[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 230 (Monday, November 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76635-76640]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26285]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90492]

Statement on Central Counterparties Authorized Under the European
Markets Infrastructure Regulation Seeking To Register as a Clearing
Agency or To Request Exemptions From Certain Requirements Under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Policy statement; guidance.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'') is issuing a
policy statement and guidance regarding future applications from a
central counterparty (``CCP'') authorized under the European Market
Infrastructure Regulation (``EMIR'') and based in the European Union
(an ``EU CCP'') that is seeking to register as a clearing agency with
the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'')
and future requests by EU CCPs for exemptions from certain SEC
requirements.

DATES: The Commission's policy statement is effective November 30,
2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Lee, Assistant Director;
Stephanie Park, Senior Special Counsel; or Claire Noakes, Special
Counsel; at<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Division of Trading and Markets, U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SEC regulates as clearing agencies two
EU CCPs authorized under EMIR that provide CCP services for security-
based swaps.\1\ Where an EU CCP has been authorized under EMIR, it is
subject to requirements that are generally consistent with the same
international standards for CCPs as are the SEC's requirements for
CCPs. Based on these factors, the SEC is issuing this policy statement
and guidance to describe the processes for EU CCPs seeking to register
as clearing agencies or to request exemptions from SEC requirements. To
provide transparency into SEC processes and to highlight efficient ways
that EU CCPs can comply with SEC rules, this policy statement and
guidance identifies the information that an EU CCP can provide in its
registration application and provides a summary of the factors that the
SEC will consider, as applicable, with respect to future requests for
exemptions. Specifically, with respect to the registration process, EU
CCPs can use preexisting materials, including self-assessments, in
their applications to demonstrate compliance with EMIR and consistency
with SEC requirements for CCPs. Such materials and self-assessments
could facilitate both the EU CCP's efficient preparation of the
application and the SEC's review of applications for registration. With
respect to requests for exemptions, the SEC identifies below specific
factors that it will consider if relevant to a particular future
request for an exemption by an EU CCP. As an example of one such
factor, an EU CCP may request an exemption because it has determined
that the application of SEC requirements would impose unnecessary,
duplicative, or inconsistent requirements in light of EMIR requirements
to which it is subject. Issuing this policy statement and guidance is
relevant to the SEC's ongoing dialogue with the European Commission
(``EC'') regarding the EC's consideration of whether to find the SEC's
regulatory framework for CCPs equivalent to EMIR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission has based this statement, in part, on its
experience regulating EU CCPs for security-based swaps, and
therefore this release primarily discusses the Commission's
processes for registration as a clearing agency and for requesting
exemptions with respect to such CCPs. However, the Commission notes
that the policy and guidance set forth in this statement, by its
terms and as set forth below, also applies to an EU CCP that clears
securities other than security-based swaps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. Background
    A. SEC Requirements for CCPs
    B. EMIR Requirements for CCPs
    C. SEC-Registered Clearing Agencies Based in the EU
III. SEC Process for Review of Applications for Registration as a
Clearing Agency and Requests for Exemptions by EU CCPS
    A. Applications for Registration as a Clearing Agency
    B. Requests for Exemptions
IV. Conclusion

I. Introduction

    The SEC regulates centralized clearance and settlement systems for
securities, including those provided by CCPs and central securities
depositories (``CSDs''). As part of the Securities Acts Amendments of
1975 (``1975 Amendments''), Congress directed the SEC to facilitate the
establishment of a national system for the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\2\ Since the
enactment of the 1975 Amendments, the SEC has given regular
consideration to how non-U.S. clearing agencies fit within the SEC's
regulatory framework under the Exchange Act.\3\ The SEC also acted to
facilitate the central clearing of credit default swaps by permitting
certain entities that performed CCP services to clear and settle credit
default

