[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 246 (Thursday, December 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 93909]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30852]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14805-000]

Island Hydroelectric Project; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On November 14, 2016, Island in the Sky Hydro, LLC, filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Island Hydroelectric Project (Island Project) to be located on the
Blackstone River, in Central Falls, Providence County, Rhode Island.
The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the
permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit
term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to
perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or
waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) The existing 10-foot-
high, 156-foot-long stone block dam with provisions for 12-inch-high
flashboards; (2) an existing 26-acre impoundment with a storage
capacity of 120-acre-feet and a normal maximum water surface elevation
of 34.9 feet (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929); (3) an
existing trashrack and 14- to 40-foot-wide, 70-foot-long forebay; (4)
an existing concrete and steel, 40-foot-wide, 70-foot-long powerhouse
containing one turbine-generator unit with an installed capacity of 700
kilowatts; (5) a proposed 300-foot-long, 15-kilovolt transmission line
connecting the powerhouse to the National Grid distribution system; and
(6) appurtenant facilities. The estimated annual generation of the
Island Project would be about 4,360 megawatt-hours. The existing dam
and appurtenant works are owned by the State of Rhode Island.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Ronald L. Johnson, Island in the Sky Hydro,
LLC, PO Box 193, Thorndike, MA 01079; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Patrick Crile; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14805-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14805) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: December 16, 2016.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30852 Filed 12-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 190 (Monday, October 1, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49298-49300]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21286]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261; FRL-9983-77--Region 7]

Approval of Missouri Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2012 Annual Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard Interstate
Transport

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing its
approval of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) in a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submission from the State of Missouri for the 2012 Annual Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires the State to
prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity within the
State from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will contribute
significantly to nonattainment (prong 1), or interfere with maintenance
(prong 2) in any other State with respect to the NAAQs.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 31, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey Casburn, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA. This section provides additional information
by addressing the following:

I. Background Information
II. Have the Requirements for approval of a SIP submittal been met?
III. The EPA's response to comments
IV. What Action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background Information

    States are required to have a SIP that provides for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. Whenever EPA
promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, States are required to make a SIP
submission to establish that they have, or are adding, the provisions
necessary to address various requirements to address the new or revised
NAAQS. These SIPs are commonly referred to as ``infrastructure'' SIPs.
The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the
structural components of each State's air quality management program
are adequate to meet the State's responsibilities under the CAA. In
this action EPA is approving the prong 1 and prong 2 interstate
transportation obligations of the State's 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
infrastructure SIP submittal. On June 5, 2018, the EPA published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register proposing
to approve the prong 1 and prong 2 elements of the State of Missouri's
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submittal. See 83 FR
25979. The NPRM, and technical support document (TSD) for the action,
included: a summary of existing modeling data; a summary of monitoring
data from areas downwind of Missouri; and a summary of annual emissions
of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and sulfur dioxide
(SO2), both of which are precursors of PM2.5.
This information showed that local control in Missouri is not necessary
to address contribution, with respect to the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS
any other State. As the EPA's rationale for approving the SIP
submission was provided in detail in the NPRM and the TSD for the
action, and both documents are included in the docket identified in the
ADDRESSES section of this document, the rationale will not be restated
in detail in this document.

II. Have the requirements for approval of the SIP submittal been met?

    The State's submission met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The State held a public
comment period from July 27, 2015, to September 3, 2015. The State
received no comments during the public comment period. A public hearing
was held on August 27, 2015. The submission satisfied the completeness
criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.

III. The EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period for the NPRM closed on July 5, 2018. The
EPA received three sets of comments prior to the close of the comment
period; all three sets of comments were not directly related to the
action and therefore not considered by the EPA to be adverse to the
action being taken. As the EPA only responds to adverse comments, there
are no responses required for this final action. The comments can be
found in the docket to this action at EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0261. No changes
were made to the proposal in this final action after consideration of
the comments received. All comments on the proposed action are
available in the docket identified in the ADDRESSES section of this
document.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    As described above, the EPA is approving the prong 1 and prong 2
interstate transportation obligations of the State's 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submittal.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this

rulemaking does not involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxides.

