[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 124 (Thursday, July 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 35118]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14097]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4600-DR;Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Georgia; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Georgia (FEMA-4600-DR), dated May 5, 2021, and related
determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued May 27, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Georgia is hereby amended to include the following
area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of May 5, 2021.

    Gordon County for Public Assistance.

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

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-14097 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 235 (Friday, December 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70481-70482]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26746]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-543-000]

 NSF Chaumont Site 3 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
NSF Chaumont Site 3 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 27, 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 6, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-26746 Filed 12-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 170)]
[Notices]
[Page 45623-45624]
[DOCID:fr03se09-37]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 3041-004; 13382-000]

Mackay Bar Corporation; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, Ready for
Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, and
Terms and Conditions

August 27, 2009.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Application: Surrender of License and Conduit Exemption.
    b. Project Nos.: 3041-004 & 13382-000.
    c. Date Filed: April 28, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Mackay Bar Corporation.
    e. Name of Project: Hettinger Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On an irrigation system at Hettinger Ranch, on Smith
Creek. in Idaho County, Idaho.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Ms. Yvonne Goundry, General Manager, Mackay
Bar Corporation, P.O. Box 7968, Boise, Idaho 83707, phone (208) 336-
0150.
    i. FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Status of Environmental Analysis: The surrender request in the
application is ready for environmental analysis at this time. The
Commission is requesting comments, reply comments, and recommendations
for both the Surrender request and the Conduit Exemption requests. The
Commission is also requesting terms and conditions for the Conduit
Exemption request.
    k. Deadline for filing responsive documents: The Commission
directs, pursuant to section 4.34(b) of the Regulations (see Order No.
533, issued May 8, 1991, 56 FR 23108, May 20, 1991) that all comments,
motions to intervene, protests, recommendations, terms and conditions,
and prescriptions concerning the application be filed within 60 days
from the issuance date of this notice. All reply comments are due 105
days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and
eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Please include the project numbers (P-3041-004 & 13382-000) on any
comments or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy
of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the applicant specified in a particular application.
    l. Description of Request: We consider the application filed on
April 28, 2008, as consisting of two requests: A surrender of license
application under P-3041 and a conduit exemption application under P-
13382.
    a. Surrender of license: The applicant proposes to surrender the
license for the Hettinger Hydroelectric Project No. 3041. The applicant
proposes to decommission and remove the following project facilities:
Powerhouse, disconnect penstock, disconnect exhaust pipe, and intake.
The project's powerhouse will be relocated and used for the conduit
exemption project described in section (b) below. The applicant
proposes to restore the site following removal of the facilities.
    b. Conduit Exemption: The applicant proposes a conduit exemption
for the Hettinger Hydroelectric Project No. 13382-000. The proposed
project would be located on its irrigation system in Idaho County,
Idaho, and would consist of: A new intake structure, a penstock, a
powerhouse containing one generating unit having an installed capacity
of 17.9 kilowatts, and appurtenant facilities. The applicant consulted
with Federal, State, local agencies, and other parties with potential
interest, during the conduit exemption application process. The Idaho
Department of Fish and Game has already provided its terms and
conditions on May 27, 2008, however, they were filed under Project No.
3041. On October 30, 2008, we issued a public notice of the Conduit
Exemption application soliciting comments, motions to intervene and
competing applications. In this notice we are only soliciting ``Terms
and Conditions''.
    m. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at 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. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    n. Mailing list: Individuals desiring to be included on the
Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the
Secretary of the Commission.
    o. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see item (j) above).
    p. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must:
(1) For the Surrender of License Request: Bear in all

capital letters the title ``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'',
``COMMENTS,'' ``REPLY COMMENTS,'' ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' or in the case
of the Conduit Exemption request ``TERMS AND CONDITIONS''; (2) set
forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number
of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name,
address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening;
and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001
through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene or protests must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene or
protests should relate to project works which are the subject of the
license surrender. Agencies may obtain copies of the application
directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to
intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant
specified in the particular application. If an intervener files
comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an
issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource
agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource
agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application
must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the
service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in
accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    q. e-Filing: Comments, motions to intervene, protests,
recommendations, or terms and conditions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
under the ``e Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-21238 Filed 9-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 168 (Friday, August 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 53366]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18984]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9052-5]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS).
Filed August 17, 2020, 10 a.m. EST Through August 24, 2020, 10 a.m.
EST.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.
EIS No. 20200172, Final, UDOT, UT, Parley's Interchange; I-80/I-215
Eastside, Contact: Naomi Kisen<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 139(n)(2), UDOT has issued a single FEIS and
ROD. Therefore, the 30-day wait/review period under NEPA does not apply
to this action.