swaps on a temporary, conditional basis.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(a)(2); see also Report of the Senate
Committee on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 94-75, at
4 (1975) (stating that ``[t]he Committee believes the banking and
security industries must move quickly toward the establishment of a
fully integrated national system for the prompt and accurate
processing and settlement of securities transactions'').
    \3\ See Release No. 34-11904 (Dec. 5, 1975), 40 FR 57872 (Dec.
12, 1975) (considering requests for exemptions from non-U.S.
clearing agencies).
    \4\ The SEC authorized five entities to clear credit default
swaps, three of which were based in the EU. See Exchange Act Release
Nos. 60372 (July 23, 2009), 74 FR 37748 (July 29, 2009), 61973 (Apr.
23, 2010), 75 FR 22656 (Apr. 29, 2010) and 63389 (Nov. 29, 2010), 75
FR 75520 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS clearing by ICE Clear Europe Limited
(``ICEEU''); 60373 (July 23, 2009), 74 FR 37740 (July 29, 2009),
61975 (Apr. 23, 2010), 75 FR 22641 (Apr. 29, 2010) and 63390 (Nov.
29, 2010), 75 FR 75518 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS clearing by Eurex
Clearing AG); 59578 (Mar. 13, 2009), 74 FR 11781 (Mar. 19, 2009),
61164 (Dec. 14, 2009), 74 FR 67258 (Dec. 18, 2009), 61803 (Mar. 30,
2010), 75 FR 17181 (Apr. 5, 2010) and 63388 (Nov. 29, 2010), 75 FR
75522 (Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS clearing by Chicago Mercantile Exchange,
Inc.); 59527 (Mar. 6, 2009), 74 FR 10791 (Mar. 12, 2009), 61119
(Dec. 4, 2009), 74 FR 65554 (Dec. 10, 2009), 61662 (Mar. 5, 2010),
75 FR 11589 (Mar. 11, 2010) and 63387 (Nov. 29, 2010), 75 FR 75502
(Dec. 3, 2010) (CDS clearing by ICE Trust US LLC); 59164 (Dec. 24,
2008), 74 FR 139 (Jan. 2, 2009) (temporary CDS clearing by LIFFE A&M
and LCH.Clearnet Ltd.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2010, Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act'') amended the Exchange Act
to provide for the comprehensive regulation of security-based swaps by
the SEC.\5\ In 2012, the EU adopted the EMIR framework to accomplish
many of the same objectives in the EU. The oversight and regulation of
security-based swap activity that is centrally cleared by both the SEC
and under EMIR occurs through the registration and supervision of
clearing agencies, among other things. Under its regulatory framework
for clearing agencies, the SEC supervises clearing agencies that are
subject to EU regulatory frameworks,\6\ including EMIR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
    \6\ In addition to EU CCPs discussed in this document, the SEC
regulates clearing agencies that provide CSD services. See Release
Nos. 34-38328 (Feb. 24, 1997), 62 FR 9225 (Feb. 28, 1997) (order
approving application for exemption from clearing agency
registration for Cedel Bank, now Clearstream); 34-39643 (Feb. 11,
1998), 63 FR 8232 (Feb. 18, 1998) (order approving application for
exemption from clearing agency registration by Morgan Guaranty Trust
Company of New York, Brussels Office, as operator of the Euroclear
System, now Euroclear Bank).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to EU CCPs currently registered with the SEC as
clearing agencies,\7\ the SEC has applied requirements commensurate and
appropriate to the risks posed by the clearing agency functions and
activities. The SEC believes that its supervisory approach to these EU
CCPs has benefited from the SEC's familiarity with EMIR, including
through the rule filing process for self-regulatory organizations
(``SROs''),\8\ and from ongoing communication and coordination between
SEC staff and staff at the relevant national competent authorities
(``NCAs'') for EU CCPs. The SEC also recognizes that both EMIR and the
SEC's regulatory frameworks are designed to be generally consistent
with the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (``PFMI''),\9\
which are the relevant international standards for CCPs.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As discussed in more detail in Part II.C, the SEC granted
ICEEU an exemption from clearing agency registration on July 23,
2009 to clear and settle credit default swaps on a temporary,
conditional basis. ICEEU was subsequently deemed a clearing agency
registered with the SEC on July 16, 2011. On December 16, 2016, the
Commission registered Banque Centrale de Compensation, which
conducts business under the name LCH SA (``LCH SA'') as a clearing
agency, so that it may provide CCP services for security-based swaps
to U.S. persons and LCH SA.
    \8\ An SRO must submit proposed rule changes to the SEC for
review and approval pursuant to 17 CFR 240.19b-4 (``Rule 19b-4''). A
stated policy, practice, or interpretation of an SRO would generally
be deemed to be a proposed rule change. See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1); 17
CFR 240.19b-4.
    \9\ See Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems and
Technical Committee of the International Organization of Securities
Commissions (``CPSS-IOSCO''), Principles for financial market
infrastructures (Apr. 16, 2012), http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss101a.pdf. In 2014, the CPSS became the Committee on Payments and
Market Infrastructures (``CPMI'').
    \10\ Title VIII of the Dodd-Frank Act directs the SEC, when
prescribing risk management standards for systemically important
CCPs, to take into consideration relevant international standards
and existing prudential requirements. See 12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on these factors, the SEC is issuing this policy statement
and guidance to provide transparency into the processes for a new EU
CCP applicant to (i) register with the SEC as a clearing agency to
provide CCP services, and (ii) request exemptions from certain SEC
requirements under the Exchange Act using preexisting materials in
their applications that demonstrate compliance with EMIR and also
consistency with SEC requirements for CCPs.\11\ The SEC is also
highlighting efficient ways that EU CCPs can comply with SEC rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has designated this statement as
not a ``major rule,'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). See 5 U.S.C.
801 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Part II briefly describes EMIR and the SEC's regulatory framework
for CCPs, both of which are generally consistent with common
international standards for CCPs, and summarizes the SEC's experience
with supervising or otherwise engaging with EU CCPs that the SEC has
registered as clearing agencies. Part III describes and provides
guidance regarding the process for seeking registration and requesting
exemptions from SEC requirements. In particular, Part III.A provides
guidance regarding the types of documentation that can be provided to
facilitate both the efficient preparation of an application and the
SEC's review of the application. Part III.B describes and provides
guidance regarding the types of exemptions the SEC has generally
provided to EU CCPs in the past and identifies the factors that the SEC
will consider, if relevant to a particular request for an exemption,
when reviewing future requests for exemptions.

II. Background

A. SEC Requirements for CCPs

    SEC requirements for CCPs are codified in 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22
(``Rule 17Ad-22'') and designed to ensure that CCPs operate consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A of the Exchange Act, which
establishes the national system for clearance and settlement of
securities transactions in the United States.\12\ As a general matter,
Rule 17Ad-22 includes policies and procedures requirements designed to
promote the safe and reliable operation of registered clearing
agencies, and to improve efficiency, transparency, and access to
registered clearing agencies.\13\ Rule 17Ad-22(e) establishes an
enhanced regulatory framework for clearing agencies that provide the
services of CCPs and CSDs.\14\ It includes requirements for policies
and procedures related to, among other things, financial risk
management, governance, recovery planning, operations, and general
business risk.\15\ In adopting Rule 17Ad-22(e), the SEC noted that it
was consistent with the PFMI.\16\ In addition, CCPs registered