    Dated: September 25, 2018.
Edward H. Chu,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart AA-Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
the entry ``(75)'' in numerical order to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1320   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e)* * *

                               EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP          geographic or           State       EPA approval date      Explanation
            provision                nonattainment area   submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
(75) Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--  Statewide............      10/14/2015  10/1/2018, [Insert  This action
 significant contribution to                                               Federal Register    approves the
 nonattainment (prong 1), and                                              citation].          following CAA
 interfering with maintenance of                                                               elements:
 the NAAQs (prong 2) (Interstate                                                               110(a)(1) and
 Transport) Infrastructure                                                                     110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I
 Requirements for the 2012 Annual                                                              )--prongs 1 and 2
 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)                                                               [EPA-R07-OAR-2018
 NAAQS.                                                                                -0261; FRL-9983-
                                                                                77--Region 7.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-21286 Filed 9-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 1, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 125)]
[Notices]
[Page 31471-31472]
[DOCID:fr01jy09-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60168; File No. SR-FINRA-2009-043]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Application of Transaction-Related
Charges for Trade Reporting to the OTC Reporting Facility

June 24, 2009.
    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 June 17, 2009, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') (f/k/a National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'')) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below [sic], which Items have been prepared by FINRA. FINRA has
designated the proposed rule change as ``establishing or changing a
due, fee or other charge'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to amend FINRA Rule 7710 to clarify the
application of transaction-related charges for trade reporting to the
OTC Reporting Facility (``ORF'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA 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. FINRA 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 FINRA Rule 7700 Series, among other things, sets forth the
pricing schedule for the ORF, the OTC Bulletin Board, and the Trade
Reporting and Compliance Engine Services. On March 1, 2007, FINRA filed
a proposed rule change (SR-NASD-2007-018) for immediate effectiveness
that deleted certain fee provisions from the FINRA

Rule 7700 Series \5\ and amended certain other provisions.\6\ In that
filing, NASD Rule 7010(g) was renumbered as NASD Rule 7010, renamed,
and amended to apply only to the ORF.\7\ The amendments became
operative on March 5, 2007.\8\ As FINRA stated in the filing, the
amendments made to the rule language were not intended to modify any of
the charges relating to the ORF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ At the time of the rule filing, the FINRA Rule 7700 Series
was the NASD Rule 7000 Series. The NASD Rule 7000 Series was
renumbered as the FINRA Rule 7700 Series in 2008. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 58643 (September 25, 2008), 73 FR 57174
(October 1, 2008); see also FINRA Regulatory Notice 08-57 (October
2008).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55538 (March 27,
2007), 72 FR 15924 (April 3, 2007) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of SR-NASD-2007-018).
    \7\ NASD Rule 7010 was later renumbered as FINRA Rule 7710. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58643 (September 25, 2008), 73
FR 57174 (October 1, 2008).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55538 (March 27,
2007), 72 FR 15924 (April 3, 2007) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of SR-NASD-2007-018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although there was no intent to modify any charges in connection
with reporting transactions to the ORF, the rule language, as amended,
omits some securities from the rule because of the definition of ``OTC
Equity Security'' in FINRA Rule 6420. The previous rule, NASD Rule
7010(g), included a catch-all provision that applied a charge of
$0.029/side to the ``reporting of all other transactions not subject to
comparison.'' This language included, for example, PORTAL equity
securities, which are reported to the ORF pursuant to the PORTAL rules
in the FINRA Rule 6630 Series. The term ``OTC Equity Security,''
however, specifically excludes PORTAL securities and restricted
securities from the definition.\9\ Thus, by using the defined term
``OTC Equity Security,'' the rule was inadvertently amended to exclude
PORTAL equity securities from the scope of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See FINRA Rule 6420(c), (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would delete the reference to ``OTC Equity
Security'' in FINRA Rule 7710 and clarify that the charge applies to
the reporting of transactions in any security, not just OTC Equity
Securities, to the ORF that are not subject to comparison through the
ORF.
    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. The effective date and the implementation date will be
the date of filing, June 17, 2009.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and
other persons using any facility or system that FINRA operates or
controls. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change clarifies the
charges assessed with respect to transactions reported to the ORF and
correctly reflects FINRA's intent when amending the rule in SR-NASD-
2007-018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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 \11\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\12\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2009-043 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-043. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2009-043 and should be
submitted on or before July 21, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-15468 Filed 6-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: August 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 47613]
[DOCID:fr06au10-96]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1925-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Kentucky; 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 Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-1925-DR), dated July 23, 2010,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: July 29, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Kentucky 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 July 23, 2010.

