[Federal Register: November 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 226)]
[Notices]
[Page 66026-66028]
[DOCID:fr26no07-94]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA-2007-0039]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed revision of the
previously approved collection of information, OMB  2127-0646.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections.
    This document describes the collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 25, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to U.S. Department of
Transportation Dockets, 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Docket No. NHTSA-2007-0039

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Siegler, Ph.D., Contracting
Officer's Technical Representative, Office of Behavioral Safety
Research (NTI-132), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Ave, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulations (at 5 CFR
1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
    (i) 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) 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) how to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (iv) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, and or other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submissions of responses.
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks public comment on
the following proposed revision of the previously approved collection
of information, OMB  2127-0646:

Evaluation Surveys for Impaired Driving and Seat Belt Interventions

    Type of Request--Revision of the previously approved collection of
information.
    OMB Clearance Number: 2127-0646.
    Form Number: NHTSA1010.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval--3 years from date of
approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information--The National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposes to conduct telephone
surveys to evaluate interventions designed to increase seat belt use
and reduce impaired driving. Sample sizes would range from 200 to 2000
depending on the geographic unit being surveyed (Nation, Region, State,
Community) and the evaluation design for the intervention (e.g., number
of analytic groups). Interview length would be 10 minutes. The surveys
would collect information on attitudes, awareness, knowledge, and
behavior related to the intervention. The surveys would follow a pre-
post design where they are administered prior to the implementation of
the intervention and after its conclusion. Interim survey waves may
also be administered if the duration of the intervention permits.
    In conducting the proposed surveys, the interviewers would use
computer-assisted telephone interviewing to reduce interview length and
minimize recording errors. A Spanish Language translation and bilingual
interviewers would be used to minimize language

barriers to participation. The proposed surveys would be anonymous.

Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was
established to reduce the mounting number of deaths, injuries, and
economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes on the Nation's
highways. As part of this statutory mandate, NHTSA is authorized to
conduct research as a foundation for the development of motor vehicle
standards and traffic safety programs.
    The heavy toll that impaired driving exacts on the nation, in
fatalities, injuries, and economic costs, is well documented. Strong
documentation also exists to show that wearing a seat belt is one of
the most important actions a person can take to prevent injury or
fatality in the event of a crash, but a significant proportion of the
population still does not wear them. The persistence of these traffic
safety problems points to a continuing need for effective interventions
to address impaired driving and non-use of safety belts. This in turn
calls for strong evaluation efforts to identify what interventions are
effective. This includes monitoring key interventions that have been
shown to be effective in order to determine whether they are retaining
their potency, as well as identifying new or refined interventions that
may influence parts of the population that have been resistant to
previous measures.
    Over the next few years, a number of legislative and programmatic
changes will require NHTSA to collect public awareness information
about its programs. Under section 410 of SAFETEA-LU, spending for State
enforcement grants for impaired driving programs will increase almost
100 million dollars annually, from 39.6 million in 2005 to $139 million
in 2009. States seeking to access these grants for specific impaired
driving activities will need to have implemented a number of programs
in order to be eligible for these grants including; statewide
checkpoints and/or saturation patrols, prosecution/adjudication
outreach, increased BAC testing of drivers in fatal crashes, high BAC
law (stronger/additional penalties), effective alcohol rehabilitation
and/or DWI courts, under age 21 program, administrative license
revocation or suspension, and self-sustaining programs.
    Under Section 406 of SAFETEA-LU, incentive grants to encourage
States to enactment and enforce primary seat belt laws were $124.5
million per year between 2006 and 2009. States were eligible for these
grants if they passed a primary seat belt law, or achieved a state seat
belt use rate of 85% for two consecutive years after passing a primary
law. Under Section 405 of SAFETEA-LU, incentive grants to encourage
States to adopt and implement effective programs to reduce deaths and
injuries from riding unrestrained or improperly restrained in motor
vehicles increased from $19.84 million annually in 2005 to $25 million
annually in 2006 and through 2009. States can only use these grant
funds to implement and enforce occupant protection programs.
    It is expected that such heightened activity will increase drivers'
awareness of these programs and reduce incidents of impaired driving
and unrestrained or improperly restrained driving. Public awareness
surveys would enable NHTSA to evaluate the effectiveness of this
increased spending.
    Between 2006 and 2009, SAFETEA-LU has authorized NHTSA to spend $29
million annually on National media to promote a message of high
visibility enforcement for both impaired driving and occupant
protection programs. This requires NHTSA to examine public awareness of
programs to determine whether the media messages are reaching the
target audience.
    In order to reduce the work requirements for each State and to
create sets of survey data that may be compared among the States, NHTSA
will grant one or more separate awards to survey firms with expertise
in conducting random telephone surveys. The data will be used to
properly plan and evaluate enforcement activities directed at reducing
the occurrence of alcohol impaired driving and increasing the use of
safety belts. Data from National surveys will be used to assess the
overall effectiveness of these programs, while State data will assess
effectiveness of individual State programs. States found to have
implemented effective programs to reduce their impaired driving
problem, and increased their seat belt use, will prepare materials that
highlight major features of their programs to be disseminated among
States that want to implement an improved alcohol enforcement program
or occupant protection enforcement program.
    It should be noted that during the past decade NHTSA has conducted
surveys on attitudes and behaviors on impaired driving and seat belt
use. These surveys were very useful in documenting effective programs
that have increased awareness of occupant protection and impaired
driving issues. Most of these surveys were conducted years ago and
cannot be used to evaluate new programs scheduled to be initiated in
the next few years.

Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number, and
Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information)

    Over the next 3 years, NHTSA intends to conduct National telephone
surveys to collect data from a total of 28,000 participants. For the
impaired driving programs, 2 sets of pre/post intervention surveys,
each with sample sizes of 1200, will be administered annually for 3
years. For the Occupant Protection programs, 2 sets of pre/post
intervention surveys, each with sample sizes of 1200, will be
administered annually for 3 years. NHTSA may also select certain sub-
groups to survey, including State, Regional, and Community telephone
surveys to monitor and evaluate occupant protection and impaired
driving demonstration projects. Typically, a State demonstration survey
will require 500 participants. A regional demonstration survey can
range from as few as 200 participants for a small county to 2000
participants for a region covering more than one State.
    Interviews will be conducted with persons at residential phone
numbers selected using random digit dialing. No more than one
respondent per household will be selected, and each sample member will
complete just one interview. Businesses are ineligible for the sample
and would not be interviewed. After each wave is completed and the data
analyzed, the findings will be disseminated to each State for review.

Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Record Keeping Burden
Resulting from the Collection of Information

    NHTSA estimates that respondents in the sample would require an
average of 10 minutes to complete the telephone interviews. Thus, the
number of annual estimated reporting burden on the general public would
be 1,600 hours for the National surveys and a maximum of 2,800 hours
for the State and regional demonstration surveys, or a maximum of 4,400
hours per year for the combined National, State, and regional surveys.
The respondents would not incur any reporting or record keeping costs
from the information collection.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).

Marilena Amoni,
Associate Administrator for Research and Program Development.
 [FR Doc. E7-22880 Filed 11-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


Eileen Pritchard/DC/USEPA/US

05/09/2008 07:43 AM

To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Joseph-J Dougherty" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Henigin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Neal Fann/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Rosalina Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Alan Rush" <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Bruce Schillo/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Nathalie Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Charlotte Bertrand/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Mike Clark/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

Draft Changes to Pb RIA Chpt 4 and 6

Heidi:    By this email EPA is transmitting revised  Chapters 4 and 6 of the Pb NAAQS RIA,  to OPEI for OMB review.   Changes in response to OMB comments are highlighted or colored in blue or red.

The chapters are attached below.

Your contact on this RIA is Kathy Kaufman in RTP, who can be reached on 919 541 0102.