EIS No. 20200173, Final Supplement, GSA, DC, St. Elizabeth's Master
Plan Amendment 2, Review Period Ends: 09/28/2020, Contact: Paul Gyamfi
202-440-3405.
EIS No. 20200174, Draft, USDA, MT, Mid-Swan Landscape Restoration and
Wildland Urban Interface Project, Comment Period Ends: 10/13/2020,
Contact: Joseph Krueger<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20200175, Second Draft Supplement, USACE, MS, Draft Supplement
II (SEIS II) to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Mississippi
River and Tributaries (MR&T) Project, Mississippi River Mainline Levees
and Channel Improvement of 1976 (1976 EIS), as updated and supplemented
by Supplement No. 1, Mississippi River and Tributaries Project,
Mississippi River Mainline Levee Enlargement and Seepage Control of
1998 (1998 SEIS), Comment Period Ends: 10/13/2020, Contact: Mike Thron
901-544-0708.
EIS No. 20200176, Final, USACE, FL, Lake Okeechobee Watershed
Restoration Project, Review Period Ends: 09/28/2020, Contact: Dr.
Gretchen Ehlinger<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20200067, Draft, NRC, NM, Holtec International's License
Application for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent
Nuclear Fuel and High Level Waste, Comment Period Ends: 09/22/2020,
Contact: Jill Caverly<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice Published 3/
20/2020; Extending the Comment Period from 5/22/2020 to 9/22/2020.
EIS No. 20200169, Final, USAF, TX, F-35A Operational Beddown--Air Force
Reserve Command, Review Period Ends: 09/21/2020, Contact: Mr. Hamid
Kamalpour<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice Published 08/21/2020;
Correction to Lead Agency Contact Phone Number from 210-925-273 to 210-
925-2738.

    Dated: August 25, 2020.
Candi Schaedle,
Acting Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal
Activities.

[FR Doc. 2020-18984 Filed 8-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16687-16691]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05535]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97136; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2023-020]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Its Fee Schedule

March 14, 2023.
    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 March 10, 2023, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``EDGX'')
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 Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX Options'')
proposes to amend its Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed rule
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant 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 Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to modify its
market data fees for EDGX Options Top.\3\ Particularly, the Exchange
proposes to modify the Professional and Non-Professional User Fees,
adopt a new Enterprise Fee for EDGX Options Top, and make other
clarifying, non-substantive changes.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EDGX Options Top is an uncompressed data feed that offers
top of book quotations and execution information based on options
orders entered into the System. Uncompressed data is disseminated
``as is'' in the native format by the Exchange, with no compression.
    \4\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on
January 3, 2023 (SR-CboeEDGX-2023-001). On February 28, 2023, the
Exchange submitted SR-CboeEDGX-2023-015 in place of SR-CboeEDGX-
2023-001, which the Exchange withdrew on March 1, 2023. On March 10,
2023 the Exchange withdrew CboeEDGX-2023-015 and submitted this
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first proposes to reduce the rates for Professional
and Non-Professional User fees for EDGX Options Top. The Exchange
currently charges Internal Distributors and External Distributors that
redistribute any of the EDGX Options Data Feeds different fees for
their Professional Users \5\ and Non-Professional Users.\6\ The
Exchange currently assesses a monthly fee for Professional Users of
$10.00 per User and a monthly fee of $1.00 per Non-Professional
User.\7\ Further, the Fee Schedule provides that Distributors and Users
of any one of EDGX Options market data products (i.e., EDGX Options
Top, EDGX Options Depth, EDGX Options Auction Feed, EDGX Options
Complex Depth, EDGX Options Complex Top, and EDGX Options Complex
Auction Fees) may receive, at no additional charge, access to any or
all of the other market data products listed. The Exchange proposes to
reduce the rates for the User fees for EDGX Options Top. Particularly,
the Exchange proposes to reduce the monthly (i) Professional User fee
from $10 per user to $5 per user and (ii) Non-Professional User fee
from $1.00 per user to $0.10 per user. The Exchange also proposes to
start charging separate User fees for EDGX Options Top. User Fees for
the Exchange's remaining market data products will continue to receive,
at no additional charge, access to any or all of the other market data
products listed (with the exception of EDGX Options Top). The Exchange
has reformatted the Market Data Fees tables to make this clear.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A Professional User of an Exchange Market Data product is
any User other than a Non-Professional User. The Exchange proposes
to amend the definition of ``Professional User'' in the Fee Schedule
to further clarify that a Professional User is a natural person
recipient of an Exchange Data product who is not a Non-Professional
User.
    \6\ A ``Non-Professional User'' of an Exchange Market Data
product is a natural person or qualifying trust that uses Data only
for personal purposes and not for any commercial purpose and, for a
natural person who works in the United States, is not: (i)
registered or qualified in any capacity with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, any
state securities agency, any securities exchange or association, or
any commodities or futures contract market or association; (ii)
engaged as an ``investment adviser'' as that term is defined in
Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (whether
or not registered or qualified under that Act); or (iii) employed by
a bank or other organization exempt from registration under federal
or state securities laws to perform functions that would require
registration or qualification if such functions were performed for
an organization not so exempt; or, for a natural person who works
outside of the United States, does not perform the same functions as
would disqualify such person as a Non-Professional User if he or she
worked in the United States.
    \7\ Distributors that receive EDGX Options Data Feeds are
required to count every Professional User and Non-Professional User
to which they provide the market data product(s).
    \8\ The Exchange is not proposing any changes to the current
User Fee rates for its other market data products at this time and
Users of any one of the remaining market data products may continue
to receive, at no additional charge, access to any or all of the
other market data products listed (i.e., except for EDGX Options
Top).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange lastly proposes to establish a $20,000 per month
Enterprise Fee that will permit a Distributor to purchase a monthly
(and optional) Enterprise license to receive the EDGX Options Top Data
for distribution to an unlimited number of Professional and Non-
Professional Users. The Enterprise Fee is an alternative to
Professional and Non-Professional User fees and will permit a
Distributor to pay a flat fee to receive the data for an unlimited
number of Professional and Non-Professional Users, which the Exchange
proposes to make clear in the Fee Schedule. The Enterprise Fee may
provide an opportunity to reduce fees. For example, if a Distributor
distributes EDGX Options Top to 15,000 Professional Users who each
receive EDGX Options Top at $5.00 per month (as proposed), then that
Distributor will pay $75,000 per month in Professional Users fees. If
the Distributor instead were to purchase the proposed Enterprise
license, then it would alternatively pay a flat fee of $20,000 for an
unlimited number of Professional and Non-Professional Users. A
Distributor must pay a separate Enterprise Fee for each entity that
controls the display of EDGX Options Top if it wishes for such Users to
be covered by the Enterprise Fee rather than by per User fees.\9\ A
Distributor that pays the Enterprise Fee will not have to report its
number of such Users on a monthly basis. Rather, every six months, it
must provide the Exchange with a count of the total number of
Professional and Non-Professional users of EDGX Options Top.\10\ The
Exchange notes that the purchase of an Enterprise license is voluntary
and a firm may elect to instead use the per User structure and benefit
from the proposed per User Fees described above. For example, a firm
that does not have a sufficient number of Users to benefit from
purchase of the license need not do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For example, if a Distributor that distributes EDGX Options
Top to Retail Brokerage Firm A and Retail Brokerage Firm B and
wishes to have the Users under each firm covered by an Enterprise
license, the Distributor would be subject to two Enterprise Fees.
    \10\ See Cboe Global Markets North American Data Policies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange lastly proposes to modify the definition of
Professional User under the definitions section of the Market Data Fees
section to clarify that a Professional ``User'' is any natural person
recipient of an Exchange Market Data product who is not a Non-
Professional User. The proposed modification also aligns the definition
with that of the definition used by the

