposed rule change.\45\ The
implementation date will be no later than 60 days following the
issuance of the Regulatory Circular.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 25356.
    \46\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange
and, in particular, with Section 6(b) of the Act.\47\ In particular,
the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Sections 6(b)(5) and 6(b)(8) of the Act,\48\ which require, among other
things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be 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 regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and 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 that the rules of an
exchange do not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposed rule change,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \48\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5), (b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposed cC2C rules are
consistent with the Act. They allow for the crossing of complex orders
in a manner similar to other crossing rules that the Commission has
previously approved for other exchanges and do not appear to raise any
novel or significant issues.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See, e.g., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
Rule 6.74A.08(b) and Phlx Rule 1080(n)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposed cQCC rules,
which would permit complex orders to participate in a clean cross of
the options leg of a subset of qualified contingent trades in a similar
manner as QCC Orders already permitted on the Exchange, are appropriate
and consistent with the Act.\50\ The Commission notes that the proposal
to permit cQCC Orders in a manner similar to QCC Orders already
permitted on MIAX Options, while requiring that the cQCC Order: (1) Be
part of a qualified contingent trade under Regulation NMS; (2) each
option leg be for at least 1,000 contracts; and (3) with respect to
each option leg of the cQCC Order, that the execution is not at the
same price as a Priority Customer Order on the Simple Order Book and is
at or between the NBBO, establishes a limited exception to the general
principle of exposure and retains the general principle of customer
priority in the options markets. Furthermore, not only must a cQCC
Order be part of a qualified contingent trade by satisfying each of the
six underlying requirements of the NMS QCT Exemption,\51\ the
requirement that a cQCC Order be for a minimum size of 1,000 contracts
per leg provides another limit to its use by ensuring only transactions
of significant size may avail themselves of this order type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See also Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 64653 (June
13, 2011), 76 FR 35491 (June 17, 2011) (order approving SR-CBOE-
2011-041); 63955 (February 24, 2011), 76 FR 11533 (March 2, 2011)
(order approving SR-ISE-2010-73). The Commission has granted an
exemption for qualified contingent trades that meet certain
requirements from Rule 611(a) of Regulation NMS, 17 CFR 242.611(a)
(the ``NMS QCT Exemption''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
57620 (April 4, 2008), 73 FR 19271 (April 9, 2008) (which supersedes
a release initially granting the NMS QCT Exemption, Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 54389 (August 31, 2006), 71 FR 52829
(September 7, 2006)).
    \51\ See supra note 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By allowing MIAX Options Members to enter complex orders into
PRIME, the Commission believes that the proposal could provide
opportunities for complex orders to receive price improvement. Under
the proposal, a complex order entered into a cPRIME Auction must be
stopped at a price that is better than the icMBBO for the strategy and
any other complex orders on the Strategy Book.\52\ As noted above, a
Member enters a cPRIME Agency Order against principal or solicited
interest for execution.\53\ At the conclusion of a cPRIME Auction, the
cPRIME Agency Order is executed in full at the best prices available,
taking into consideration orders and quotes in

the MIAX Options market, RFR responses, and the Initiating Member's
submission. Thus, a complex order entered into a cPRIME Auction would
receive an execution at the best price available at the conclusion of
the Auction and, at a minimum, would be executed in full at the
improved net price. In addition, if an improved net price for a complex
order entered in a cPRIME Auction could be achieved from bids and
offers for the individual legs of the complex order in the MIAX Options
market, the complex order would be executed at the better net price.
The Commission further notes that other exchanges have previously
adopted similar rules to permit the entry of complex orders into a
price improvement mechanism.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(a) to Rule
515A; see also Notice, supra note 3, at 25352, for an example of an
eligible cPRIME Order.
    \53\ See proposed Interpretations and Policies .12(a) to Rule
515A.
    \54\ See, e.g., Phlx Rule 1080(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Sections 6(b)(5) and 6(b)(8) of the
Act.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5), (b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\56\ that the proposed rule change (SR-MIAX-2017-19), be and hereby
is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\57\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-14984 Filed 7-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P