************************

Eileen Pritchard

EPA/OPEI/OPRM

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW

Room 3521-C

Mailcode 1804-A

Washington, DC 20460

(202)564-6578

(202)566-0268 - FAX

email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77660-77662]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27377]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96481; File No. SR-GEMX-2022-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq GEMX, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA Fees

December 13, 2022.
    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 7, 2022, Nasdaq GEMX, LLC (``GEMX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend GEMX's Pricing Schedule at Options
7, Section 5, Legal & Regulatory, to reflect adjustments to FINRA
Registration Fees and Fingerprinting Fees.
    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated the additional processing of each initial or
amended Form U4, Form U5 or Form BD and electronic Fingerprint
Processing Fees to become operative on January 2, 2023. Additionally,
the Exchange designates that the FINRA Annual System Processing Fee
Assessed only during Renewals become operative on January 2, 2024.\3\
The amendments to the paper Fingerprint Fees are immediately effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90176 (October 14,
2020), 85 FR 66592 (October 20, 2020) (SR-FINRA-2020-032) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Adjust FINRA Fees To Provide Sustainable Funding for FINRA's
Regulatory Mission).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/gemx/rules, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    This proposal amends Options 7, Section 5, Legal & Regulatory, to
reflect adjustments to FINRA Registration Fees and Fingerprinting
Fees.\4\ The FINRA fees are collected and retained by FINRA via Web CRD
for the registration of employees of GEMX Members that are not FINRA
members (``Non-FINRA members''). The Exchange is merely listing these
fees on its Pricing Schedule. The Exchange does not collect or retain
these fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ FINRA operates Web CRD, the central licensing and
registration system for the U.S. securities industry. FINRA uses Web
CRD to maintain the qualification, employment and disciplinary
histories of registered associated persons of broker-dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend: (1) the $110 fee for the additional
processing of each initial or amended Form U4, Form U5 or Form BD that
includes the initial reporting, amendment, or certification or one or
more disclosure events or proceedings to $155; (2) the $45 FINRA Annual
System Processing Fee Assessed only during Renewals to $70; and (3) the
$15 Second Submission (Electronic) Fingerprint Processing Fee to $20.
Each of these fees are listed within GEMX Options 7, Section 5. These
amendments are being made in accordance with a FINRA rule change to
adjust to its fees.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See note 4. FINRA noted in its rule change that it was
adjusting its fees to provide sustainable funding for FINRA's
regulatory mission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend the following Fingerprint Fees:
(1) the $29.50 Initial Submission (Electronic) fee to $31.25; \6\ (2)
the $44.50 Initial Submission (Paper) fee to $41.25; \7\ (3) the $29.50
Third Submission (Electronic) fee to $31.25; \8\ and (4) the $44.50
Third Submission (Paper) fee to $41.25.\9\ Specifically, today, the FBI
fingerprint charge is $11.25 \10\ and the FINRA electronic Fingerprint
Fee will increase from $15 to $20 in 2023.\11\ While FINRA did not
amend the paper Fingerprint Fee, previously the FBI Fee was reduced
from $14.50 to $11.25.\12\ The paper Fingerprint Fees are not currently
reflecting the amount assessed by FINRA. The amendment to the paper
Fingerprint Fees will conform these fees with those of FINRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This fee includes a $20.00 FINRA fee and $11.25 FBI fee).
See https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/classic-crd/fingerprints/fingerprint-fees.
    \7\ This fee includes a $30 FINRA Fee and a $11.25 FBI Fee. See
https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/classic-crd/fingerprints/fingerprint-fees.
    \8\ This fee includes a $20.00 FINRA fee and $11.25 FBI fee).
See https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/classic-crd/fingerprints/fingerprint-fees.
    \9\ This fee includes a $30 FINRA Fee and a $11.25 FBI Fee. See
https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/classic-crd/fingerprints/fingerprint-fees.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67247 (June 25,
2012) 77 FR 38866 (June 29, 2012) (SR-FINRA-2012-030) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Sections 4 and 6 of Schedule A to the FINRA By-Laws Regarding Fees
Relating to the Central Registration Depository) (``2012 Rule
Change'')
    \11\ See note 4.
    \12\ See 2012 Rule Change at note 6. The FBI does not charge its
fee on a second fingerprint transaction when it identifies the first
set of fingerprints as illegible for the same individual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FINRA Web CRD Fees are user-based and there is no distinction
in the cost incurred by FINRA if the user is a FINRA member or a Non-
FINRA member. Accordingly, the proposed fees mirror those currently
assessed by FINRA.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with section
6(b)