Exchange's affiliates Cboe Exchange, Inc. and Cboe C2 Exchange,
Inc.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Cboe Data Services, LLC Fees Schedule and Cboe C2
Options Fees Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\12\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \13\ requirements that the rules of an 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\14\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
environment. Indeed, there are currently 16 registered options
exchanges that trade options. Based on publicly available information,
no single options exchange has more than 17% of the market share.\15\
The Exchange believes top-of-book quotation and transaction data is
highly competitive as national securities exchanges compete vigorously
with each other to provide efficient, reliable, and low-cost data to a
wide range of investors and market participants. Indeed, there are
several competing products offered by other national securities
exchanges today, not counting products offered by the Exchange's
affiliates, and each of the Exchange's affiliated U.S. options
exchanges also offers similar top-of-book data.\16\ Each of those
exchanges offer top-of-book quotation and last sale information based
on their own quotation and trading activity that is substantially
similar to the information provided by the Exchange through the EDGX
Options Top Feed. Further, the quote and last sale data contained in
the EDGX Options Top Feed is identical to the data sent to OPRA for
redistribution to the public.\17\ Accordingly, Exchange top-of-book
data is widely available today from a number of different sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Market Month-to-Date
Volume Summary (February 24, 2023), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
    \16\ See e.g., NYSE Arca Options Proprietary Market Data Fees
Schedule, MIAX Options Exchange, Fee Schedule, Section 6 (Market
Data Fees), Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 10
(Proprietary Data Feed Fees) and Cboe Data Services, LLC Fees
Schedule.
    \17\ The Exchange notes that it makes available the top-of-book
and last sale data that is included in the EDGX Options Top Data
Feed no earlier than the time at which the Exchange sends that data
to OPRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the EDGX Options Top is distributed and purchased on a
voluntary basis, in that neither the Exchange nor market data
distributors are required by any rule or regulation to make this data
available. Accordingly, Distributors and Users can discontinue use at
any time and for any reason, including due to an assessment of the
reasonableness of fees charged. As described above, market participants
have a wide variety of alternative market data products from which to
choose, such as similar proprietary data products offered by other
exchanges and consolidated data. Further, the Exchange is not required
to make any proprietary data products available or to offer any
specific pricing alternatives to any customers. Moreover, persons
(including broker-dealers) who subscribe to any exchange proprietary
data feed must also have equivalent access to consolidated Options
Information \18\ from OPRA for the same classes or series of options
that are included in the proprietary data feed, and proprietary data
feeds cannot be used to meet that particular requirement.\19\ As such,
all proprietary data feeds are optional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ ``Consolidated Options Information'' means consolidated
Last Sale Reports combined with either consolidated Quotation
Information or the BBO furnished by OPRA. Access to consolidated
Options Information is deemed ``equivalent'' if both kinds of
information are equally accessible on the same terminal or work
station. See Limited Liability Company Agreement of Options Price
Reporting Authority, LLC (``OPRA Plan''), Section 5.2(c)(iii). The
Exchange notes that this requirement under the OPRA Plan is also
reiterated under the Cboe Global Markets Global Data Agreement and
Cboe Global Markets North American Data Policies, which subscribers
to any exchange proprietary product must sign and are subject to,
respectively. Additionally, the Exchange's Data Order Form (used for
requesting the Exchange's market data products) requires
confirmation that the requesting market participant receives data
from OPRA.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. Particularly, in
Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \20\ Making
similar data products available to market participants fosters
competition in the marketplace, and constrains the ability of exchanges
to charge supracompetitive fees. In the event that a market participant
views one exchange's data product as more or less attractive than the
competition they can and do switch between similar products. The
proposed fees are a result of the competitive environment, as the
Exchange seeks to adopt fees to attract purchasers of EDGX Options Top
Data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed changes to reduce the rates of
the current Professional and Non-Professional User fees are reasonable
as Distributors will be subject to lower rates for EDGX Options Top
User fees. Additionally, the User fees continue to be in line with and/
or lower than User fees assessed by other exchanges for similar
data.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See e.g., Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section
10 (Proprietary Data Feed Fees), which provides for a fee of $40 per
month to professional users and $1.00 per month to non-professional
users to cover the usage of PHLX Options (TOPO) Data, TOPO Plus
Orders, PHLX Orders and PHLX Depth Data feeds. See also NYSE
American Options Proprietary Market Data Fees schedule, which
provides for a fee of $50 per month to professional users and $1.00
per month to non-professional users of American Options Top Data,
American Options Deep and American Options Complex products. By
comparison, the total combined Professional User fee for the
Exchange's market data products is significantly lower at $11 per
Professional User (i.e., $1 per Professional Users of EDGX Options
Top, as proposed, and $10 per Professional User of any of the
remaining EDGX Options market data products). The Exchange's
combined Non-Professional User Fee at $1.10 per Non-Professional
User (i.e., $0.10 per Non-Professional User of EDGX Options Top, as
proposed, and $1 per Non-Professional User of any of the remaining
EDGX Options market data products) is still in line with, and not a
significant departure from, PHLX's and NYSE American's
aforementioned Non-Professional User fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees are equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because they will be charged uniformly to
Distributors who distribute EDGX Options Top. The Exchange also
believes continuing to offer EDGX Options Top Data to Non-Professional

