[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 144 (Friday, July 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41123-41125]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16233]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92504; File No. SR-ICC-2021-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICE Clear Credit
Operating Agreement and Governance Playbook

July 26, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
\1\ and Rule 19b-4,\2\ notice is hereby given that on July 20, 2021,
ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICE Clear Credit'' or the ``Clearing House'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have been
prepared primarily by ICE Clear Credit. 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. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend and
restate ICE Clear Credit's Fifth Amended and Restated Operating
Agreement (such amended and restated document, the Sixth Amended and
Restated Operating Agreement or ``Sixth A&R Operating Agreement'') to
(i) reduce the number of managers on its Board of Managers (the
``Board'') designated by its Parent, ICE US Holding Company L.P.,
(``ICE-designated managers''), and (ii) remove outdated provisions and
make certain other non-substantive amendments.\3\ ICE Clear Credit
proposes corresponding changes to the Governance Playbook to update the
composition of the Board and to make other non-substantive amendments.
These revisions do not require any changes to the ICE Clear Credit
Clearing Rules (the ``Rules'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the Sixth A&R Operating Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Credit included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice and discussed
any comments it received on the proposed rule change, security-based
swap submission, or advance notice. The text of these statements may be
examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ICE Clear Credit has
prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of
the most significant aspects of these statements.

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

(a) Purpose
    ICE Clear Credit proposes to adopt the Sixth A&R Operating
Agreement, which would amend and restate its Fifth Amended and Restated
Operating Agreement, and to make corresponding changes to the
Governance Playbook. The proposed revisions are described in detail as
follows.
I. Sixth A&R Operating Agreement
    ICE Clear Credit is proposing to adopt the Sixth A&R Operating
Agreement to reduce the number of ICE-designated managers on the Board
and to remove outdated provisions and make other non-substantive
amendments.
Board of Managers
    Proposed amendments to Section 3.02(a)(i) would reduce the number
of Parent Independent Managers (those independent managers designated
by the Parent with no material relationships with ICE Clear Credit or
its affiliates) from four to three managers. It would also remove all
references to names of such Parent Independent Managers, as such
persons have been appointed and need not be named in the operating
agreement. Section 3.02(a)(ii) would reduce the number of Parent Non-
Independent Managers (those non-independent managers designated by the
Parent) from three to two managers. It would also similarly remove all
references to names of such Parent Non-Independent Managers. The
amendments would not change the numbers of Risk Committee Independent
Managers or Risk Committee Non-Independent Managers (those independent
and non-independent managers designated by the Risk Committee under the
Rules, rather than by the Parent).
    The amendments also update Section 3.03 to reflect prior amendments
to the operating agreement that the Board will meet no less frequently
than quarterly at such time and place as may be determined by the chair
and may meet more frequently (either in person or telephonically) as
circumstances dictate, and to remove a requirement that the Board meet
telephonically no less than twice per calendar year.
Removal of Outdated Information Related to Conversion
    Sections 2.01 and 2.02 would be revised to remove outdated
provisions of the Fifth Amended and Restated Operating Agreement
relating to the operation of the Clearing House prior to its conversion
in 2011 to a Delaware limited liability company and to reflect the
occurrence of that conversion. Related defined terms would be removed
and/or updated as necessary to reflect these changes.
General Drafting Clarifications and Improvements
    ICE Clear Credit additionally proposes other general drafting
clarifications and improvements. The proposed changes revise outdated
references to the name, jurisdiction of organization, and/or governing
document of certain Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. entities and
replace references to the Chief Executive Officer with references to
the President (which is the correct title of the relevant officer) to
reflect prior amendments to the operating agreement. The other changes
that would be made throughout the Sixth A&R Operating Agreement include
updating the Clearing House's and the Parent's notice information as
presented in Section 7.01(a) and (b), updating the Clearing House's
registered office and agent in Delaware, referencing the Fifth Amended
and Restated Operating Agreement where necessary, updating the
definition of ICE's Board of Director Governance Principles to refer to
the current Independence Policy of the Board of Directors of ICE as
well as other typographical and grammatical updates.
II. Governance Playbook
    ICE Clear Credit proposes conforming changes to update the
composition of the Board and to make other non-substantive amendments
to the Governance Playbook, which consolidates governance arrangements
set forth in ICE Clear Credit's Rules, operating agreement, and other
ICE Clear Credit policies and procedures. The changes to Section III.A
would similarly reduce the number of Parent