    Shelby 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.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-19466 Filed 8-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: October 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 209)]
[Notices]
[Page 63367-63370]
[DOCID:fr30oc06-138]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54643; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-73]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment
No. 1 Thereto To Amend Certain of its Rules To Provide for the Listing
and Trading of Options on the CBOE Russell 2000 Volatility Index \sm\
(``RVX \sm\'')

 October 23, 2006.
    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 August 31, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') 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. On October 20, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, 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 proposes to amend certain of its rules to provide for the
listing and trading of options on the CBOE Russell 2000 Volatility
Index\sm\ (``RVX\sm\''). Options on the RVX will be cash-settled and
will have European-style expiration. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on CBOE's Web site, http://www.cboe.org, at CBOE'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, CBOE 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. CBOE 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to permit the Exchange
to list and trade cash-settled, European-style options on the RVX.
Index Design and Calculation
    The Exchange states that the calculation of this index is based on
a methodology that is an up-to-the-minute market estimate of expected
volatility that is calculated by using real-time Russell 2000 Index
(``RUT'') option bid/ask quotes. RVX uses nearby and second nearby
options with at least 8 days left to expiration and then weights them
to yield a constant, 30-day measure of the expected volatility of the
RUT.
    For each contract month, CBOE will determine the at-the-money
strike price. It will then select the at-the-money and out-of-the money
series with non-zero bid prices and determine the midpoint of the bid-
ask quote for each of these series. The midpoint quote of each series
is then weighted so that the further away that series is from the at-
the-money strike, the less weight that is accorded to the quote. Then,
to compute the index level, CBOE will calculate a volatility measure
for the nearby options and then for the second nearby options. This is
done using the weighted mid-point of the prevailing bid-ask quotes for
all included option series with the same expiration date. These
volatility measures are then interpolated to arrive at a single,
constant 30-day measure of volatility.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The RVX is calculated in the same manner as other volatility
indexes (e.g., the CBOE Volatility Index (``VIX'')), upon which
options have been based and previously approved by the Commission. A
more detailed explanation of the method used to calculate VIX may be
found on CBOE's Web site at the following Internet address: http://www.cboe.com/micro/vix/vixwhite.pdf
.

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

    As described above, the RVX option will be structured as an option
on a group of securities, namely options on the RUT and by extension
the stocks underlying the RUT. CBOE will use the actual quotes of the
index options to derive the corresponding volatility index. The
underlying index options are themselves securities and are based on an
index of the broader number of underlying securities.\4\ Thus, the
pricing components underlying the RVX options will include the RUT
options and, by extension, the component stocks of the RUT. These
pricing components will provide a measure of the volatility of price
movements of the RUT. The Exchange states that this structure is
similar to the approach used by CBOE for its interest rate options.\5\
Those products use the quotes of debt securities to derive an interest
rate yield, which is converted into a measure that serves as the
underlying for options. Similarly, quotes from index option securities,
which reflect a measure of stock price movements of the RUT, will be
used to derive a measure of volatility that will be the underlying for
the respective volatility index options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ RUT measures the performance of the 2000 smallest companies
in the Russell 3000 Index, which represent approximately 8% of the
total market capitalization of the Russell 3000.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 26938 (June 15,
1989), 54 FR 26285 (June 22, 1989) (SR-CBOE-87-30) and 33106
(October 26, 1993), 58 FR 58358 (November 1, 1993) (SR-CBOE-93-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE will compute the index on a real-time basis throughout each
trading day, from 8:30 a.m. until 3:15 p.m. CST. CBOE has calculated
historical index values for the new RVX back to January 2004.
Volatility index levels will be calculated by CBOE and disseminated at
15-second intervals to market information vendors via the Options Price
Reporting Authority.
Index Option Trading
    RVX is quoted in absolute numbers that represent the volatility of
the RUT in percentage points per annum. For example, an index level of
20.47 (the closing value of the RVX on October 9, 2006) represents an
annualized volatility of 20.47% in the RUT. The Exchange states that
the RVX level fluctuates quite differently than individual equity
securities or indexes of individual equity securities. Specifically,
the Exchange states that indexes such as the RVX that track volatility
are ``mean-reverting,'' a statistical term used to describe a strong
tendency for the volatility index to move toward its long-term
historical average level. In other words, at historically low
volatility index levels, there is a higher probability that the next
big move will be up rather than down. Conversely, at historically high
volatility index levels, the next big move is more likely to be down
rather than up.
    Thus, as exemplified by RVX, the Exchange states that volatility
indexes tend to move within set ranges, and even when a level moves
outside that range, the tendency towards mean-reversion often results
in the volatility index returning to a level within the range. In the
case of RVX, the historical average index value is 20.89. Since January
2004, RVX has fluctuated in a narrow range between a low of 15.95 to a
high of 34.02. Furthermore, RVX closed under 25 for 89% of the days on
which the level was calculated since 2004 (621 days out of a total of
695 days) and has closed under 30 for 99% of the days on which the
level was calculated since 2004 (689 days out of a total of 695 days).
RVX has closed between 18 and 24 for 78% of the days on which the level
was calculated since 2004 (544 days out of a total of 695 days).
    Because of the generally limited range in which RVX has fluctuated,
the Exchange believes that investors will be better served if the
Exchange is able to list $1 strike price intervals in RVX option
series. To address this, the Exchange is proposing to list series at $1