Users at a lower cost than Professional Users results in greater equity
among data recipients, as Professional Users are categorized as such
based on their employment and participation in financial markets, and
thus, are compensated to participate in the markets. Although Non-
Professional Users too can receive significant financial benefits
through their participation in the markets, the Exchange believes it is
reasonable to charge more for those Users who are more directly engaged
in the markets.
    The Exchange next notes it is not required to charge a single User
fee to cover all its available data products, but none-the-less has
opted to not charge for separate User Fees for both feeds since EDGX
Options Top was adopted in January 2018.\22\ However, the Exchange now
wishes to have separate User fees for EDGX Options Top. The Exchange
believes the proposed change is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as all of EDGX Options data products are purely
optional. Only those Distributors that deem the products to be of
sufficient overall value and usefulness would purchase them for
distribution to Users. Further, Distributors are not required to
distribute, and Users are not required to receive, any one particular
data product and may choose to receive none, one, or several of the
Exchange's market data products. Indeed, less than 25% of the
Exchange's market data subscriptions is for EDGX Options Top.
Additionally, the Exchange is not required to provide any fee waiver to
Distributors of EDGX Options Top. The Exchange believes the proposed
change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory as it will apply
uniformly to Distributors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82462 (January 8,
2018), 83 FR 1647 (January 12, 2018) (SR-CboeEDGX-2017-010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Enterprise Fee for EDGX Options Top Feed is equitable
and reasonable as the proposed fee could result in a fee reduction for
Distributors with a large number of Professional and Non-Professional
Users. If a Distributors has a smaller number of Professional Users of
EDGX Options Top Data, then it may continue using the per User
structure and benefit from the proposed per EDGX Options Top User Fee
reductions. By reducing prices for recipient firms with a large number
of Professional and Non-Professional Users, the Exchange believes that
more firms may choose to receive and to distribute EDGX Options Top
Data, thereby expanding the distribution of this market data for the
benefit of investors.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed Enterprise Fee is
reasonable because it will simplify reporting for certain recipients
that have large numbers of Professional and Non-Professional Users.
Firms that pay the proposed Enterprise Fee will not have to report the
number of Users on a monthly basis as they currently do, but rather
will only have to count Professional and Non-Professional Users every
six months, which is a significant reduction in administrative burden.
Finally, as described above the Enterprise Fee is entirely optional. A
firm that does not have a sufficient number of Users to benefit from
purchase of the license need not do so.
    The Exchange lastly believes the proposed non-substantive
clarifying changes will alleviate potential confusion, thereby removing
impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, protecting investors and
the public interest.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive environment, and its ability to price
top-of-book data is constrained by competition among exchanges that
offer similar data products to their customers. Top-of-book data is
broadly disseminated by competing U.S. options exchanges and through
OPRA. There are therefore a number of alternative products available to
market participants and investors, including products offered by
certain competing exchanges, as well as OPRA. In this competitive
environment potential Distributors are free to choose which competing
product to purchase to satisfy their need for market information.
Often, the choice comes down to price, as market data customers look to
purchase cheaper data products, and quality, as market participants
seek to purchase data that represents significant market liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees do not put any market
participants at a relative disadvantage compared to other market
participants. As discussed, the proposed fees would apply to all
similarly situated recipient firms of EDGX Options Top on an equal and
non-discriminatory basis. The Exchange believes the differentiated fees
for Professional and Non-Professional Users of EDGX Options Top is
appropriate given Professional Users are categorized as such based on
their employment and participation in financial markets, and thus, are
compensated to participate in the markets. Non-Professional Users too
can receive significant financial benefits through their participation
in the markets, however the Exchange believes it is reasonable to
charge more to those Users who are more directly engaged in the
markets. The Exchange therefore believes that the proposed fee neither
favors nor penalizes one or more categories of market participants in a
manner that would impose an undue burden on competition.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fees do not impose a burden
on competition or on other SROs that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, market
participants are not forced to subscribe to EDGX Options Top Data, or
any of the Exchange's data feeds, as described above. As noted, the
quote and last sale data contained in the Exchange's EDGX Options Top
feed is identical to the data sent to OPRA for redistribution to the
public. Accordingly, Exchange top-of-book data is therefore widely
available today from a number of different sources.
    Because market data customers can find suitable substitute feeds,
an exchange that overprices its market data products stands a high risk
that users may substitute another product. These competitive pressures
ensure that no one exchange's market data fees can impose an undue
burden on competition, and the Exchange's proposed fees do not do so
here.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \23\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \24\
thereunder. 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 will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2023-020 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-CboeEDGX-2023-020. 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-CboeEDGX-2023-020 and should be
submitted on or before April 10, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05535 Filed 3-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 74)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 17911-17912]
[DOCID:fr20ap09-12]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0248; Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-2]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of VOR Federal Airway V-625; Arizona