with the SEC as clearing agencies are also SROs under the Exchange Act
and subject to the SRO rule filing process for proposed rule
changes,\17\ and registered clearing agencies are subject to the
requirements of Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22; see also Clearing Agency Standards,
Release No. 34-68080 (Oct. 22, 2012), 77 FR 66220, 66225-26 (Nov. 2,
2012) (``Clearing Agency Standards adopting release'').
    \13\ See Clearing Agency Standards adopting release, supra note
13, at 66224-25.
    \14\ See 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e); Release No. 34-78961 (Sept. 28,
2016), 81 FR 70786 (Oct. 13, 2016) (``CCA Standards adopting
release''). While Rule 17Ad-22(e) originally applied to systemically
important clearing agencies and clearing agencies for security-based
swaps, the Commission amended the approach in 2020 so that Rule
17Ad-22(e) applies to any clearing agency that provides the services
of a CCP or CSD. See Release No. 34-88616 (Apr. 9, 2020), 85 FR
28853 (May 14, 2020).
    \15\ See CCA Standards adopting release, supra note 14.
    \16\ See CCA Standards adopting release, supra note 14, at 70789
(stating that ``the PFMI is the relevant international standard for
systemically important financial market infrastructures, such as
[clearing agencies]. . . . Commission staff co-chaired the working
group within CPSS-IOSCO that drafted both the consultative and final
versions of the PFMI, and the Commission believes that the
requirements applicable to clearing agencies set forth in the
Exchange Act and the rules thereunder, including [Rule 17Ad-22(e)],
are consistent with the standards set forth in the PFMI. Regulatory
authorities around the world are in various stages of updating their
regulatory regimes to adopt measures consistent with the PFMI. [Rule
17Ad-22 is] a continuation of the Commission's active effort to
foster the development of the national clearance and settlement
system, consistent with the requirements of the Exchange Act, and
enhance the regulation and supervision of [clearing agencies],
consistent with the Clearing Supervision Act.''). Similar to the
subparts of Rule 17Ad-22(e), the PFMI includes 23 principles
intended to address different potential sources of risk to CCPs and
CSDs, including, among other things, legal risk, financial risk
management, operational risk, and governance. See supra note 9.
    \17\ See supra note 8.
    \18\ See 17 CFR 242.1000 et seq.; Release No. 34-73639 (Nov. 19,
2014), 79 FR 72251 (Dec. 5, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to CCPs for security-based swaps, Congress has charged
the SEC with oversight of security-based swaps and the obligation to
ensure that risk in the U.S. securities markets is appropriately
managed, consistent with the purposes of the Exchange Act and Title VII
of the Dodd-Frank Act.\19\ Security-based swaps, and the CCPs that
clear them, present unique risks to the U.S. securities markets,
necessitating appropriate risk management by the CCPs and supervision
by the SEC.\20\ As it does more generally with respect to clearing
agencies, the SEC has sought to apply requirements to such CCPs
commensurate and appropriate to these risks while recognizing that each
CCP has different organizational and operating structures and clears
distinct products that warrant a tailored approach to governance and
risk management. Accordingly, the SEC's regulatory framework for CCPs
is designed to balance imposing appropriate regulatory requirements on
CCPs and allowing each CCP, subject to its obligations and
responsibilities as an SRO,\21\ to implement its own policies and
procedures consistent with Rule 17Ad-22.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See id. at 70800.
    \20\ See, e.g., id. at 70854-55 (noting that certain
requirements in Rule 17Ad-22(e) are applied specifically to CCPs for
security-based swaps to protect against the risks associated with
the jump-to-default risk and nonlinear payoffs associated with
security-based swaps).
    \21\ See supra notes 8, 17, and accompanying text (discussing
the SRO rule filing process in further detail).
    \22\ See CCA Standards adopting release, supra note 14, at
70875.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. EMIR Requirements for CCPs

    EMIR was enacted in 2012 and, among other things, sets out
requirements for the clearing of OTC derivatives through authorized
CCPs.\23\ More specifically, EMIR introduces rules to reduce the
counterparty credit risk of derivatives contracts by requiring that:
All standardized OTC derivatives contracts must be centrally cleared
through CCPs; if a contract is not cleared by a CCP, risk mitigation
techniques must be applied; and CCPs must comply with stringent
prudential, organizational, and conduct of business requirements. The
regulation also requires market participants to monitor and mitigate
the operational risks associated with transactions in derivatives, such
as fraud and human error, by, for example, using electronic means to
promptly confirm the terms of OTC derivatives contracts.\24\ Recital 90
of EMIR also notes that EMIR is designed to be generally consistent
with the PFMI:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central
counterparties and trade repositories, as amended, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02012R0648-20200101.
The Commission notes that it would take substantially the same
approach set out in this document for other jurisdictions that have
adopted a regulatory framework that is substantially similar to
EMIR.
    \24\ See EC, ``Derivatives/EMIR,'' https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/banking-and-finance/financial-markets/post-trade-services/derivatives-emir_en#eu-rules-on-derivatives-contracts.

    It is important to ensure international convergence of
requirements for CCPs and trade repositories. This Regulation
follows the existing recommendations developed by the Committee on
Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS) and International Organization
of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) noting that the CPSS-IOSCO
principles for financial market infrastructure, including CCPs, were
established on 16 April 2012. It creates a Union framework in which
CCPs can operate safely. ESMA should consider these existing
standards and their future developments when drawing up or proposing
to revise the regulatory technical standards as well as the
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
guidelines and recommendations foreseen in this Regulation.

    In addition, the European Securities Markets Authority (``ESMA'')
issued guidance confirming that EMIR and the relevant Regulatory
Technical Standards are ``intended for the EU regulatory framework for
CCPs to consistently implement the PFMI, and NCAs have already been
applying the PFMI in their supervision of CCPs.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See ESMA, Guidelines and Recommendations regarding the
implementation of the CPSS-IOSCO Principles for Financial Market
Infrastructures in respect of Central Counterparties (Apr. 9, 2014),
https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/2015/11/2014-1133_en.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. SEC-Registered Clearing Agencies Based in the EU