Independent Managers from four to three managers and the number of
Parent Non-Independent Managers from three to two managers. Footnote 1
would reference an amended version of the limited partnership agreement
of the Parent and update the jurisdiction of organization of the
Parent.\4\ In Section III.C, ICE Clear Credit proposes a minor
clarification with respect to the receipt and review of resignation
letters from managers. Additionally, the proposed changes to Section
III.F update the number of independent managers on the Board as well as
a link to ICE's Board of Director Governance Principles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See SR-ICC-2021-010 for more information on the change in
the jurisdiction of organization of the Parent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Credit believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \5\ and the
regulations thereunder applicable to it. In particular, Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \6\ requires, among other things, that the
rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to
the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions, the safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody
or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and
the protection of investors and the public interest. The proposed
amendments to the number of ICE-designated managers are intended to
promote efficient operation of the Board while maintaining appropriate
diversity of viewpoints, representation of the interests of
Participants and independence standards for managers. Specifically, as
noted above, the amendments will not affect the number of managers
designated by the Risk Committee under the Rules. ICE Clear Credit
believes a board of 9 managers (rather than 11) remains an appropriate
size for oversight of its ongoing operations. The other proposed
clarifications and changes enhance readability and ensure that the
Sixth A&R Operating Agreement and the Governance Playbook are clear and
up to date, including by removing outdated provisions, incorporating
prior amendments, or making other general clarifications and
improvements, which would further ensure that relevant individuals
carry out their responsibilities under the documents. In ICE Clear
Credit's view, the amendments will thus enhance the overall governance
of the Clearing House and are consistent with the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of cleared contracts, the safeguarding of
securities and funds in the custody or control of ICE Clear Credit or
for which it is responsible, and the protection of investors and the
public interest. Accordingly, the amendments satisfy the requirements
of Section 17A(b)(3)(F).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, Section 17A(b)(3)(C) of the Act \8\ requires that the
rules of the clearing agency assure a fair representation of its
shareholders (or members) and participants in the selection of its
directors and administration of its affairs. The Sixth A&R Operating
Agreement and the Governance Playbook will continue to set out the
composition of the Board, with five managers (three independent and two
non-independent) designated by the Parent and four managers (two
independent and two non-independent) designated by the Risk Committee
following the proposed amendments. The amendments will not affect the
number of managers designated by the Risk Committee, the majority of
whose members (9 of 12) are Participant representatives, and
Participants will continue to be represented on the Board. As such, ICE
Clear Credit believes that its governance arrangements, as modified by
the proposed amendments, will continue to provide a fair representation
of its shareholders and participants in the selection of its directors
and administration of its affairs and are thus consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(C) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(C).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2) \10\ requires clearing agencies to establish
reasonably designed policies and procedures to provide for governance
arrangements that, among other matters, establish that the board of
directors have appropriate experience and skills to discharge their
duties and responsibilities and consider the interests of relevant
stakeholders of the clearing agency. As noted above, ICE Clear Credit
believes the reduction in the number of ICE-designated managers is
consistent with the ongoing effective oversight of the Clearing House
by the Board. The amendments will not affect the number of managers
designated by the Risk Committee, and thus will not adversely affect
representation of Participants on the Board. Moreover, a majority of
the Board will continue to be independent and have no material
relationships with ICE Clear Credit and its affiliates. As such, ICE
Clear Credit believes that the amendments set out in the Sixth A&R
Operating Agreement and Governance Playbook are consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(2).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17 Ad-22(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICE Clear Credit does not believe the proposed amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The amendments
are being adopted to update ICE Clear Credit's operating agreement and
Governance Playbook, and specifically the number of managers designated
by the Parent. As a result, ICE Clear Credit does not expect that the
proposed changes will adversely affect access to clearing or the
ability of Participants, their customers or other market participants
to continue to clear contracts. ICE Clear Credit also does not believe
the amendments would materially affect the cost of clearing or
otherwise impact competition among market participants or limit market
participants' choices for selecting clearing services. Accordingly, ICE
Clear Credit does not believe the amendments would impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose
of the Act.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed amendments have not been
solicited or received by ICE Clear Credit. ICE Clear Credit will notify
the Commission of any written comments received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate 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 or disapprove such 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICC-2021-017 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-ICC-2021-017. 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 such filings will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Credit and on ICE
Clear Credit's website at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation. 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-ICC-2021-017 and should be
submitted on or before August 20, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-16233 Filed 7-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 22, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 13)]
[Notices]
[Page 4065-4068]
[DOCID:fr22ja09-84]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59244; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2008-102]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 2 Thereto To
Establish a Pilot Program for NASDAQ Basic Data Feeds

January 13, 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 December 23, 2008, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by NASDAQ. On January 8, 2009, NASDAQ filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. On January 12, 2009,
NASDAQ replaced the original filing and Amendment No. 1 by filing
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change.\3\ 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.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 2, NASDAQ removed data from the jointly-
operated NASDAQ/FINRA Trade Reporting Facility (``TRF'') from the
NASDAQ Basic product. NASDAQ notes that a separate filing will be
made in the event approval is sought to include TRF data in this
product. In addition, NASDAQ made technical changes including
changing the name of the Alternext market, clarifying that no fees
will be assessed during the first month of the pilot, and explaining
the application of internal and external distributor fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ is proposing a rule change to establish a five-month pilot
to offer ``NASDAQ Basic'' which is a real time data feed combining both
NASDAQ's Best Bid and Offer (``QBBO'') and the NASDAQ Last Sale. NASDAQ
will offer information separately for NASDAQ-, NYSE- and Amex-listed
stocks. NASDAQ Basic will be available free of charge for the first
month of the five-month pilot.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Changes are marked to the rule text that appears in the
electronic NASDAQ Manual found at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

7047. NASDAQ Basic

    (a) For a five-month pilot period commencing on February 1, 2009,
NASDAQ shall offer proprietary data feeds containing real-time market
information from the NASDAQ Market Center. There shall be no fee for
NASDAQ Basic for the first month of the pilot.
    (1) ``NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ'' shall contain NASDAQ's best bid and
offer and last sale for NASDAQ-listed stocks; and
    (2) ``NASDAQ Basic for NYSE'' shall contain NASDAQ's best bid and
offer and last sale for NYSE-listed stocks.
    (3) ``NASDAQ Basic for Alternext'' shall contain NASDAQ's best bid
and offer and last sale for Alternext-listed stocks.
    (b) User Fees
    (1) Except as provided in (b)(2) and (b)(3), for the NASDAQ Basic
product there shall be a per subscriber monthly charge of $10 for
NASDAQ-listed stocks, $5 for NYSE-listed stocks, and $5 for Alternext-
listed stocks; or
    (2) For each non-professional subscriber, as defined in Rule
7011(b), there shall be a per subscriber monthly charge of $0.50 for
NASDAQ-listed stocks, $0.25 for NYSE-listed stocks, and $0.25 for
Alternext-listed stocks; or
    (3) There shall be a per query fee for NASDAQ Basic of $0.0025 for
NASDAQ-listed stocks, $0.0015 for NYSE-listed stocks, and $0.0015 for
Alternext-listed stocks.
    (c) Distributor Fees
    (1) Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ-listed stocks shall
pay a fee of $1,500 per month for either internal or external
distribution or both.
    (2) Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for NYSE-listed stocks shall
pay a fee of $250 per month for internal distribution or $625 per month
external distribution. Distributors that pay the external distribution
fee may distribute NASDAQ Basic for NYSE-listed stocks internally with
no additional distribution fee.
    (3) Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for Alternext-listed stocks
shall pay a fee of 250 per month for internal distribution or $625 per
month external distribution. Distributors that pay the external
distribution fee may distribute NASDAQ Basic for Alternext-listed
stocks internally with no additional distribution fee.
    (4) Each Distributor that receives Direct Access to the NASDAQ
Basic shall also pay a monthly fee of $2,000 for NASDAQ-listed stocks,
$1,000 for NYSE-listed stocks, and $1,000 for Alternext-listed stocks.
    (5) The terms ``Distributor'' and ``Direct Access'' shall have the
same meanings as set forth in Rule 7019.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NASDAQ included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below, and is set forth in Sections A, B, and C below.