or greater strike price intervals for each expiration on up to 5 RVX
option series above and 5 RVX option series below the current index
level. Additional series at $1.00 or greater strike price intervals
could be listed for each expiration as the current index level of RVX
moves from the exercise price of the RVX options series that already
have been opened for trading on the Exchange in order to maintain at
least 5 RVX option series above and 5 RVX option series below the
current index level. For purposes of adding strike prices at $1.00 or
greater strike price intervals, as well as at $2.50 or greater strike
price intervals, the ``current index level'' would be defined as the
``implied forward level'' of RVX for each expiration.\6\ The Exchange
intends to determine implied forward levels of RVX through the use of
RVX futures prices. Its reasons for using this approach are explained
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ With respect to $2.50 or greater strikes, the $2.50 or
greater strike price intervals will be reasonably related to the
current index value of RVX at or about the time such series are
first opened for trading. The term ``reasonably related to the
current index value of the underlying index'' means that the
exercise price is within 30% of the current index value. The
Exchange may also open additional $2.50 or greater strike price
series that are more than 30% away from the current index value,
provided that demonstrated customer interest exists for such series,
as expressed by institutional, corporate, or individual customers or
their brokers. See Interpretations and Policies .01(d) and .04 of
CBOE Rule 24.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of background, option prices reflect the market's
expectation of the price of the underlying at expiration, which is
referred to as the ``forward'' level. For stock indexes such as the SPX
and the S&P 100 (``OEX''), the best estimate of the forward level is
the current, or ``spot,'' price adjusted for the ``carry,'' which is
the financing cost of owning the component stocks in the index less the
dividends paid by those stocks. For volatility indexes such as RVX, the
Exchange states that a better estimate than the standard ``cash and
carry'' model for calculating the forward levels of RVX at each
expiration is reflected in the prices of the options that will be used
to calculate RVX on that expiration day. For example, December RUT
options will be used to calculate RVX on the November RVX expiration
date. Likewise, February 2007 RVX options are tied to the implied
volatility of March 2007 RUT options, and so on.
    The Exchange states that one important property of implied
volatility is that it exhibits a ``term structure.'' In other words,
the implied volatility of options expiring on different dates can trade
at different levels and can move independently. Another property
related to the term structure is that implied volatility tends to trend
toward the market's expectation of a long-term ``average'' value. As a
result, a large spike in one-month implied volatility might not affect
implied volatility of longer-dated options very much at all.
    The CBOE Futures Exchange does not currently list RVX futures;
however, CBOE expects that RVX futures corresponding to each RVX
options expiration month will be available prior to launch. As a
result, the Exchange believes that traders will likely use RVX futures
prices as a proxy for forward RVX levels. CBOE believes that using
these prices is an accurate and transparent method for determining the
``current index level'' used to center the limited range in which $1 or
greater strikes in RVX options will be listed and the broader range in
which $2.50 or greater strikes in RVX options will be listed.
    Additionally, the Exchange is proposing that it would not list
series with $1 intervals within $0.50 of an existing $2.50 strike price
with the same expiration month (e.g., if there is an existing $12.50
strike, the Exchange would not list a $12.00 or $13.00 strike).
Finally, the interval between strike prices for RVX long-term option
series (``LEAPs[supreg]'') will continue to be no less than $2.50.
    The Exchange states that $1 strike price intervals will more
closely bracket the level of RVX when it remains locked within a static
range, as currently exists, and will enable investors to assume more
dynamic volatility index option positions that reflect greater
possibilities of settling in-the-money.
    The Exchange also notes that the Commission has approved the
listing of options on the CBOE Volatility Index (``VIX'') at $1.00
strike intervals within certain parameters.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-54192 (July 21,
2006), 71 FR 43251 (July 31, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE has analyzed its capacity and represents that it believes the
Exchange and the Options Price Reporting Authority have the necessary
systems capacity to handle the additional traffic associated with the
listing and trading of $1 strike RVX options as proposed herein.
    The trading hours for options on the volatility indexes will be
from 8:30 a.m. to 3:15 p.m. CST. Exhibit 2 to CBOE's filing presents
proposed contract specifications for RVX options.
Exercise and Settlement
    The proposed options on each index will expire 30 days prior to the
expiration date of the options used in the calculation of that index.
For example, September 2006 RVX options would expire on Wednesday,
September 20, 2006, exactly 30 days prior to the third Friday of the
calendar month immediately following the expiring month. Trading in the
expiring contract month will normally cease at 3:15 p.m. CST on the
last day of trading. Exercise will result in delivery of cash on the
business day following expiration. RVX options will be a.m.-settled.
The exercise settlement value will be determined by a Special Opening
Quotation (SOQ) of the RVX calculated from the sequence of opening
prices of the RUT options that comprise that index on the settlement
date. The opening price for any series in which there is no trade would
be the average of that option's bid price and ask price as determined
at the opening of trading.
    The exercise-settlement amount is equal to the difference between
the exercise-settlement value and the exercise price of the option,
multiplied by $100. When the last trading day is moved because of
Exchange holidays, the last trading day for expiring options will be
the day immediately preceding the last regularly-scheduled trading day.
Surveillance
    The Exchange will use the same surveillance procedures currently
utilized for each of the Exchange's other index options to monitor
trading in options on each volatility index. The Exchange further
represents that these surveillance procedures will be adequate to
monitor trading in options on these indexes. For surveillance purposes,
the Exchange states that it will have complete access to information
regarding trading activity in the pertinent underlying securities.
Position Limits
    The Exchange proposes to establish position limits for options on
the RVX at 50,000 contracts on either side of the market, and no more
than 30,000 of such contracts may be in series in the nearest
expiration month. The Exchange states that these position limits for
options on the RVX are consistent with the position limits for options
on the underlying RUT set forth in CBOE Rule 24.4.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Telephone conversation between Jennifer L. Klebes, Senior
Attorney, CBOE, and Florence E. Harmon, Senior Special Counsel,
Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on October 23, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exchange Rules Applicable
    Except as modified herein, the CBOE Rules in Chapter XXIV will be
applicable to the RVX options. The RVX