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish VOR Federal Airway 625 (V-
625) between the Nogales, AZ, Very High Frequency Omnidirectional
Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) and the ULAPI, AZ, intersection.
Specifically, the FAA is proposing this action to establish a
coordination point to facilitate border crossing flights between Mexico
and the United States.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 4, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2009-
0248 and Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-2 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken McElroy, Airspace and Rules Group,
Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2009-0248 and Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-2) and be submitted in
triplicate

to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for address
and phone number). You may also submit comments through the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2009-0248 and Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-2.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Western Service Center, Operations Support Group,
Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA
98055.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

History

    In November 2008, Albuquerque ARTCC requested the establishment of
a new airway for the coordination of border crossing flights between
Mexico and the United States. This action responds to that request.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish VOR Federal Airway 625 (V-
625) between the Nogales, AZ, Very High Frequency Omnidirectional
Range/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) and the ULAPI, AZ, intersection.
Specifically, the FAA is proposing this action to establish a
coordination point to facilitate border crossing flights between Mexico
and the United States.
    Domestic VOR Federal Airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of
FAA Order 7400.9S, signed October 3, 2008 and effective October 31,
2008, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Domestic
VOR Federal Airway listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes a VOR Federal Airway in Arizona.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures,'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed October 3,
2008 and effective October 31, 2008, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-625 [New]

    From Nogales, AZ, to int Nogales 154T/142M excluding that
airspace in Mexico.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 13, 2009.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.
[FR Doc. E9-8969 Filed 4-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35957-35961]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11615]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97596; File No. SR-FICC-2023-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Clearing Agency Investment Policy

May 25, 2023.
    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 May 17, 2023, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'') 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 clearing agency. FICC filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(4) thereunder.\4\ 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).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change amends the Clearing Agency Investment
Policy (``Investment Policy'', or ``Policy'') of FICC and its
affiliates, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') and National
Securities Clearing Corporation (``NSCC,'' and together with DTC, the
``Clearing Agencies''). Specifically, the proposed rule change would
amend the Investment Policy to (1) clarify obligations regarding the
separation and segregation of funds deposited to a Clearing Agency's
Participants Fund or Clearing Fund; \5\ (2) clarify roles and
responsibilities related to credit reviews and setting investment
limits; (3) update allowable investments for the respective Clearing
Funds of NSCC and FICC and other investable funds; (4) include
approvals required for longer term bank deposits and reverse repurchase
investments; (5) remove descriptions of hedge transactions; and (6)
make technical corrections and revisions to clarify and simplify
statements in the Investment Policy, as described in greater detail
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The respective Clearing Funds of NSCC and FICC, and the DTC
Participants Fund are described in the Rules & Procedures of NSCC
(``NSCC Rules''), the DTC Rules, By-laws and Organization
Certificate (``DTC Rules''), the Clearing Rules of the Mortgage-
Backed Securities Division of FICC (``MBSD Rules'') or the Rulebook
of the Government Securities Division of FICC (``GSD Rules''),
respectively, available at http://dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures. See Rule 4 (Clearing Fund) of the NSCC Rules, Rule 4
(Participants Fund and Participants Investment) of the DTC Rules,
Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation) of the GSD Rules and Rule
4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation) of the MBSD Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency 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 clearing agency has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Clearing Agencies are proposing to revise the Investment
Policy, which was adopted in December 2016 \6\ and is maintained in
compliance with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16) under the Act.\7\ The proposed
changes to the Investment Policy would (i) clarify obligations
regarding the separation and segregation of funds deposited to a
Clearing Agency's Participants Fund or Clearing Fund, (ii) clarify
roles and responsibilities related to credit reviews and setting
investment limits, (iii) update allowable investments for the
respective Clearing Funds of NSCC and FICC and other investable funds,
(iv) include approvals required for longer term bank deposit and
reverse repurchase investments, (v) remove descriptions of hedge
transactions, and (vi) make technical corrections and revisions to
clarify and simplify statements in the Investment Policy, as described
in greater detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79528 (December 12,
2016), 81 FR 91232 (December 16, 2016) (SR-DTC-2016-007, SR-FICC-
2016-005, SR-NSCC-2016-003).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overview of the Investment Policy
    The Investment Policy governs the management, custody and
investment of cash deposited to the respective Clearing Funds of NSCC
and FICC,\8\ the DTC Participants Fund,\9\ the proprietary liquid net
assets (cash and cash equivalents) of the Clearing Agencies, and other
funds held by the Clearing Agencies pursuant to their respective rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Supra note 5.
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Investment Policy identifies the guiding principles for
investments and defines the roles and responsibilities of DTCC staff in
administering the Investment Policy pursuant to those principles. The
Investment Policy is co-owned by DTCC's Treasury group (``Treasury'')
and the Counterparty Credit Risk team (``CCR'') within DTCC's Group
Chief Risk Office (``GCRO''). Treasury is responsible for identifying
potential counterparties to investment transactions, establishing, and
managing investment relationships with approved investment
counterparties, and making and monitoring all investment transactions
with respect to the Clearing Agencies. CCR is responsible for
conducting a credit review of any potential counterparty, updating
those reviews on