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

1. Purpose
    In July of 2008, NASDAQ successfully launched a market data product
that for the first time made available to investors real-time execution
prices based solely on proprietary data from the NASDAQ Market Center
and FINRA/NASDAQ Trade Reporting Facility. Building on the success of
that pilot, NASDAQ now proposes a five-month pilot to offer real-time
quotation data in combination with last sale data solely from the
NASDAQ Market Center as set forth below. There will be no fees for
NASDAQ Basic for the first month of the pilot.
    NASDAQ Basic is a ``Level 1'' product containing two data elements:
(1) Quotation information from the NASDAQ Market Center and (2) last
sale data from the NASDAQ Market Center. NASDAQ Basic will be available
in three forms, NASDAQ Basic for NASDAQ, NASDAQ Basic for NYSE, and
NASDAQ Basic for Alternext.
    As with the recently-approved NASDAQ Last Sale product, NASDAQ
Basic is designed to meet the needs of current and prospective
subscribers that do not need or are unwilling to pay for the
consolidated data provided by the consolidated Level 1 products.
Providing investors with new options for receiving market data, as
NASDAQ proposes, was a primary goal of the market data amendments
adopted in Regulation NMS. NASDAQ developed these product proposals in
consultation with industry members and also market data vendors and
purchasers that expressed an interest in exchange-only data for
instances where consolidated data is no longer required to be purchased
and displayed.
    Consistent with the sale of consolidated data and of NASDAQ
proprietary data, NASDAQ proposes to charge a fee for professional use
of NASDAQ Basic, and a reduced fee for non-professional use.
Specifically, for each professional user of the NASDAQ Basic product,
there will be a per subscriber monthly charge of $10 for NASDAQ-listed
stocks, $5 for NYSE-listed stocks, and $5 for Alternext-listed stocks.
For each non-professional subscriber, there will be a per subscriber
monthly charge of $0.50 for NASDAQ-listed stocks, $0.25 for NYSE-listed
stocks, and $0.25 for Alternext-listed stocks. ``Non-professional'' is
a term that is well-understood within the vendor and user communities,
and it will have the same meaning in this proposed rule as it currently
has in Rule 7011(b), For users that do not require a monthly
subscription, there will be a per query option available for NASDAQ
Basic, with a fee of $0.0025 for NASDAQ-listed stocks, $0.0015 for
NYSE-listed stocks, and $0.0015 for Alternext-listed stocks. Vendors
that report per query usage to NASDAQ are permitted to convert to
monthly subscriptions when the cost of individual users' queries
exceeds the cost of the monthly subscription.
    As with the distribution of other NASDAQ proprietary products, all
distributors of NASDAQ Basic will be assessed a Distributor Fee in
addition to any applicable usage fees. Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic
for NASDAQ-listed stocks shall pay a fee of $1,500 per month for either
internal or external distribution. Each Distributor of NASDAQ Basic for
NYSE-listed stocks shall pay a fee of $250 per month for internal
distribution or $625 per month external distribution. Each Distributor
of NASDAQ Basic for Alternext-listed stocks shall pay a fee of $250 per
month for internal distribution or $625 per month external
distribution. Distributors that pay the fee for external distribution
of NASDAQ Basic for NYSE and Alternext may distribute the same data
internally for no additional fee. In addition, each Distributor that
receives Direct Access to the NASDAQ Basic shall also pay a monthly fee
of $2,000 for NASDAQ-listed stocks, $1,000 for NYSE-listed stocks, and
$1,000 for AMEX-listed stocks. The terms ``Distributor'' and ``Direct
Access'' are well-understood by market data distributors and will have
the same meanings in this proposed rule as currently set forth in
NASDAQ Rule 7019.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\6\ as stated above, in that it provides an
equitable allocation of reasonable fees among users and recipients of
NASDAQ data. In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-
regulatory organizations and broker-dealers increased authority and
flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the public. It was
believed that this authority would expand the amount of data available
to consumers, and also spur innovation and competition for the
provision of market data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f-3(b)(4) [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NASDAQ Basic market data products proposed here appear to be
precisely the sort of market data product that the Commission
envisioned when it adopted Regulation NMS. The Commission concluded
that Regulation NMS--by deregulating the market in proprietary data--
would itself further the Act's goals of facilitating efficiency and
competition:

    [E]fficiency is promoted when broker-dealers who do not need the
data beyond the prices, sizes, market center identifications of the
NBBO and consolidated last sale information are not required to
receive (and pay for) such data. The Commission also believes that
efficiency is promoted when broker-dealers may choose to receive
(and pay for) additional market data based on their own internal
analysis of the need for such data.\7\

    \7\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70
FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