    The SEC regulates two registered clearing agencies based in the EU
that provide CCP services for security-based swaps pursuant to EU
regulatory requirements, and the SEC has sought to avoid the
application of unnecessary, duplicative, or inconsistent regulatory
requirements with respect to these clearing agencies. ICEEU is based in
the United Kingdom and was an authorized CCP under EMIR until the UK
left the EU on January 31, 2020. The Commission granted ICEEU an
exemption from clearing agency registration on July 23, 2009, to clear
and settle credit default swaps on a temporary, conditional basis.\26\
Congress deemed ICEEU a clearing agency registered with the SEC on July
16, 2011, so that ICEEU could provide CCP services for security-based
swaps.\27\ LCH SA is based in France and is an authorized CCP under
EMIR. LCH SA applied for registration as a clearing agency to provide
CCP services for security-based swaps to U.S. persons in 2016, and the
SEC registered LCH SA on December 16, 2016.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The Commission granted the exemption in connection with its
efforts to facilitate the central clearing of credit default swaps
prior to the enactment of the Dodd Frank Act. See Release Nos. 34-
60373 (July 23, 2009), 74 FR 37740 (July 29, 2009), 61975 (Apr. 23,
2010), 75 FR 22641 (Apr. 29, 2010) and 63390 (Nov. 29, 2010), 75 FR
75518 (Dec. 3, 2010).
    \27\ Section 763(b) of the Dodd-Frank Act amended Section 17A of
the Exchange Act by adding new paragraph (l), 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(l),
which provides that (i) a depository institution registered with the
CFTC that cleared swaps as a multilateral clearing organization
prior to the date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act and (ii) a
derivatives clearing organization registered with the CFTC that
cleared swaps pursuant to an exemption from registration as a
clearing agency prior to the date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act
will be deemed registered with the Commission as a clearing agency
solely for the purpose of clearing security-based swaps.
    \28\ See Release No. 34-79707 (Dec. 29, 2016), 82 FR 1398 (Jan.
5, 2017) (``LCH SA registration order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SEC's regulatory approach to ICEEU and LCH SA avoids the
application of unnecessary, duplicative, or inconsistent regulatory
requirements in several ways. First, SEC requirements for clearing
agencies generally, and in Rule 17Ad-22 specifically, are principles-
based rather than prescriptive, enabling ICEEU and LCH SA to achieve
compliance with SEC requirements, through the SRO rule filing process,
in a manner that is also consistent with EMIR.\29\ Second, the SEC
requirements for CCPs, codified in Rule 17Ad-22, are generally
consistent with the PFMI,\30\ as are the requirements under the EMIR
framework.\31\ Third, as

discussed further below and in Part III.B, the SEC has exempted both
clearing agencies from certain SEC requirements that may be
unnecessary, duplicative, or inconsistent in light of EMIR requirements
to which the EU CCPs are subject.\32\ Fourth, the SEC remains engaged
in a collaborative regulatory dialogue with the NCAs for each CCP,
including the Bank of England for ICEEU and the Autorit[eacute] des
March[eacute]s Financiers, Autorit[eacute] de Contr[ocirc]le Prudentiel
et de R[eacute]solution, and Banque de France for LCH SA. The following
sections provide a brief overview of the SEC's experience with each
clearing agency, including examples of how the SEC has used its
supervisory authority to avoid imposing unnecessary, duplicative, or
inconsistent requirements on each clearing agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Both ICEEU and LCH SA are subject to Section 19(b) of the
Exchange Act, which requires a registered clearing agency to submit
proposed rule changes to the SEC for public comment and SEC review
and approval. See supra notes 8 and 17 (further discussing the
requirements of the rule filing process under Rule 19b-4).
    \30\ See supra note 16 and accompanying text.
    \31\ See supra note 25 and accompanying text.
    \32\ See infra notes 40-42, 55-57, and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. ICEEU
    Pursuant to the Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, the SEC has
published, reviewed, and approved a number of proposed rule changes
submitted by ICEEU that, based on the information and representations
made by ICEEU, were intended to facilitate its efforts to comply with
EMIR, in addition to the Exchange Act. These proposed rule changes
addressed topics including: (i) Segregation and portability of customer
positions and margin; (ii) risk modeling; (iii) back testing; (iv)
stress testing; (v) default management; and (vi) liquidity risk
management.\33\ In a number of instances, the SEC found good cause to
provide accelerated approval \34\ for proposed rule changes derived
from EMIR requirements.\35\ The SEC has also published notice of
certain other immediately effective ICEEU rule filings \36\ that were
submitted in connection with other EU-based regulatory requirements for
EU CCPs, including the General Data Protection Regulation,\37\ the
revised Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (``MiFID II''),\38\
and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (``MiFIR'').\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Release Nos. 34-73075 (Sept. 11, 2014), 79 FR 55848
(Sept. 17, 2014); 34-72756 (Aug. 4, 2014), 79 FR 46479 (Aug. 8,
2014); 34-72755 (Aug. 4, 2014), 79 FR 46481 (Aug. 8, 2014); 34-72754
(Aug. 4, 2014), 79 FR 46477 (Aug. 8, 2014).
    \34\ See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C)(iii).
    \35\ See, e.g., ICEEU Notice of Filing Amendment Nos. 1 and 2
and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, to Revise the ICE Clear Europe
Clearing Rules Relating to the Application of Default Provisions in
the Event of a Resolution Proceeding, Release No. 34-80304 (Mar. 24,
2017) https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2017/34-80304.pdf; ICEEU
Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe
CDS Risk Policy, Release No. 34-81680 (Sep. 22, 2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2017/34-81680.pdf; ICEEU Notice of
Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules
and Procedures for Indirect Clearing, Release No. 34-82422 (Dec. 29,
2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2017/34-82422.pdf; ICEEU
Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to Intraday
Margining, Release No. 34-84375 (Oct. 5, 2018), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2018/34-84375.pdf.
    \36\ See ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Accounts Categories for Positions
of Clearing Member Affiliates, Release No. 34-77809 (May 11, 2016),
available at: https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2016/34-77809.pdf;
ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change Relating to Certain Default Management Requirements
under Applicable Law, Release No. 34-78762 (Sep. 2, 2016), available
at: https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2016/34-78762.pdf.
    \37\ See, e.g., ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to
the Clearing Rules to Implement the European Union General Data
Protection Regulation, Release No. 34-83311 (May 23, 2018), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2018/34-83311.pdf; ICEEU Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Amendments to the Clearing Rules, Release No. 34-85247 (Mar. 5,
2019), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2019/34-85247.pdf.
    \38\ See ICEEU Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules
and Procedures, Release No. 34-86753 (Aug. 23, 2019), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2019/34-86753.pdf.
    \39\ See ICEEU Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Amendments to the ICE
Clear Europe Clearing Rules and Procedures for Indirect Clearing,
Release No. 34-82422 (Dec. 29, 2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/iceeu/2017/34-82422.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. LCH SA
    When the SEC approved LCH SA's registration as a clearing agency,
LCH petitioned for, and the SEC granted, exemptions from certain
requirements in the Exchange Act for aspects of LCH SA's U.S.
operations, referencing the fact that LCH SA is subject to oversight by
regulators in other jurisdictions.\40\ Specifically, the SEC granted
exemptions from requirements in Rule 17a-22 (concerning the filing by
clearing agencies of certain supplemental material provided to
participants), Rule 17Ad-22(c)(2) and (c)(2)(iii) (relating to annual
audited financial statements), Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act and
Rule 19b-4 thereunder (relating to SRO rule filings),\41\ and Sections
5 and 6 of the Exchange Act (relating to registration as an
exchange).\42\ In addition, as part of its oversight of LCH SA, the SEC
routinely evaluates representations made in proposed rule changes
submitted by LCH SA that state as their purpose a need to comply with
EMIR regulatory requirements, and the SEC has been able to approve
multiple rule filings after finding that they were consistent with the
Exchange Act, enabling LCH SA to achieve compliance with both the
Exchange Act and EMIR.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See LCH SA registration order, supra note 28, at 1398.
    \41\ See supra notes 8, 17, and 29 (further discussing the
requirements of the rule filing process under Rule 19b-4 for
registered clearing agencies).
    \42\ See LCH SA registration order, supra note 28, at 1414-15;
see also Release No. 34-64795 (July 1, 2011), 76 FR 39927, 39934-35
(July 7, 2011) (further describing exemptions from Sections 5 and 6
of the Exchange Act for clearing agencies for security-based swaps).
    \43\ See LCH SA Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Implementation of the Markets
in Financial Instruments Regulation, Release No. 34-82421 (Dec. 29,
2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/lchsa/2017/34-82421.pdf; LCH SA
Order Granting Approval on an Accelerated Basis of Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Self-Referencing Transactions, Release No. 34-
82883 (Mar. 15, 2018), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/lchsa/2018/34-82883.pdf; see also LCH SA Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Implementation of the Markets
in Financial Instruments Regulation, Release No. 34-82421 (Dec. 29,
2017), https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/lchsa/2017/34-82421.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. SEC Process for Review of Applications for Registration as a
Clearing Agency and Requests for Exemptions by EU CCPs