will be classified as a ``broad-based index'' and, under CBOE margin
rules, specifically CBOE Rule 12.3(c)(5)(A), the margin requirement for
a short put or call on the respective volatility indexes will be 100%
of the current market value of the contract plus up to 15% of the
respective underlying index value.
    Finally, CBOE has analyzed its capacity and represents that it
believes the Exchange and the Options Price Reporting Authority have
the necessary systems capacity to handle the additional traffic
associated with the listing and trading of RVX options as proposed
herein.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in
particular, in that it will permit trading in options based on the RVX
pursuant to rules designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts
and practices and to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
and thereby will provide investors with the ability to invest in
options based on an additional index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange did not solicit or receive any written comments with
respect to the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve the proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

File Number SR-CBOE-2006-73 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-73. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-CBOE-2006-73 and should be submitted on or before
November 20, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-18081 Filed 10-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34908-34910]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11444]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97559; File No. SR-FICC-2023-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Adopt Fees for a New Pair-Off Message That May Be Processed Through
the EPN Service

May 24, 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 18, 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)(2) 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)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change consists of modifications to the FICC
Mortgage-Backed Securities Division (``MBSD'') EPN Rules (``EPN
Rules'') to adopt fees for a pair-off Message that EPN Users may
process through the EPN Service, as described in greater detail
below.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the EPN
Rules, as applicable, available at https://www.dtcc.com/legal/rules-and-procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
Overview of the Proposed Rule Change
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to adopt fees for a new
Message that EPN Users may process through the EPN Service relating to
the pair-off of trades in their TBA (``to-be-announced'') contracts in
agency mortgage-backed securities. The proposed fees are designed to
recover the cost of providing this service and would be set at a rate
that is lower than the rate charged for other Messages processed
through the EPN Service to incentivize EPN Users to use this voluntary
service.
Background
    While some trades in agency mortgage-backed securities submitted to
FICC for processing on a TBA basis are ``specified pool trades''
(transactions