By removing ``unnecessary regulatory restrictions'' on the ability of
exchanges to sell their own data, Regulation NMS advanced the goals of
the Act and the principles reflected in its legislative history. If the
free market should determine whether proprietary data is sold to
broker-dealers at all, it follows that the price at which such data is
sold should be set by the market as well.
    NASDAQ's ability to price NASDAQ Basic is constrained by (1)
competition between exchanges and other trading platforms that compete
with each other in a variety of dimensions; (2) the existence of
inexpensive real-time consolidated data and free delayed consolidated
data, and (3) the inherent contestability of the market for proprietary
last sale data.
    The market for proprietary data products is currently competitive
and inherently contestable because there is fierce competition for the
inputs necessary to the creation of proprietary data and strict pricing
discipline for the proprietary products themselves. Numerous exchanges
compete with each other for listings, trades, and market data itself,
providing virtually limitless opportunities for entrepreneurs who wish
to produce and distribute their own market data. This proprietary data
is produced by each individual exchange, as well as other entities, in
a vigorously competitive market.
    Broker-dealers currently have numerous alternative venues for their
order flow, including eleven self-regulatory organization (``SRO'')
markets, as well as broker-dealers (``BDs'') and aggregators such as
the Direct Edge and NexTrade electronic communications network
(``ECN''). Each SRO market competes to produce transaction reports via
trade executions,

and an ever-increasing number of FINRA-regulated Trade Reporting
Facilities (``TRFs'') compete to attract internalized transaction
reports. It is common for BDs to further and exploit this competition
by sending their order flow and transaction reports to multiple
markets, rather than providing them all to a single market. Competitive
markets for order flow, executions, and transaction reports provide
pricing discipline for the inputs of proprietary data products.
    The large number of SROs, TRFs, and ECNs that currently produce
proprietary data or are currently capable of producing it provides
further pricing discipline for proprietary data products. Each SRO,
TRF, ECN and BD is currently permitted to produce proprietary data
products, and many currently do or have announced plans to do so,
including NASDAQ, NYSE, Amex, NYSEArca, and BATS.
    Any ECN or BD can combine with any other ECN, broker-dealer, or
multiple ECNs or BDs to produce jointly proprietary data products.
Additionally, non-broker-dealers such as order routers like LAVA, as
well as market data vendors can facilitate single or multiple broker-
dealers' production of proprietary data products. The potential sources
of proprietary products are virtually limitless.
    The fact that proprietary data from ECNs, BDs, and vendors can by-
pass SROs is significant in two respects. First, non-SROs can compete
directly with SROs for the production and distribution of proprietary
data products, as Archipelago and BATS Trading did prior to registering
as SROs. Second, because a single order or transaction report can
appear in an SRO proprietary product, a non-SRO proprietary product, or
both, the data available in proprietary products is exponentially
greater than the actual number of orders and transaction reports that
exist in the marketplace writ large.
    Consolidated data provides two additional measures of pricing
discipline for proprietary data products that are a subset of the
consolidated data stream. First, the consolidated data is widely
available in real-time at $1 per month for non-professional users.
Second, consolidated data is also available at no cost with a 15- or
20-minute delay. Because consolidated data contains marketwide
information, it effectively places a cap on the fees assessed for
proprietary data (such as last sale data) that is simply a subset of
the consolidated data. The mere availability of low-cost or free
consolidated data provides a powerful form of pricing discipline for
proprietary data products that contain data elements that are a subset
of the consolidated data, by highlighting the optional nature of
proprietary products.
    Market data vendors provide another form of price discipline for
proprietary data products because they control the primary means of
access to end users. Vendors impose price restraints based upon their
business models. For example, vendors such as Bloomberg and Reuters
that assess a surcharge on data they sell may refuse to offer
proprietary products that end users will not purchase in sufficient
numbers. Internet portals, such as Google, impose a discipline by
providing only that data which will enable them to attract ``eyeballs''
that contribute to their advertising revenue. Retail broker-dealers,
such as Schwab and Fidelity, offer their customers proprietary data
only if it promotes trading and generates sufficient commission
revenue. Although the business models may differ, these vendors'
pricing discipline is the same: they can simply refuse to purchase any
proprietary data product that fails to provide sufficient value. NASDAQ
and other producers of proprietary data products must understand and
respond to these varying business models and pricing disciplines in
order to successfully market proprietary data products.
    In addition to the competition and price discipline described
above, the market for proprietary data products is also highly
contestable because market entry is rapid, inexpensive, and profitable.
The history of electronic trading is replete with examples entrants
that swiftly grew into some of the largest electronic trading platforms
and proprietary data producers: Archipelago, Bloomberg Tradebook,
Island, RediBook, Attain, TracECN, and BATS Trading. Today, BATS
publishes its data at no charge on its Web site in order to attract
order flow, and it uses market data revenue rebates from the resulting
executions to maintain low execution charges for its users.
    Several ECNs have existed profitably for many years with a minimal
share of trading, including Bloomberg Tradebook and NexTrade.
    Regulation NMS, by deregulating the market for proprietary data,
has increased the contestability of that market. While broker-dealers
have previously published their proprietary data individually,
Regulation NMS encourages market data vendors and broker-dealers to
produce proprietary products cooperatively in a manner never before
possible. Multiple market data vendors already have the capability to
aggregate data and disseminate it on a profitable scale, including
Bloomberg, Reuters and Thomson. New entrants are already on the
horizon, including ``Project BOAT,'' a consortium of financial
institutions that is assembling a cooperative trade collection facility
in Europe. These institutions are active in the United States and could
rapidly and profitably export the Project Boat technology to exploit
the opportunities offered by Regulation NMS.
    In establishing the price for NASDAQ Basic, NASDAQ considered the
competitiveness of the market for BBO and last sale data and all of the
implications of that competition. NASDAQ believes that it has
considered all relevant factors and has not considered irrelevant
factors in order to establish a fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably
discriminatory fee and an equitable allocation of fees among all users.

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

    NASDAQ 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, as amended. To the contrary, as
set forth in detail above, the market for the data elements contained
in NASDAQ Basic is already competitive, with both real-time and delayed
consolidated data as well as the ability for innumerable entities begin
rapidly and inexpensively to offer competitive last sale data products.
Moreover, NASDAQ expects that the New York, NYSEArca, BATS, and
American Stock Exchanges will each respond to this proposal with a
similar proposal to distribute competing data products. Under the
regulatory regime of Regulation NMS, there is no limit to the number of
competing products that can be developed quickly and at low cost. The
Commission should not stand in the way of enhanced competition.