a quarterly basis, and establishing an investment limit for each
counterparty. CCR is also responsible for ongoing monitoring of
counterparties and recommending changes to investment limits when
appropriate.
    The Investment Policy also identifies sources of funds that may be
invested, and the permitted investments of those funds, including the
authority required to make such investments and the parameters of, and
limitations on, each type of investment. Finally, the Investment Policy
defines the approval authority required to exceed established
investment limits. As stated above, the activities and processes
carried out pursuant to the Investment Policy, and the governance set
forth therein, support the Clearing Agencies' compliance with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Revisions to the Investment Policy
    The Investment Policy is reviewed and approved by the Boards
annually. In connection with the most recent annual review of the
Investment Policy, the Clearing Agencies have decided to propose
certain revisions and updates. These proposed revisions, described in
greater detail below, are designed to update the Investment Policy to
reflect current practices and to help ensure that it continues to
operate as intended.
(i) Proposed Change Regarding the Separation and Segregation of Funds
    Section 3.2 of the Policy addresses the Clearing Agencies' approach
to segregation of deposits to their respective Participants or Clearing
Funds. The Policy currently states that deposits to the Participants
Fund and Clearing Funds must not be commingled with each other or with
general corporate funds of the Clearing Agencies. The Clearing
Agencies' intention in using this approach is to ensure these funds are
not commingled on the Clearing Agencies' books and records but is not
intended to restrict the Clearing Agencies from depositing those
amounts in the same deposit accounts, for example at their cash deposit
accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (``FRBNY''). In short,
the Clearing Agencies have subaccounts on their books and records to
reflect the segregation of various funds, but each Clearing Agency only
has one account at the FRBNY where Clearing Funds and Participant Fund
are held with Clearing Agency general corporate funds.
    For example, deposits to NSCC's Clearing Fund currently can be
deposited into the same bank deposit account as NSCC's general
corporate funds, so long as these amounts are separated on NSCC's books
and records and are not deposited into the same bank account as the DTC
Participant Fund or either of the FICC Clearing Funds. Additionally,
because GSD and MBSD are divisions of FICC, and FICC, like NSCC and
DTC, has only one cash deposit account at the FRBNY, the proposed
change also makes clear that the GSD Clearing Fund and MBSD Clearing
Fund may be commingled in the same bank deposit account so long as they
are segregated on FICC's books and records. Lastly, the proposed change
clarifies that the Clearing Agencies' approach to segregation of funds
applies not only to the relationship between a Clearing Agency's
general corporate funds and its Participants Fund or Clearing Fund but
to all investable funds of a Clearing Agency.
    Therefore, the Clearing Agencies are proposing to clarify that,
although deposits to a Clearing Agencies' Participant Fund or Clearing
Fund must be segregated on each respective Clearing Agency's books and
records from each other and from their respective general corporate
funds, these amounts may be deposited in the same bank deposit account
as other investable funds of that Clearing Agency. The proposed
clarification is consistent with the Clearing Agencies' existing
practices and would not significantly affect the rights or obligations
of the Clearing Agencies or their participants. This proposed change
would clarify the Investment Policy and reflect the Clearing Agencies
current practices regarding Clearing Agencies' separation and
segregation of funds.
(ii) Proposed Change To Clarify Roles and Responsibilities of CCR and
Treasury
    Section 4 of the Policy outlines the roles and responsibilities of
Treasury and CCR in conducting credit reviews and setting investment
limits of counterparties. The proposed changes include clarification of
these roles and responsibilities to improve the transparency of the
Investment Policy to the DTCC staff who adhere to its provisions. The
proposed changes to Section 4.2would add the requirement that Treasury
state the intended type of investment relationship with a counterparty
when it requests that CCR perform a credit review of an investment
counterparty. The proposed changes would also clarify that the
governance of an investment counterparty credit review depends on
whether the proposed counterparty is a participant of a Clearing
Agency. Counterparties that are not participants must be approved by a
Managing Director of CCR and counterparties that are participants are
reviewed using a risk-based criteria based on the participants'
membership level.
    An additional proposed change to Section 4.2 would remove the
requirement that a Managing Director of GCRO approve counterparty
investment limits. This proposed change would clarify that CCR is
responsible for setting the aggregate investment limits assigned to a
counterparty in connection with the credit reviews for that
counterparty.
    In addition, the Clearing Agencies are proposing changes to Section
4.2 to specify the management of the quarterly credit reviews and
changes to counterparty investment limits. The Policy currently states
that CCR will notify Treasury if an investment counterparty's external
credit rating is downgraded, if CCR believes an investment
counterparty's investment limit should change, or if an investment
transaction should be terminated. The purpose of this procedure is to
quickly capture any changes to an investment counterparty's credit
rating that may affect the Clearing Agencies' exposure to such
counterparty and, therefore, require change to the allowable investment
limit applicable to that counterparty under the Policy. The proposed
changes to this Section would clarify that CCR only notifies Treasury
if an investment counterparty's external credit ratings fall below the
minimum ratings in the Policy or requires a change to that
counterparties' investment limit. The proposed changes would also
clarify that CCR may advise Treasury if it is appropriate to set a
counterparty's investment limit lower than the investment limits
provided within the Policy or to terminate an investment transaction.
These proposed changes would clarify that either of these investment
limit changes require approval by a Managing Director of GCRO.
    The proposed changes are consistent with the Clearing Agencies'
existing practices and would not significantly affect the rights or
obligations of the Clearing Agencies or their participants.
(iii) Proposed Change To Update Allowable Investments and Investment
Limits
    The Clearing Agencies are proposing to amend the table of allowable
investments in Section 6 of the Policy to reflect their current
investment practice of only investing the Clearing