based on a particular set of underlying mortgages), most are not. For
those trades, a critical step in the trading and settlement of the TBA
contracts is for sellers to inform their buyer counterparties what
pools of mortgages will be delivered to satisfy that trade. The EPN
Service provides EPN Users with an automated way to transmit this
information regarding their TBA contracts through Messages.
    The new pair-off Message, which will be announced to EPN Users by
Important Notice, would allow EPN Users that are buyers in a TBA
contract transaction to notify their seller counterparties of which
trades in that transaction should pair-off. Currently messages
regarding pair-offs are transmitted between buyers and sellers by
electronic mail using spreadsheets, which creates some risk that
information sharing is incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent and not
timely. In connection with its ongoing dialogue with mortgage-backed
security industry participants, FICC was asked to develop and offer
pair-off Messages through the EPN Service to minimize these risks. By
automating and standardizing the transmittal of this information, the
pair-off Messages would reduce those risks to the mortgage-backed
securities market. The new pair-off Messages will be designed similarly
to the other Messages transmitted through the EPN Service, where buyers
would receive an acknowledgement message verifying delivery and receipt
of the initial pair-off Message, and sellers would have the ability to
return a ``DK'' message if the trades or the terms of the trades in the
pair-off Message are not known. The use of this Message will be
voluntary and would allow users to eliminate the current manual process
of transmitting information regarding the pair-off of transactions.
    The proposed rate for the new pair-off Message was designed to be
consistent with the fees for other Messages currently processed through
the EPN Service. Rates for current Messages are charged per million
because these Messages involve pools to satisfy TBA trades and
specified pool trades, where the proposed rate for the new pair-off
Messages would be charged per Message because these Messages would be
sent at the TBA trade-level.
    In this fee structure, fees are generally lower for Messages
submitted earlier in the day to encourage submission of the initial
Message earlier in the day to allow for a response Message to be sent
on the same day. Therefore, the rate increases for initial Messages
submitted later in the day. The fee is lower for Messages submitted
after the 3:00 p.m. cut-off time for response Messages. The fee rates
being proposed are slightly lower than the rates for processing other
Messages through the EPN Service, which both reflects the low cost to
FICC to build these additional Messages and incentivizes EPN Users to
use this new, voluntary service.
Proposed Rule Change
    FICC is proposing to adopt fees for the use of the pair-off
Messages that may be processed through the EPN Service. The proposed
fees would be identified in the EPN Service Schedule of Charges in the
EPN Rules, as follows: pair-off send Messages would be $0.10 per
Message if sent from the opening of business to 1:00 p.m., $0.50 per
Message if sent from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m., $1.00 per Message if sent
from 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., and $0.75 per Message if sent from 3:00
p.m. to close of business; pair-off receive Messages would be $0.50 per
Message if received from opening of business to 1:00 p.m., $0.25 per
Message if received from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., and $0.15 per Message
if received from 3:00 p.m. to close of business.
    FICC is also proposing to clarify the descriptions of other fees
for the EPN Service to use consistent language in describing fees in
the EPN Service Schedule of Charges. For example, these proposed
changes would refer to the beginning of the business day as ``Opening
of Business'' and refer to end of the business day as ``Close of
Business'' consistently in the Schedule of Charges. These
clarifications would avoid any confusion in the descriptions of these
fees in the EPN Service Schedule of Charges, making them clearer to EPN
Users.
Member Impact
    The proposed fees would impact all EPN Users who voluntarily elect
to use the new pair-off Messages. As described above, the proposed fee
rates are designed to be comparable to the current fee rates charged
for Messages processed through the EPN Service and would be set at a
rate that is lower than the rates for processing other Messages in
order to incentivize EPN Users to use this voluntary service.
Implementation Timeframe
    FICC would implement the proposed rule change on August 31, 2023.
2. Statutory Basis
    FICC believes this proposal is consistent with the requirements of
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a
registered clearing agency. Specifically, FICC believes this proposal
is consistent with sections 17A(b)(3)(D) and (b)(3)(F) of the Act \6\
and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii), as promulgated under the Act,\7\ for the
reasons described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D) and (b)(3)(F).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its participants.\8\ FICC believes
the proposed fees would be allocated equitably among EPN Users that use
the new pair-off Message. FICC believes that the proposed fees are
reasonable because they are based on the expected investment costs to
develop pair-off Messages and such fee changes are expected to recover
such investment and operating costs in an appropriate timeframe. As
noted above, FICC has set these fees at a rate that is lower than the
rate charged for other Messages processed through the EPN Service to
incentivize EPN Users to use this voluntary service. FICC notes that
once the proposed pair-off Message fees are implemented, the fees would
be periodically reviewed under FICC's procedures to determine whether
FICC is continuing to appropriately control its costs and to regularly
review pricing levels against costs of operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the rules
of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\9\ FICC believes
the proposed rule change is consistent with section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act because the new pair-off Message would automate and standardize the
transmittal of information related to transaction pair-offs, minimizing
the risks presented by the current process of transmitting this
information through electronic mail and spreadsheets. By reducing the
risks that information sharing is incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent
and not timely, the new pair-off Messages would promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and,
therefore, are consistent with the requirements of the Act, in
particular section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii) under the Act requires a covered clearing
agency to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies
and procedures reasonably designed to provide sufficient information to
enable participants to identify and evaluate the risks, fees, and other
material costs they

incur by participating in the covered clearing agency.\11\ The proposed
fees would be clearly and transparently published in the EPN Service
Schedule of Charges in the EPN Rules, which are available on a public
website,\12\ thereby enabling EPN Users to identify the fees associated
with using the new pair-off Messages. Additionally, the proposed
changes to clarify the descriptions of other fees for the EPN Service
would make those descriptions consistent throughout the EPN Service
Schedule of Charges, reducing the risk of any confusion in the
descriptions of these fees and making them clearer to EPN Users. As
such, FICC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule
17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii) under the Act.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
    \12\ See supra note 5.
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FICC does not believe the proposed rule changes would impact
competition. The proposed rule changes would adopt fees for the use of
a voluntary service. Because EPN Users would not be obligated to use
the new pair-off Messages, FICC believes the proposed rule change would
not have any impact on competition.