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

    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 NASDAQ consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such 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-NASDAQ-2008-102 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-NASDAQ-2008-102. 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, on official
business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of NASDAQ. 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-NASDAQ-2008-102 and should be submitted on or before
February 12, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-1231 Filed 1-21-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 9530-9531]
[DOCID:fr24fe06-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PH06-3-000]

AGL Resources Inc.; Notice of Petition for Exemption From the
Requirements of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005

February 14, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 8, 2006, AGL Resources Inc. filed a
petition seeking, pursuant to 18 CFR 366.4(b)(1), exemption from the
requirements of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005 pursuant
to 18 CFR 366.3(a) or 18 CFR 366.3(b).
    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 and 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, pursuant to 18 CFR

385.214. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 1, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-2625 Filed 2-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 53494]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24792]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER18-266-000]

Southern Partners, INC; 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
Southern Partners, INC'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 November 28, 2017.
    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 should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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 protected]. or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 8, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-24792 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 132 (Monday, July 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44888-44889]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16332]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0477]

Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Federal advisory committee working group meeting.

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

SUMMARY: A working group of the Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory
Committee will meet to work on Task Statement 30, which asks the
committee to evaluate utilizing military education, training, and
assessment to satisfy national and STCW \1\ credential requirements.
The working group will specifically consider a military-to-mariner
training and program/course approval workshop for Officer in Charge
Navigation Watch and Officer in Charge Engineering Watch. These
meetings will be open to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended.

DATES: The Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee working group
is scheduled to meet daily from August 2, 2016 to August 4, 2016 from 8
a.m. until 5:30 p.m. Central Daylight Time. Please note that these
meetings may adjourn early if the working group has completed its
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
business.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at the U.S. Naval Station Great
Lakes, 2121 Paul Jones St., Building 122, Great Lakes, IL 60088.
Entrance to the Base must be made via the Naval Station Great Lakes
Main Gate and government issued identification will be required. Please
arrive at least 30 minutes early for processing. For further
information about the meeting facilities, please contact Lieutenant
Junior Grade Boris Kun at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please be advised that all
attendees are required to notify the Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory
Committee Alternate Designated Federal Officer of your attendance no
later than July 21, 2016 using the contact information provided in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact
the Alternate Designated Federal Officer as soon as possible.
    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment
on the issues to be considered by the working group as listed in the
``Agenda'' section below. Written comments for distribution to working
group members must be submitted no later than July 21, 2016, if you
want the working group members to be able to review your comments
before the meeting, and must be identified by docket number USCG-2016-
0477. Written comments may be submitted using the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If you encounter technical
difficulties, contact the individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words
``Department of Homeland Security'' and the docket number for this
action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management
System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR
15086).
    Docket Search: For access to the docket to read documents or
comments related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG-2016-0477 in the Search box, press Enter, and then click on the
item you wish to view.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Davis Breyer, Alternate Designated
Federal Officer of the Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee,
2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593-
7509, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is in compliance with
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, title 5 United States Code
Appendix.
    The Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee was established
under authority of section 310 of the Howard Coble Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Act of 2014, title 46, United States Code,
section 8108, and chartered under the provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (title 5, United States Code, Appendix). The
Committee acts solely in an advisory capacity to the Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security through the Commandant of the Coast
Guard on matters relating to personnel in the United States merchant
marine, including training, qualifications, certification,
documentation, and fitness standards and other matters as assigned by
the Commandant; shall review and comment on proposed Coast Guard
regulations and policies relating to personnel in the United States
merchant

marine, including training, qualifications, certification,
documentation, and fitness standards; may be given special assignments
by the Secretary and may conduct studies, inquiries, workshops, and
fact finding in consultation with individuals and groups in the private
sector and with State or local governments; shall advise, consult with,
and make recommendations reflecting its independent judgment to the
Secretary.

Agenda

Day 1

    The agenda for the August 2, 2016 meeting is as follows:
    (1) The working group will meet briefly to discuss Task Statement
30, Utilizing military education, training and assessment for the
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers and U.S. Coast Guard Certifications; the
purpose and goals of this intercessional; and the organization of this
intercessional/workshop;
    (2) Reports of working sub-groups. At the end of the day, the
working sub-groups will report to the full working group on what was
accomplished in their meetings. The full working group will not take
action on these reports on this date. Any action taken as a result of
this working group meeting will be taken on day 3 of the meeting.
    (3) Public comment period.
    (4) Adjournment of meeting.

Day 2

    The agenda for the August 3, 2016 meeting is as follows:
    (1) The working group will meet briefly to discuss Task Statement
30, Utilizing military education, training and assessment for the
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers and U.S. Coast Guard Certifications; the
purpose and goals of this intercessional for this date; and any
adaptations to the organization of this intercessional;
    (2) Reports of working sub-groups. At the end of the day, the
working sub-groups will report to the full working group on what was
accomplished in their meetings. The full working group will not take
action on these reports on this date. Any action taken as a result of
this working group meeting will be taken on day 3 of the meeting.
    (3) Public comment period.
    (4) Adjournment of meeting.

Day 3

    The agenda for the August 4, 2016 meeting is as follows:
    (1) The working group will meet briefly to discuss Task Statement
30, Utilizing military education, training and assessment for the
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers and U.S. Coast Guard Certifications; the
purpose and goals of this intercessional for this date; and any
adaptations to the organization of this intercessional;
    (2) Reports of working sub-groups. The working sub-groups will
report to the full working group on what was accomplished in their
meetings. The full working group will not take action on these reports
at this time. Any action taken as a result of this working group
meeting will be taken after the public comment period.
    (3) Public comment period.
    (4) Preparation of the meeting report to the Committee.
    (5) Adjournment of meeting.
    A public comment period will be held during each day during the
working group meeting concerning matters being discussed. Speakers are
requested to limit their comments to 3 minutes. Please note that the
public comment periods may end before the prescribed ending times
following the last call for comments.
    Please contact Mr. Davis Breyer, listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section, to register as a speaker. Please note that
the meeting may adjourn early if the work is completed.