Funds of NSCC and FICC; NSCC's Fully Paid-For Account, DTC Short
Position Cash, Corporate Actions Payments and Principal & Interest
Payments; and GSD Forward Margin in bank deposits. The table identifies
the sources of investable funds that are invested by the Clearing
Agencies, and groups these sources of funds into separate categories.
The Policy currently permits the Clearing Agencies to invest the
investable funds listed above in multiple types of investment vehicles,
for example reverse repurchase agreements. The Clearing Agencies
believe that it is prudent investment practice to limit the investment
of these funds to only bank deposits and have, in practice, already
limited such investments accordingly. The proposed changes to this
table would also delete footnotes that include information that is no
longer necessary given this change in investment practice.
    Two proposed changes to Section 6.2.1 of the Policy would conform
the Investment Policy to current practice. First, this section
currently states that the DTC Participant Fund may only be invested in
demand deposit, savings or checking accounts that provide same day
access to funds. The Clearing Agencies would update this section to
make clear that these criteria also applies to investment of the NSCC
and FICC Clearing Funds. Finally, the proposed changes would include
adding ``unless an exception has been granted pursuant to Section 4.2
of this Policy'' following the requirement for approved bank
counterparty minimum external credit ratings, for clarification
purposes in terms of the interplay of the various sections in the
Policy.
(iv) Proposed Change To Include Approvals Required for Longer Term
Transactions
    The Clearing Agencies are proposing to amend the Policy to describe
the approval requirements for investments in bank deposits and reverse
repurchase agreements with a term maturity longer than overnight. The
Policy is currently silent as to the approval process for these longer-
term transactions. The proposed changes would describe the requirement
that CCR approve such longer-term transactions and would align the
parameters around establishing investment limits for such transactions
to the guidelines provided in Section 6.2.1 of the Policy, for longer
term bank deposit investments, and Section 6.2.2, for reverse
repurchase agreements, unless an exception has been granted pursuant to
Section 4.2 of the Policy.
    The proposed changes would also describe the requirement that CCR
assess the creditworthiness of a counterparty when determining term to
maturity for such longer-term transactions requested by Treasury. These
proposed changes would improve the Investment Policy by clearly
describing the approval process for these types of investments.
(v) Proposed Change To Remove Reference to Hedge Transactions
    The proposed changes would remove references to the Clearing
Agencies' process involving hedge transactions from the Policy. Section
6.2.6 of the Policy currently describes allowable hedge transactions,
limitations on hedge transaction maturity dates and value amounts, and
the approval process for hedge transactions. The proposed changes would
remove this section from the Policy because hedging activity is
different from investment activity. Additionally, hedging activity is
conducted using only general corporate funds of the Clearing Agencies,
thereby posing very little risk to the Clearing Agencies' Clearing Fund
or Participant Fund. Therefore, the Clearing Agencies believe it is
appropriate to establish a stand-alone internal hedging policy
reflecting the processes, procedures and philosophy regarding hedge
transactions that is currently captured in this Investment Policy. Such
internal hedging policy would provide greater detail and clarity
related to the current hedging practices of the Clearing Agency.
Further, the proposed removal of references to hedging activity would
improve the Investment Policy in clarifying and focusing its purpose.
(vi) Proposed Change To Make Technical Corrections and Revisions
    Finally, the proposed changes would make technical corrections to
statements in the Investment Policy, delete irrelevant processes, and
add clarifying words or sentences throughout the Policy. These changes
are (1) change the word ``Subject'' to ``Pursuant'' in the footnote to
the table in Section 5 and delete the second footnote, (2) change the
heading of subparagraph 6.2.4 from Reverse Repurchase Agreements
(Reverse Repos) to Money Market Mutual Funds (MMMFs) as the content of
the subparagraph discusses MMMFs instead of Reverse Repos, (3) change
the word ``percent'' as it relates to a counterparty's shareholders'
equity capital in Section 6.2.1 to ``multiple'' for consistency with
the use of the word multiple in the corresponding table, (4) remove
reference to Hold-in custody Reverse Repos in Section 6.2.2 as the
Clearing Agencies do not engage in such transactions, (5) change
numeric representations in the table in 6.2.1 for consistency
throughout the Policy, (6) delete any footnotes made inaccurate or
unnecessary by the other proposed changes to the Policy, and (7) add
the word ``amount'' in front of the words ``by 30%'' in Section 7.1 for
clarification purposes. These changes are not substantive changes to
the Clearing Agencies' investment practices.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Clearing Agencies believe that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a registered clearing agency.\11\
In particular, the Clearing Agencies believe that the proposed
modifications to the Investment Policy are consistent with Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \12\ and Rule 17Ad22(e)(16) under the Act,\13\
for the reasons described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(16).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules
of the Clearing Agencies be designed to assure the safeguarding of
securities and funds that are in the custody or control of each of the
Clearing Agencies or for which they are responsible.\14\ The investment
guidelines and governance procedures set forth in the Investment Policy
are designed to safeguard funds that are in the custody or control of
the Clearing Agencies or for which they are responsible. Such
protections include, for example, following a prudent and conservative
investment philosophy that places the highest priority on maximizing
liquidity and risk avoidance. The Clearing Agencies believe the
proposed change to reflect the Clearing Agencies' current investment
practice to only invest NSCC and FICC Clearing Funds, Fully Paid-For
Account, Short Position Cash, Corporate Actions Payments, Principal &
Interest Payments, and GSD Forward Margin in bank deposits would allow
it to adhere to these guidelines by maximizing liquidity and minimizing
the risk posed by other, potentially longer term, investments.
Therefore, the Clearing Agencies believe the proposed change would
allow the Clearing Agencies to continue to invest pursuant to the
Investment Policy in a prudent and conservative manner that assures the
safeguarding of securities and funds that are in their custody and
control, or for which they are responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act also requires, in part, that the
rules of the