    For the reasons discussed above, the SEC is describing, and
providing transparency into, its processes to assist EU CCPs seeking
registration or requesting exemptions. The guidance includes
information that an EU CCP can provide in its application and a summary
of the factors that the SEC will consider, if applicable to a
particular request, with respect to future exemption requests.

A. Applications for Registration as a Clearing Agency

    To register as a clearing agency, an EU CCP must submit an
application for registration on Form CA-1 in accordance with Section
17A of the Exchange Act and Rule 17Ab2-1 thereunder.\44\ Form CA-1
requires an applicant to complete the elements of the form itself and
submit nineteen exhibits. Specifically, the form itself, and Schedule A
thereto, contain questions that are designed to elicit general
information about the types of activities in which the applicant
proposes to engage and the identity of the applicant's direct and
indirect owners and other control persons, as

well as all affiliates engaged in the clearing agency activity.
Exhibits A through R request specific information related to the
applicant's business organization, financial information, operational
capacity and access to services.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1; 17 CFR 240.17Ab2-1. Rule 17Ab2-1 directs
applicants for registration as a clearing agency or applicants for
an exemption from registration to apply on Form CA-1.
    \45\ As discussed further in Part III.A, Exhibit S is required
for requests for an exemption from registration as a clearing
agency. In addition to completing the Exhibit S, an EU CCP may also
submit a petition to request an exemption from certain SEC
requirements outside of the registration process. See supra note 40,
infra note 55, and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SEC is providing guidance to reference the types of documents
that could be submitted in preparing responses to the exhibits required
by Form CA-1. For example, an EU CCP may submit to the SEC preexisting
documentation or a self-assessment demonstrating that (i) the EU CCP is
in compliance with EMIR and (ii) the EU CCP's compliance with EMIR also
satisfies the Exchange Act requirements for registration.\46\ The use
of existing documentation or a self-assessment could help facilitate
the efficient preparation of an EU CCP's application to the SEC, as
well as the SEC's efficient review of the application, potentially
resulting in shorter application preparation and review periods. The
use of self-assessments may help facilitate the SEC's review process by
substantiating and supplementing any preexisting documentation provided
in response to the Form CA-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ To register a clearing agency, the SEC must find that the
clearing agency meets each of the requirements in Section 17A(b)(3)
of the Exchange Act. See 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(A)-(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the SEC is providing guidance to articulate methods
that future EU CCPs can use to facilitate an efficient process for
clearing agency registration. First, the SEC encourages future EU CCP
applicants to engage with SEC staff and submit drafts of the
application for SEC staff to review while an EU CCP prepares the Form
CA-1 and accompanying exhibits. SEC staff can provide technical advice
regarding how to answer the questions on the form itself and to prepare
the required exhibits, which could help facilitate the efficient
preparation of a Form CA-1 application. The SEC will also look to
coordinate with the EU CCP's NCA for the purposes of analyzing and
evaluating any documentation submitted by the EU CCP.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Any such cooperative arrangements entered as a precondition
to this process could be useful for ongoing coordinated or joint
supervisory matters between the SEC and the NCA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the SEC believes that much of the material requested by the
Form CA-1 and its exhibits has likely been memorialized in preexisting
documents that an EU CCP already provides or has provided to NCAs or
other regulatory authorities in the EU. In particular, an EU CCP may
use materials generated in the course of its oversight by its NCA to
prepare its application on Form CA-1, so long as those materials are
accurate and current in all material respects.\48\ In addition, these
documents could be attached to a Form CA-1 application as responsive to
particular exhibits, which can facilitate the efficient preparation of
the form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ For example, an EU CCP could include any preexisting
documents prepared for use by its NCA as an attachment to its Form
CA-1 application and reference said attachment in response to the
requested exhibit. Such an approach would be consistent with the
requirements of the Form CA-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, future EU CCP applicants could prepare self-assessments to
facilitate the efficient preparation of Form CA-1 and the SEC's review
of the application to determine that the applicant meets each of the
requirements set forth in Section 17A(b)(3) of the Exchange Act to
register a clearing agency.\49\ In a self-assessment, an EU CCP can
describe how satisfaction of regulatory requirements under EMIR
supports an SEC finding that the applicant has met the requirements for
registration as a clearing agency in Section 17A(b)(3). In the SEC's
view, based on its experience supervising EMIR-authorized EU CCPs
registered as clearing agencies and its familiarity with the PFMI, such
self-assessment could significantly facilitate the SEC's review in
order to make the determinations required in the Exchange Act. As an
example, a self-assessment could explain how the EU CCP's compliance
with EMIR corresponds to the requirements in the Exchange Act and
applicable SEC rules thereunder, such as Rule 17Ad-22 and Regulation
SCI.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See supra note 46.
    \50\ See supra notes 12-15 (describing the requirements in Rule
17Ad-22 applicable to CCPs), 18 (citing to the requirements of
Regulation SCI), and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Requests for Exemptions