    Dated: July 6, 2016.
F.J. Sturm,
Acting Director, Commercial Regulations and Standards, United States
Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2016-16332 Filed 7-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34497-34498]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11402]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0239; FRL-10952-01-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Fuels Regulatory
Streamlining

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR). ``Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements for Fuels Regulatory Streamlining (EPA ICR No. 2607.03,
OMB Control No. 2060-0731) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
January 31, 2024. An Agency may not conduct, or sponsor and a person is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 31, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0239, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential

Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne-Marie Pastorkovich, Mail Code
6405A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i)
evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register
document to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: This ICR is related to information collected under 40 CFR
part 1090, Fuels Regulatory Streamlining. The final rule, entitled
``Fuels Regulatory Streamlining'' has been published in the Federal
Register. In general, the information to be collected will be used to
ensure that gasoline meets standards for sulfur, benzene, RVP and
oxygenate blending, and that diesel fuel meets the appropriate standard
for sulfur. These fuel standards are designed to protect human health
and the environment, and to reduce the harmful effects of emissions
from motor vehicles and motor vehicle fuels.
    The recordkeeping and reporting associated with each party is
directly related to that party's opportunity to create, control, or
alter the product's characteristics. Parties who manufacture fuels
(e.g., refiners) generally have more recordkeeping and reporting
requirements than those who merely distribute them.
    The information under this ICR will be collected by the EPA's
Compliance Division, within the Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation, and by the EPA's Air Enforcement
Division, within the Office of Civil Enforcement, Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance. The information collected will be used by the
EPA to evaluate compliance with the fuel quality requirements of part
1090 under the final rule. This oversight by EPA is necessary to ensure
the goals of the Clean Air Act are met. Proprietary information (i.e.,
information claimed as CBI) may be submitted by regulated parties; such
information must be clearly marked by the submitter. Information
claimed as CBI by the submitter will be handled in accordance with EPA
regulations at 40 CFR part 2 and established Agency procedures.
Registration and reporting activities will be conducted via EPA systems
that will provide a method of identifying information claimed as CBI by
the submitter (e.g., reporting formats contain a Y/N field asking
submitters if they would like to claim the information as CBI).
    Form numbers: EPA form numbers 5900-364, 5900-474, 5900-475, 5900-
476, 5900-477, 5900-478, 5900-479, 5900-480, 5900-624, 5900-625, 5900-
626, 5900-627, 5900-628, 5900-629, 5900-630.
    Respondents/affected entities:
     Manufacturers of fuels--including refiners of gasoline and
diesel.
     Manufacturers of regulated blendstocks, such as those who
manufacturer butane, pentane, ethanol denaturant.
     Blenders, including those who blend oxygenate and
detergent into gasoline.
     Transmix processors and blenders.
     Additive manufacturers, including those who produce
oxygenate, detergent, or other additives.
     Parties in fuel distribution system, including pipelines,
terminals, trucks, wholesale, and retail gasoline stations.
     Third parties who submit reports on behalf of the parties
listed above, such as laboratories, auditors, and surveyors.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory, under 40 CFR part
1090.
    Estimated number of respondents: 134,918 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annually, quarterly, on occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 550,205 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $37,542,321 (per year), includes $5,744,016
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: The OMB inventory for the expiring collection
is 7,905,905 responses; for this renewal, the total will be 7,926,769.
The change is an increase of 20,864 responses. The OMB inventory for
the expiring collection is 608,992 hours; for the renewal, the total
will be 550,205 hours. The change is a decrease of (58,787). The total
cost for the expiring collection is $36,787,434; for the renewal, the
total will be $37,542,321. The change is an increase of $754,887. Most
of the change is due to minor updates to assumptions about respondents
or time required to report. Decrease in hours is expected because most
parties will have completed registration and other initial changes and
updates by now. It should be noted that we changed our multiplier for
calculating purchased services, based upon consultation with industry
on the RFS ICR renewal (OMB Control No. 2060-0725); specifically, we
now use a 2.5 multiplier to calculate purchased services cost rather
than 2.0. This is based upon feedback from industry about increased
overhead/benefit costs.

Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality.
[FR Doc. 2023-11402 Filed 5-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 24 (Monday, February 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8627-8628]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02519]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1196; FRL-10019-49-OAR]

Recent Postings of Broadly Applicable Alternative Test Methods

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the broadly applicable alternative test
method approval decisions that the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) made under and in support of New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020. This notice
also announces the removal of a previously approved broadly applicable
alternative test method.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An electronic copy of each alternative
test method approval document is available at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods. For questions
about this notice, contact Mrs. Lula H. Melton, Air Quality Assessment
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (E143-02),
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For technical questions about individual
alternative test method decisions, refer to the contact person
identified in the individual approval document(s).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    This notice will be of interest to entities regulated under 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 59, 60, 61, 63 and 65; state, local,
and tribal agencies; and the EPA Regional offices responsible for
implementation and enforcement of regulations under 40 CFR parts 59,
60, 61, 63, and 65.

B. How can I get copies of this information?

    You may access copies of the broadly applicable alternative test
method approval documents at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods.