Clearing Agencies be designed to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of securities
transactions.\15\ The proposed changes to (1) clarify obligations
regarding the separation and segregation of funds deposited to a
Clearing Agency's Participants Fund or Clearing Funds; (2) clarify
roles and responsibilities related to credit reviews and setting
investment limits; (3) remove descriptions of hedge transactions; and
(4) make technical corrections and revisions to clarify and simplify
statements in the Investment Policy would help clarify the
administration of the procedures outlined in the Policy and therefore
aid in the cooperation and coordination between the DTCC staff who
adhere to its provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the proposed change to provide approval requirements
for investments in bank deposits and reverse repurchase agreements with
a term maturity longer than overnight would improve the effectiveness
of the Investment Policy and allow the Clearing Agencies to administer
the Investment Policy in alignment with the investment guidelines and
governance procedures set forth therein. Specifically, the Investment
Policy sets forth guiding principles for the investment of funds, which
include adherence to a prudent and conservative investment philosophy
that places the highest priority on maximizing liquidity and avoiding
risk. The guiding principles of the Investment Policy also address the
process for evaluating the credit ratings of counterparties and setting
investment limits. Given that such guidelines and governance procedures
are designed to safeguard funds that are in the custody or control of
the Clearing Agencies or for which they are responsible, the Clearing
Agencies believe the proposed changes are consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16) under the Act requires, in part, the Clearing
Agencies to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies
and procedures reasonably designed to safeguard the Clearing Agencies'
own and their participants' assets, minimize the risk of loss and delay
in access to these assets, and invest such assets in instruments with
minimal credit, market, and liquidity risks.\17\ The Clearing Agencies
believe that the Investment Policy, as amended by the proposed changes,
follows a prudent and conservative investment philosophy, placing the
highest priority on maximizing liquidity and avoiding risk of loss, by
setting appropriate investment practices and creating clear guidelines.
As originally implemented, the Investment Policy was designed to meet
the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16) under the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(16).
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons stated above, the Clearing Agencies believe that
the proposed revisions to (1) clarify obligations regarding the
separation and segregation of funds deposited to a Clearing Agency's
Participants Fund or Clearing Funds; (2) update allowable investments
for the Clearing Agencies' respective Clearing Funds and other
investable funds; and (3) include approvals required for longer term
bank deposits and reverse repo investments would both strengthen the
risk management objectives of the Investment Policy and improve the
clarity of the Policy and, therefore, make the Investment Policy more
effective in governing the management, custody, and investment of funds
of and held by the Clearing Agencies. In this way, these proposed
changes would better allow the Clearing Agencies to maintain this
document in a way that is designed to meet the requirements of Rule
17Ad-22(e)(16).\19\ Therefore, the Clearing Agencies believe these
proposed revisions would be consistent with the requirements of Rule
17Ad-22(e)(16) under the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Each of the Clearing Agencies believes that none of the proposed
revisions to the Investment Policy would have any impact, or impose any
burden, on competition. The Investment Policy applies equally to the
allowable investments of the Clearing Agencies, including the FICC and
NSCC Clearing Funds and DTC Participants Fund deposits, and establishes
a uniform policy at the Clearing Agencies. The proposed changes to the
Investment Policy would not affect any changes on the fundamental
purpose or operation of this document and, as such, would also not have
any impact, or impose any burden, on competition.

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    FICC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. If any written comments are received, they will be
publicly filed as an Exhibit 2 to this filing, as required by Form 19b-
4 and the General Instructions thereto.
    Persons submitting comments are cautioned that, according to
Section IV (Solicitation of Comments) of the Exhibit 1A in the General
Instructions to Form 19b-4, the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. Commenters should
submit only information that they wish to make available publicly,
including their name, email address, and any other identifying
information.
    All prospective commenters should follow the Commission's
instructions on how to submit comments, available at https://www.sec.gov/regulatory-actions/how-to-submitcomments. General questions
regarding the rule filing process or logistical questions regarding
this filing should be directed to the Main Office of the Commission's
Division of Trading and Markets at [email protected] or 202-
551-5777.
    FICC reserve the right not to respond to any comments received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \21\ of the Act and paragraph (f) \22\ of Rule 19b-4
thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-FICC-2023-006 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-FICC-2023-006. 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 FICC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). Do not include personal
identifiable information in submissions; you should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. We may redact in
part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material that is
obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions should
refer to File Number SR-FICC-2023-006 and should be submitted on or
before June 22, 2023.
    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-11615 Filed 5-31-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P