    An EU CCP may submit a request for an exemption to the SEC in one
of two ways: through the Form CA-1 application or through a separate
petition to the SEC. First, an EU CCP may submit a request for an
exemption from registration as part of Exhibit S to its Form CA-1
application, either when it seeks to register as a clearing agency or
at any time following registration by submitting an amendment to its
application including such request. Exhibit S requires an applicant to
provide a statement demonstrating why the approval of the requested
exemption would be consistent with the public interest, the protection
of investors, and the purposes of Section 17A of the Exchange Act.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See supra note 6 (noting exemptions from registration as a
clearing agency provided to Clearstream and Euroclear Bank).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, for other exemption requests, an EU CCP may submit a
petition to the SEC requesting exemptions from certain SEC requirements
for clearing agencies under the Exchange Act pursuant to the SEC's
authority in Section 17A(b)(1) or Section 36 of the Exchange Act, as
applicable. For example, an EU CCP may request an exemption because it
has determined that the application of certain SEC requirements would
impose unnecessary, duplicative, or inconsistent requirements in light
of EMIR requirements to which the EU CCP is already subject. As
outlined above, the SEC previously has made determinations related to
such issues.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See supra notes 40-42 and accompanying text; infra notes
55-57 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the CCA Standards adopting release, whether the SEC
approves an exemption is dependent on several factors, many of which
were identified as relevant to a potential request for an exemption by
an EU CCP.\53\ Based on the SEC's supervision of EU CCPs to date, and
to provide certainty to EU CCPs that request exemptions, the SEC
believes it is appropriate to make clear that it will consider the
following factors--as applicable to a particular request--in assessing
whether to grant an exemption to an EU CCP: (i) The nature of the EU
CCP's activities as a clearing agency; (ii) the anticipated level or
volume of activity that the applicant seeks to effect within the United
States; (iii) the structure of, scope of, and requirements under EMIR
to which the applicant is subject in its home jurisdiction; (iv) the
extent to which the application of EMIR is relevant to the findings the
SEC must make in considering an exemption under Section 17A(b)(1) of
the Exchange Act; and (v) the extent to which the SEC and the relevant
EU authority or authorities have appropriate cooperative arrangements
in place to communicate and cooperate to fulfill their respective
regulatory mandates. In addition, as noted in the CCA Standards
adopting release, the Commission will also consider the extent to which
the EU CCP is subject to appropriate supervision and enforcement by the
NCA or other relevant authorities in the

context of comparable EMIR requirements.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ CCA Standards adopting release, supra note 14, at 70791.
    \54\ See id. (discussing as a relevant factor the particular
system of supervision and oversight in a non-U.S. jurisdiction for
purposes of evaluating any non-U.S. framework).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in Part II.C.2, LCH SA petitioned the SEC to request
exemptions under the Exchange Act from the application of Rule 17a-22
and Rules 17Ad-22(c)(2) and (c)(2)(iii), and the SEC approved this
request based on factors similar to those discussed above.\55\ The SEC
has also provided exemptions to LCH SA with respect to application of
Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\56\ and to
LCH SA and ICEEU with respect to the application of Sections 5 and 6 of
the Exchange Act.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See supra note 40 and accompanying text.
    \56\ See supra note 41 and accompanying text.
    \57\ See supra note 42 and accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    The SEC has structured its regulatory framework for clearing
agencies that are EU CCPs to achieve an appropriate balance between (i)
applying the levels of oversight and supervision for clearing agencies
that ensure consistency with the Exchange Act and, at the same time,
(ii) avoiding the application of certain SEC requirements that are
unnecessary, duplicative, or inconsistent relative to EMIR requirements
that have already been applied to the EU CCP in the EU. Accordingly,
this policy statement and guidance is designed to provide transparency
into the SEC's processes and to describe the processes available to EU
CCPs that seek to register as clearing agencies or request exemptions
from certain SEC requirements. This policy statement and guidance also
highlight efficient ways that EU CCPs can comply with SEC rules and
describe how an EU CCP can facilitate the efficient preparation of its
application and the SEC's review of such application, potentially
resulting in shorter application preparation and review periods. It
also identifies the factors that the SEC will consider with respect to
future requests for exemptions, as applicable to a particular request.
The SEC looks forward to continuing its dialogue with the EC regarding
its consideration of whether to find the SEC's regulatory framework for
CCPs equivalent to EMIR.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: November 23, 2020.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-26285 Filed 11-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise

Chambers Works

Deepwater, NJ  08023

CERTIFIED MAIL – Return Receipt Requested

September 23, 2008

Document Control Office

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 6428

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Re: 	EPA – HQ – OPPT – 2003 - 0012

	DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100

	PFOA Data Submittal – Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples

	July 2008 Sample Data

Dear Document Control Office:

As per Part IV, Section G.5.a of the NJPDES permit, we are submitting a summary of PFOA analytical results for the weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A to NJDEP on a monthly basis. Per your request, we are sending you a paper and electronic copy of the report for samples taken during July 2008. We will continue to send you the reports each month.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (856) 540-3015.

Sincerely,

Karen L. Pinder

SET Environmental Coordinator

DuPont Chambers Works

Enclosures

Copies to:

Director, Chemical Control Division

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 4146

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20004

Ms. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only)

Principal Environmental Engineer

NJDEP Division of Water Quality

Bureau of Point Source Permitting – Region 2

401 E. State Street

P.O. Box 029

Trenton, NJ 08625-0029


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 164 (Friday, August 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44295-44296]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18154]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9046-4]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

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

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 08/12/2019 Through 08/16/2019
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20190194, Final, NSF, AQ, Continuation and Modernization of
McMurdo Station Area Activities, Review Period Ends: 10/15/2019,
Contact: Dr. Polly A. Penhale<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190195, Final Supplement, BLM, NV, Mount Hope Project Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Review Period Ends: 09/23/
2019, Contact: Kevin Hurrell<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190196, Final Supplement, USFS, SC, AP Loblolly Pine Removal
and Restoration Project, Review Period Ends: 09/23/2019, Contact:
Victor Wyant<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190197, Final, FHWA, NV, Interstate 80/Interstate 580/US
Highway 395 Freeway-to-Freeway Interchange and Connecting Road
Improvements, Contact: Abdelmoez Abdalla<PHONE_NUMBER>, Pursuant to 23
U.S.C. 139(n)(2), FHWA has issued a combined FEIS and ROD. Therefore,
the 30-day wait/review period under NEPA does not apply to this action.
EIS No. 20190198, Draft Supplement, RUS, SC, McClellanville 115 kV
Transmission Project, Comment Period Ends: 10/22/2019, Contact: Lauren
Rayburn<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190199, Final, FHWA, AL, Project No. DPI-0030(005), I-10
Mobile River Bridge and Bayway, Mobile and Baldwin Counties, Alabama,
Contact: Mr. Mark D. Barlett, P.E.<PHONE_NUMBER>, Pursuant to 23 U.S.C.
139(n)(2), FHWA has issued a combined FEIS and ROD. Therefore, the 30-
day wait/review period under NEPA does not apply to this action.
EIS No. 20190200, Final, BR, CA, B.F. Sisk Dam Safety of Dams
Modification Project, Review Period Ends: 09/23/2019, Contact: Jamie
LeFevre<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20190201, Final, BLM, UT, Grand Staircase-Escalante National
Monument-Grand Staircase, Kaiparowits, and Escalante Canyon Units and
Federal Lands previously included in the Monument that are excluded
from the Boundaries Draft Resource Management Plans and Final
Environmental Impact Statement, Review Period Ends: 09/23/2019,
Contact: Harry Barber<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20190155, Revised Draft, USACE, FL, Lake Okeechobee Watershed
Restoration Project Revised Draft Integrated Project Implementation
Report and Environmental Impact Statement, Comment Period Ends: 09/03/
2019, Contact: Dr. Gretchen Ehlinger<PHONE_NUMBER>, Revision to FR
Notice Published 07/05/2019; Extending the Comment Period from 08/19/
2019 to 09/03/2019.

    Dated: August 19, 2019.
Robert Tomiak,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2019-18154 Filed 8-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 111 (Monday, June 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34557-34558]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1334; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-18]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Sanibel, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E Airspace at Sanibel, FL, to
accommodate a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System
(GPS) special Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) serving
Sanibel Island Heliport. This action enhances the safety and airspace
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations within the
National Airspace System. Also, geographic coordinates are corrected
under their proper heading.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, August 22, 2013. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P. O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On March 6, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E airspace at
Sanibel, FL (78 FR 14473). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Subsequent to
publication the FAA found that the heliport coordinates were
incorrectly listed as point in space coordinates; and point in space
coordinates were inadvertently omitted. This action makes the
correction. Except for editorial changes and the changes listed above,
this rule is the same as published in the NPRM.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9W dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Sanibel, FL, providing the controlled airspace
required to support the new Copter RNAV (GPS) special standard
instrument approach procedures for Sanibel Island Heliport. Controlled
airspace within a 6-mile radius of the point in space coordinates of
the heliport is necessary for the safety and management of IFR
operations at the heliport. Geographic coordinates for the heliport and
point in space are corrected and separately listed.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that

section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the
use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it establishes controlled airspace at Sanibel Island
Heliport, Sanibel, FL.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, effective September 15, 2012, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO FL E5 Sanibel, FL [New]

Sanibel Island Heliport, FL
    (Lat. 26[deg]27'46'' N., long. 82[deg]9'18'' W.)
Point in Space Coordinates
    (Lat. 26[deg]27'52'' N., long. 82[deg]8'35'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6-mile radius of the Point in Space Coordinates (lat.
26[deg]27'52'' N., long. 82[deg]9'35'' W.) serving Sanibel Island
Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on May 28, 2013.
Jackson D. Allen,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2013-13107 Filed 6-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 7, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50130-50132]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19219]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-N-0929]

Food and Drug Administration New Era of Smarter Food Safety
Summit on E-Commerce; Public Meeting; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing a
virtual public meeting entitled ``FDA New Era of Smarter Food Safety
Summit on E-Commerce: Ensuring the Safety of Foods Ordered Online and
Delivered Directly to Consumers.'' The purpose of the public meeting is
to engage with stakeholders and invite input on various topics
pertaining to the implementation of Core Element 3.1 of the New Era of
Smarter Food Safety Blueprint. We intend to use information resulting
from the public meeting to determine what action(s), if any, should be
taken to help ensure the safe production and delivery of human and
animal foods sold through new e-commerce business models.