II. Background

    This notice identifies broadly applicable alternative test methods
that the EPA approved in 2020 under the New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS), 40 CFR part 60, and the National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) programs, 40 CFR parts 61 and 63.
See Table 1 of this notice for the summary of these test methods.
Source owners and operators may voluntarily use these broadly
applicable alternative test methods in lieu of otherwise required test
methods or related testing procedures. Use of these broadly applicable
alternative test methods are not intended to and should not change the
applicable emission standards. This notice also announces the removal
of ALT-109 as an approved broadly applicable alternative test method
given our subsequent revisions to certain requirements in Method 22. 83
FR 56713 (November 14, 2018).
    The Administrator has the authority to approve the use of
alternative test methods for compliance with requirements under 40 CFR
parts 60, 61, and 63. This authority is found in 40 CFR 60.8(b)(3),
61.13(h)(1)(ii), and 63.7(e)(2)(ii). Additional and similar authority
can be found in 40 CFR 59.104(f) and 65.158(a)(2). The criteria for
approval and procedures for submission and review of broadly applicable
alternative test methods are explained in a previous Federal Register
notice published at 72 FR 4257 (January 30, 2007) and located at
https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods. As explained in this notice, we will announce approvals for
broadly applicable alternative test methods at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods as they are issued
and publish an annual notice that summarizes approvals for broadly
applicable alternative test methods during the preceding year.
    As also explained in the January 30, 2007 notice, our approval
decisions involve thorough technical reviews of numerous source-
specific requests for alternatives and modifications to test methods
and procedures. Based on these reviews, we have often found that these
modifications or alternatives would be equally valid and appropriate to
apply to other sources within a particular class, category, or
subcategory. Consequently, we have concluded that where a method
modification or an alternative method is clearly broadly applicable to
a class, category, or subcategory of sources, it is both equitable and
efficient to simultaneously approve its use for all appropriate sources
and situations.
    Use of approved alternative test methods are not mandatory but
rather permissive. Sources are not required to employ such a method but
may choose to do so in appropriate circumstances. As specified in 40
CFR 63.7(f)(5), however, a source owner or operator electing to use an
alternative method for 40 CFR part 63 standards must continue to use
the alternative method until otherwise authorized. Source owners or
operators should, therefore, review the specific broadly applicable
alternative method approval decision at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods

before electing to employ any alternative method.

III. Approved Alternative Test Methods and Modifications To Test
Methods

    This notice specifies four broadly applicable alternative test
methods that the EPA approved between January 1, 2020, and December 31,
2020. The alternative method decision letter/memo designation numbers,
test methods affected, sources allowed to use this alternative, and
method modifications or alternative methods allowed are summarized in
Table 1 of this notice. A summary of approval documents was previously
made available on our Technology Transfer Network between January 1,
2020, and December 31, 2020. For more detailed information, please
refer to the complete copies of these approval documents available at
https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods.
    As also explained in our January 30, 2007 notice, we will revisit
approvals of alternative test methods in response to written requests
or objections indicating that a particular approved alternative test
method either should not be broadly applicable or that its use is not
appropriate or should be limited in some way. Any objection to a
broadly applicable alternative test method, as well as the resolution
of that objection, will be announced at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods and in a
subsequent Federal Register notice. If we decide to retract a broadly
applicable test method, we will likely consider the need for an
appropriate transition period for users either to request case-by-case
approval or to transition to an approved method.
    This notice also announces our removal of ALT-109 as a broadly
applicable alternative test method from the Broadly Applicable Approved
Alternative Test Methods web page. In the February 10, 2016 Federal
Register notice (81 FR 7092), we announced the approval of ALT-109 as
an alternative method that would allow the use of digital photographs
as a compliance option for specific recordkeeping requirements in
Method 22. On November 14, 2018, we incorporated this compliance option
into Method 22 (83 FR 56713). Therefore, ALT-109 is no longer an
alternative test method.

    Dated: January 15, 2021.
Peter Tsirigotis,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

  Table 1--Approved Alternative Test Methods and Modifications To Test Methods Referenced in or Published Under
            Appendices in 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 Posted Between January 2020 and December 2020 a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Alternative method  decision      As an alternative or
      letter/ memo number          modification to . . .            For . . .                You may . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALT-136.......................  Gas Chromatography (GC) in  Sources subject to 40 CFR  Use High-Performance
                                 Method 18.                  parts 59, 60, 61, 63,      Liquid Chromatograph
                                                             and 65.                    (HPLC) to measure acetic
                                                                                acid, formic acid, and
                                                                                lactic acid under Method
                                                                                18.
ALT-137.......................  ASTM D2879................  Sources subject to 40 CFR  Use ASTM D6377-16 and
                                                             part 60, subparts K, Ka,   ASTM D6378-20 in
                                                             and Kb; 40 CFR part 61,    accordance with the
                                                             subpart FF; 40 CFR part    provisions specified in
                                                             63, subparts G, Y, CC,     the approval letter
                                                             WW, EEEE, and GGGGG; and   dated June 19, 2020.
                                                             40 CFR part 65, subpart
                                                             C.
ALT-138.......................  ASTM D6522-00.............  Sources subject to 40 CFR  Use Other Test Method-39.
                                                             part 60, subpart JJJJ
                                                             and 40 CFR part 63,
                                                             subparts ZZZZ and DDDDD.
ALT-139.......................  Method 29-Determination of  Sources subject to 40 CFR  Use Method 30B-
                                 Total Vapor Phase Mercury   part 63, subpart LL-       Determination of Total
                                 Emissions from Coal-Fired   National Emission          Vapor Phase Mercury
                                 Combustion Sources Using    Standards for Hazardous    Emissions from Coal-
                                 Carbon Sorbent Traps.       Air Pollutants for         Fired Combustion Sources
                                                             Primary Aluminum           Using Carbon Sorbent
                                                             Reduction Plants.          Traps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Source owners or operators should review the specific broadly applicable alternative method approval letter
  at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadly-applicable-approved-alternative-test-methods before electing to employ any
  alternative test method.

[FR Doc. 2021-02519 Filed 2-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US

11/27/2007 05:52 PM

To

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: agenda for Thursday's call

I will be able to answer the question of when at the meeting on Thursday.

Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 11/27/2007 05:05 PM

To

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

RE: agenda for Thursday's call

Ron,

Can you also address the DOE request for information and when you plan

to provide that information?

Thanks,

Rob

Stefan Osborne

Office of Competition and Economic Analysis

International Trade Administration

U.S. Department of Commerce

1401 Constitution Ave., NW

Room 2224

Washington, D.C. 20230

(T)<PHONE_NUMBER>

(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:45 PM

To: Johansson, Robert

Subject: RE: agenda for Thursday's call

Will do.  I can not find his phone number, do you have it readily

available?

Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax

             "Johansson,

             Robert"

             <Robert_C._Johan                                        To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>       Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             >                                                       cc

             11/26/2007 05:06                                   Subject

             PM                       RE: agenda for Thursday's call

Why don't you schedule with Stefan to see if you can do a 30min/30min

split?

Cheers,

Rob

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 4:46 PM

To: Johansson, Robert

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> <EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: RE: agenda for Thursday's call

We expect to be ready to outline our approach to estimating the social

costs and benefits for the extreme areas, including the 2 areas in

California which have attainment dates past 2020.

             "Johansson,

             Robert"

             <Robert_C._Johan                                        To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>       Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

             >                                                       cc

             11/26/2007 11:57                                   Subject

             AM                       RE: agenda for Thursday's call

What other items are we scheduled to discuss?

R

-----Original Message-----

From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 10:37 AM

To: Johansson, Robert

Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: agenda for Thursday's call

Hey Rob, I hope you had a good Thanksgiving.   In thinking about this

Thursday's meeting, I expect we need to carve out specific time for

Stefan in the agenda to present his ideas.  How would you propose

setting the agenda?


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 88939-88940]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28370]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2393]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before March 25, 2024.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2393, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any

request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information
shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data
requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal.
Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be
considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

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

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Adair County, Missouri and Incorporated Areas
          Project: 19-07-0064S Preliminary Date: June 16, 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Brashear.......................  City Hall, 105 East Main
                                          Street, Brashear, MO 63533.
City of Kirksville.....................  City Hall, 201 South Franklin
                                          Street, Kirksville, MO 63501.
City of Novinger.......................  City Hall, 302 Marion Avenue,
                                          Novinger, MO 63559.
Unincorporated Areas of Adair County...  Adair County Courthouse, 106
                                          West Washington Street,
                                          Kirksville, MO 63501.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-28370 Filed 12-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 57 (Monday, March 25, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11108-11109]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05656]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2017-D-0120]

Interpretation of and Compliance Policy for Certain Label
Requirement; Applicability of Certain Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act Requirements to Vape Shops; Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the
availability of a final guidance for industry entitled ``Interpretation
of and Compliance Policy for Certain Label Requirement; Applicability
of Certain Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Requirements to Vape
Shops.'' This guidance provides FDA's interpretation of, and a
compliance policy for, the requirement that the label of tobacco
products contain an accurate statement of the percentage of foreign and
domestic grown tobacco under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FD&C Act). This guidance document is also intended to assist retailers
who sell deemed products by explaining whether engaging in certain
activities subjects such establishments to additional requirements of
the FD&C Act and the limited circumstances under which FDA does not
intend to enforce compliance.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on March 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments on
Agency guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2017-D-0120 for ``Interpretation of and Compliance Policy for
Certain Label Requirement; Applicability of Certain Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act Requirements to Vape Shops.'' Received comments will
be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the
Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document
Control Center, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist
that office in processing your request or include a Fax number to which
the guidance document may be sent. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for information on electronic access to the guidance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerie Voss or Annette Marthaler,
Center for Tobacco Products, Food and Drug Administration, Document
Control Center, Bldg. 71, Rm. G335, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002, 1-877-287-1373, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a guidance for industry
entitled ``Interpretation of and Compliance Policy for Certain Label
Requirement; Applicability of Certain Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act Requirements to Vape Shops.'' This guidance finalizes the draft
guidance of the same title, which was made available for public comment
as noted in the Federal Register of January 17, 2017 (82 FR 4893).
    This guidance document provides FDA's interpretation of, and a
compliance policy for, the label requirement under section 903(a)(2)(C)
of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387c(a)(2)(C)). This guidance document is
also intended to assist retailers who

sell deemed products by explaining whether engaging in certain
activities subjects such establishments to additional requirements of
the FD&C Act and the limited circumstances under which FDA does not
intend to enforce compliance.
    The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Pub. L. 111-
31) (Tobacco Control Act), enacted on June 22, 2009, amends the FD&C
Act and provides FDA with the authority to regulate the manufacture,
marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public
health generally and to reduce tobacco use by minors.
    Cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own tobacco, and smokeless
tobacco were immediately covered by FDA's tobacco product authorities
in chapter IX of the FD&C Act, when the Tobacco Control Act went into
effect. As for other types of tobacco products, section 901(b) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387a(b)) grants FDA authority to deem those
products subject to chapter IX of the FD&C Act. Pursuant to that
authority, FDA issued a rule deeming all other products that meet the
statutory definition of ``tobacco product,'' set forth in section
201(rr) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(rr)), except for accessories of
those products, as subject to chapter IX of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 387
through 387u) (81 FR 28974). FDA published the final rule on May 10,
2016, and it became effective on August 8, 2016.
    Section 903(a)(2)(C) of the FD&C Act provides that a tobacco
product in package form is misbranded unless its label contains ``an
accurate statement of the percentage of tobacco used in the product
that is domestically grown tobacco and the percentage that is foreign
grown tobacco.'' The guidance provides FDA's interpretation of, and a
compliance policy for, this label requirement.
    Retail establishments, such as vape shops, which engage in certain
activities may also be subject to certain requirements of the FD&C Act
that apply to tobacco product manufacturers and to establishments that
engage in the manufacture, preparation, compounding, or processing of
tobacco products. These activities may also include modifying a product
so that it is a new tobacco product requiring compliance with the
premarket authorization requirements. This guidance explains which
activities subject vape shops to these FD&C Act requirements and the
limited circumstances under which FDA does not intend to enforce
compliance.

II. Significance of Guidance

    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA on this topic. It does not establish any rights
for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive
Order 12866.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain an electronic
version of the guidance at either https://www.regulations.gov or
https://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/RulesRegulationsGuidance/default.htm.

    Dated: March 20, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-05656 Filed 3-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P