(C) 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-submit-comments. 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<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FICC reserves the right to not 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) of the Act \14\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\15\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 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-2023-007 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-2023-007. 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-2023-007 and should be submitted on or
before June 21, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-11444 Filed 5-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 29133-29134]
[DOCID:fr20my08-49]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0353; FRL-8568-1]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Motor Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Economy Compliance:
Light Duty Vehicles, Light Duty Trucks, and Highway Motorcycles; EPA
ICR No. 0783.54, OMB Control No. 2060-0104

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on November 30, 2008. Before submitting the ICR to
OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 21, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0353, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket, Mailcode 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Center, (EPA/DC), EPA, West Room
B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0353. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Sohacki, Compliance and
Innovative Strategies Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor,
Michigan, 48105; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 734-214-
4869; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0353, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air Docket in the
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, EPA Headquarters Library, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading
Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of
information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified in this
document.

What Information is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider when I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does this Apply to?

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0353

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
manufacturers

and independent commercial importers into the United States of light
duty vehicles, light duty trucks and highway motorcycles.
    Title: Motor Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Economy Compliance: Light
Duty Vehicles, Light Duty Trucks, and Highway Motorcycles.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 0783.54, OMB Control No. 2060-0104.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on November
30, 2008. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.)
manufacturers and importers of light duty vehicles (passenger cars),
light trucks, and motorcycles must have a certificate of conformity
issued by EPA covering any vehicle they intend to offer for sale. In
addition, light duty vehicles and light truck manufacturers and
importers must also submit fuel economy information and reports
required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (49 U.S.C. 32901 et
seq.). EPA reviews vehicle information and manufacturer test data to
determine if the vehicle design conforms to applicable requirements and
to verify that the required testing has been performed. After a
certificate of conformity has been issued, subsequent audit and
enforcement actions may be taken based on the initial information
submitted as well as on information submitted while the vehicles are in
service. Until a vehicle is available for purchase, information is
confidential. Some proprietary information is permanently confidential.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average
346.24 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 173.
    Frequency of response: Yearly and occasionally.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
10.82.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 647,100.
    Estimated total annual costs: $58,343,913. This includes an
estimated labor burden cost of $39,876,745 and an estimated cost of
$18,467,168 for capital investment or maintenance and operational
costs.

What is the Next Step in the Process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: May 14, 2008.
Karl J. Simon,
Director, Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E8-11296 Filed 5-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 12 (Friday, January 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 3193]
[FR Doc No: 2014-00744]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL14-17-000]

New England Power Generators Association, Inc. v. ISO New England
Inc.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on January 8, 2014, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 and sections 206 and 306 of the Federal
Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824(e) and 825(e), New England Power Generators
Association, Inc. (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against ISO
New England Inc. (Respondent) alleging that, Respondent's Transmission,
Markets & Services Tariff is unjust and unreasonable. Complainant
request that the Commission order the Respondent to revise its
Transmission, Markets & Services Tariff to prevent price suppression
that will result if capacity from resources whose Non-Price retirement
Requests have been rejected by the Respondent for local reliability
reasons is then counted against the Installed Capacity Requirement for
purposes of the upcoming Forward Capacity Auction.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for the Respondent as listed in the Commission's list
of Corporate Offiicals.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 21, 2014.

    Dated: January 10, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-00744 Filed 1-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                            WORKSHOP AGENDA (FINAL)
Joint Interim Approaches to NAS Recommendations for Assessing Risks to Endangered and Threatened Species from Pesticides
                WEDNESDAY MORNING, JUNE 29  -  Plenary Sessions
                                     TIME
                               SESSION SCHEDULE
                                     8:00
                              Registration Opens
                                     9:00
Opening Comments
                                     9:15
Overview of Aquatic Breakout Discussion  -  Chuck Peck (EPA)
                                     9:55
Overview of Refinements Discussion  -  Melissa Panger (EPA)
                                     10:20
Break
                                     10:40
Overview of Weight of Evidence Discussion  -  Kris Garber / Elizabeth Donovan (EPA)
                                     11:20
NatureServe on Range Modeling  -  Regan Smyth, NatureServe
                                     11:45
Breakout Group Instructions  -  Bernalyn McGaughey (CSI, Workshop Steering Committee)
                                     12:00
Lunch (on own)

              WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON, JUNE 29  -  Breakout Sessions
                                     TIME
                               SESSION SCHEDULE
                                    GROUPS
                   AQUATIC 1 (Chuck Peck and George Noguchi)

Improving Aquatic Modeling: Changes to conceptual and mathematical approaches incorporated into Bins 3 and 4 (flowing waters)
  Modifications to EPA's current modeling approach and parameterization to flowing bins
  Use of other watershed models (e.g., SWAT, WARP)
                    AQUATIC 2 (Mark Corbin and Al Barefoot)

Improving Aquatic Modeling: Evaluating watershed model results
  Use of multiple lines-of-evidence to evaluate watershed model results
  Role of and metadata requirements for use of monitoring data in evaluating watershed results
                                 REFINEMENTS 1
                    (Bill Eckel/Steve Lennartz and Jake Li)

Refinements to Steps 1 and 2: Spatial analysis
  Methods to better identify pesticide use sites (ag and non-ag)
  Methods to better understand the distribution of individuals within a listed species range
  Improvements to the overlap analyses between species range and potential pesticide use

                                 REFINEMENTS 2
                       (Melissa Panger and Karen Myers)

Refinements to Steps 1 and 2: Non-spatial analysis
  Identification of use patterns (e.g., those resulting in minimal exposures) and/or listed species (e.g., those found on uninhabited islands) that may not need to be fully evaluated
  Methods to utilize thresholds that are more probabilistic
  Methods to incorporate exposure durations into the analysis of potential effects
                                WOE 1 (ANIMALS)
                      (Kris Garber and Spencer Mortenson)

Weight of Evidence for Listed Animals
    Improvements to the evaluation of information and criteria used to draw risk conclusions
    Incorporation of additional information into the weight of evidence approach

                                WOE 2 (PLANTS)
                  (Elizabeth Donavon and Bernalyn McGaughey)

Weight of Evidence for Listed Plants
    Improvements to the evaluation of information and criteria used to draw risk conclusions
    Incorporation of additional information into the weight of evidence approach

                                     ROOMS
                               Leopold (10-12)
                                (12 registered)
                                Beatie (17-20)
                                (16 registered)
                                Roosevelt (24)
                                (19 registered)
                                 Stickel (30+)
                                (21 registered)
                               Hamilton A (16)
                               (16 registered)
                        Hamilton B (16) (13 registered)
                                     1:00
                     Aquatic 1  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                     Aquatic 2  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                   Refinements 1  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                   Refinements 2  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                  WOE 1 (Animals)  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                   WOE 1 (Plants)  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                                     3:00
                                     BREAK
                                     3:30
                     Aquatic 1  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                     Aquatic 2  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                   Refinements 1  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                   Refinements 2  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                  WOE 1 (Animals)  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                   WOE 1 (Plants)  -  Charge Questions Set 1
                                     5:30
                                    ADJOURN
                                     5:45
        NO-HOST SOCIAL - Buffalo Wild Wings (Next Door to Meeting Area)

                    THURSDAY, JUNE 30  -  Breakout Sessions
                                     TIME
                               SESSION SCHEDULE
                                     8:30
                              Registration Opens
                                    GROUPS
                                   AQUATIC 1
                                   AQUATIC 2
                                 REFINEMENTS 1
                                 REFINEMENTS 2
                                WOE 1 (ANIMALS)
                                WOE 2 (PLANTS)
                                     9:00
                     Aquatic 1  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                     Aquatic 2  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                   Refinements 1  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                   Refinements 2  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                  WOE 1 (Animals)  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                   WOE 1 (Plants)  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                                     10:30
                                     BREAK
                                     11:00
                     Aquatic 1  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                     Aquatic 2  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                   Refinements 1  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                   Refinements 2  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                  WOE 1 (Animals)  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                   WOE 1 (Plants)  -  Charge Questions Set 2
                                     12:30
                                LUNCH (on own)
                                     1:30
                       Aquatic 1  -  Finalize Responses
                       Aquatic 2  -  Finalize Responses
                     Refinements 1  -  Finalize Responses
                     Refinements 2  -  Finalize Responses
                    WOE 1 (Animals)  -  Finalize Responses
                     WOE 1 (Plants)  -  Finalize Responses
                                     2:30
                                     BREAK
                                     2:45
          Final Overview  -  Breakout Groups Report Out (30 min each)
                                     5:45
                                    Wrap-up
                                     6:00
                                    Adjourn