DATES: The public meeting will be held over 3 days on October 19, 2021,
from 11:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time; October 20, 2021, from 11:30
a.m. to 5:15 p.m. Eastern Time, and October 21, 2021, from 11:30 a.m.
to 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time. Submit either electronic or written comments
on this public meeting by November 20, 2021. See ``Participating in the
Public Meeting'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document for registration and other information regarding meeting
participation.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held virtually. For more
information on the public meeting, see: https://www.fda.gov/food/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements/new-era-smarter-food-safety-summit-e-commerce-ensuring-safety-foods-ordered-online-and-delivered.
    You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely
filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be
submitted on or before November 20, 2021. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of November 20, 2021. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions)
will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery
service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

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-2021-N-0929 for ``FDA New Era of Smarter Food Safety Summit on E-
Commerce.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see
ADDRESSES), 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,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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.'' We will review
this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in our
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.govinfo.gov/content/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,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita Yates, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition, (HFS-009), Food and Drug Administration, 5001
Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In April 2019, we announced the New Era of Smarter Food Safety
initiative and in July 2020, we released the New Era of Smarter Food
Safety Blueprint (see https://www.fda.gov/food/new-era-smarter-food-safety/new-era-smarter-food-safety-blueprint) (Blueprint). The
Blueprint outlines the effort to modernize approaches to food safety as
we respond to unique demands on our food system and work to ensure the
safety and security of our food supply. This virtual public meeting
(Summit) will focus on Core Element 3.1: Ensure Safety of Food Produced
or Delivered Using New Business Models. Specifically, we invite
discussion and input on human and animal foods sold through Business to
Consumer (B2C) e-commerce. B2C e-commerce is the manufacturing,
packaging, labeling, storage, and delivery of human and animal foods
sold directly to consumers, through commercial transactions conducted
electronically on the internet.
    The Summit is an opportunity for us to share our current
understanding of human and animal foods sold through new business
models and hear from the public. The Summit will enhance our knowledge
of possible food safety risks related to these new business models and
help us identify what additional courses of action, if any, are needed
to address potential food safety vulnerabilities.
    We invite industry, consumers, consumer and public health
organizations, academia, Federal, State, local, and tribal governments,
foreign governments, and other interested parties to join the
discussion and provide their perspectives on these issues.

II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Meeting

    The Summit will address a variety of topics related to human and
animal foods sold through B2C e-commerce, including:
     Types of B2C e-commerce models (e.g., produce and meal kit
subscription services, ghost kitchens, dark stores);
     Safety risks associated with foods sold through B2C e-
commerce;
     Standards of care used by industry to control these safety
risks;
     Types of delivery models (e.g., third-party delivery,
autonomous delivery models);
     Regulatory approaches to food sold through B2C e-commerce,
including challenges and gaps that need to be addressed; and
     Labeling of foods sold through B2C e-commerce.
    During the Summit, experts from FDA, industry, academia, consumer
and public health organizations, domestic and foreign governments will
be asked to address these topics. Each day, there will also be an
opportunity for registered participants to ask questions and engage
with these experts, as well as to offer open public comment for those
who select this option when registering (see Part III, ``Participating
in the Public Meeting'').
    Before the meeting date, we will post the agenda and additional
background materials on the internet at: https://www.fda.gov/food/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements/new-era-smarter-food-safety-summit-e-commerce-ensuring-safety-foods-ordered-online-and-delivered. Registered participants will be notified when
these materials are posted. There will be an opportunity for interested
stakeholders to submit written comments following the meeting.

III. Participating in the Public Meeting

    Registration: To register for the public meeting, please visit the
following website to register: https://www.fda.gov/food/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements/new-era-smarter-food-safety-summit-e-commerce-ensuring-safety-foods-ordered-online-and-delivered. Please provide complete contact information for each
attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email, and
telephone.
    This is a virtual public meeting. Registration is free and will be
open through the day of the meeting. Persons interested in attending
this public meeting must register at: https://www.fda.gov/food/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements/new-era-smarter-food-safety-summit-e-commerce-ensuring-safety-foods-ordered-online-and-delivered. Upon registering, they will receive a
confirmation email with a link for the public meeting. Approximately

24 to 48 hours before the event, registrants will receive an email with
the meeting link and a formal calendar invitation.
    Request to Provide Open Public Comment: During online registration,
you may indicate if you wish to make open public comments during the
public meeting and which topic(s) you would like to address. All
requests to make public comments must be received by October 8, 2021 at
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. We will do our best to accommodate requests to
make public comments. We are seeking to have a broad representation of
ideas and issues presented at the meeting. Individuals and
organizations with common interests are urged to consolidate or
coordinate their comments. FDA will determine the amount of time
allotted to each commenter, the meeting day, the approximate time open
public comments are to be provided and notify all registrants who
requested to make public comments.
    Streaming Webcast of the Public Meeting: This public meeting will
be broadcast via YouTube.
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript of the
public meeting is available, it will be accessible at https://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at the Dockets Management Staff
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20850. A link to the transcript will also be available on
the internet at: https://www.fda.gov/food/workshops-meetings-webinars-food-and-dietary-supplements/new-era-smarter-food-safety-summit-e-commerce-ensuring-safety-foods-ordered-online-and-delivered.

    Dated: August 31, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-19219 Filed 9-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P