of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of sections
6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, in that it provides
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is
not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes it is reasonable to increase: (1) the $110
fee for the additional processing of each initial or amended Form U4,
Form U5 or Form BD that includes the initial reporting, amendment, or
certification or one or more disclosure events or proceedings to $155;
(2) the $45 FINRA Annual System Processing Fee Assessed only during
Renewals to $70; and (3) the electronic Fingerprint Fees from $15 to
$20 in accordance with an adjustment to FINRA's fees \15\ because the
proposed fees are identical to those adopted by FINRA for use of Web
CRD for disclosure and the registration of FINRA members and their
associated persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The $20 FINRA Fee is in addition to the $11.25 FBI Fee
except for the second fingerprint transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These costs are borne by FINRA when a Non-FINRA member uses Web
CRD. The Exchange's rule text will reflect the current registration and
electronic fingerprint rates that will be assessed by FINRA as of
January 2, 2023 for the additional processing of each initial or
amended Form U4, Form U5 or Form BD and Second Submission (Electronic)
Fingerprint Processing Fee and the registration rates that will be
assessed by FINRA as of January 2, 2024 for the FINRA Annual System
Processing Fee Assessed only during Renewals.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it is reasonable to correct the paper
Fingerprint Fees to reflect the reduced FBI Fee of $11.25.\17\ The
amendments to the paper Fingerprint Fees will provide all GEMX Members
with the correct Fingerprint Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 2012 Rule Change at note 6. The FBI does not charge its
fee on a second fingerprint transaction when it identifies the first
set of fingerprints as illegible for the same individual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to increase: (1) the $110 fee for the additional
processing of each initial or amended Form U4, Form U5 or Form BD that
includes the initial reporting, amendment, or certification or one or
more disclosure events or proceedings to $155; (2) the $45 FINRA Annual
System Processing Fee Assessed only during Renewals to $70; and (3) the
electronic Fingerprint Fees from $15 to $20 in accordance with an
adjustment to FINRA's fees \18\ because the Exchange will not be
collecting or retaining these fees, therefore, the Exchange will not be
in a position to apply them in an inequitable or unfairly
discriminatory manner. Similarly, the Exchange believes it is equitable
and not unfairly discriminatory to correct the paper Fingerprint Fees
to reflect the reduced FBI Fee of $11.25 \19\ because the Exchange will
not be collecting or retaining these fees, therefore, the Exchange will
not be in a position to apply them in an inequitable or unfairly
discriminatory manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The $20 FINRA Fee is in addition to the $11.25 FBI Fee
except for the second fingerprint transaction.
    \19\ See 2012 Rule Change at note 6. The FBI does not charge its
fee on a second fingerprint transaction when it identifies the first
set of fingerprints as illegible for the same individual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to increase: (1) the $110
fee for the additional processing of each initial or amended Form U4,
Form U5 or Form BD that includes the initial reporting, amendment, or
certification or one or more disclosure events or proceedings to $155;
(2) the $45 FINRA Annual System Processing Fee Assessed only during
Renewals to $70; and (3) the electronic Fingerprint Fees from $15 to
$20 in accordance with an adjustment to FINRA's fees \20\ does not
impose an undue burden on competition because the Exchange will not be
collecting or retaining these fees, therefore, the Exchange will not be
in a position to apply them in an inequitable or unfairly
discriminatory manner. The proposal will reflect the fees that will be
assessed by FINRA to all Members who register or require fingerprints
as of January 2, 2023 and January 2, 2024, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The $20 FINRA Fee is in addition to the $11.25 FBI Fee
except for the second fingerprint transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the Exchange believes it does not impose an undue burden
on competition to correct the paper Fingerprint Fees to reflect the
reduced FBI Fee of $11.25 because the Exchange will not be collecting
or retaining these fees, therefore, the Exchange will not be in a
position to apply them in an inequitable or unfairly discriminatory
manner.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-GEMX-2022-12 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2022-12. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than

those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-GEMX-2022-12 and should be
submitted on or before January 9, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-27377 Filed 12-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 85 (Friday, May 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25497-25499]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09252]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88756; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2020-32]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 1.1E To Modify the Definition of ``UTP Exchange Traded Product''
and Rule 5.1E To Incorporate the Modified Definition of ``UTP Exchange
Traded Product''

April 27, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on April 16, 2020, NYSE American LLC (``Exchange'') 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 the self-regulatory organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend (1) Rule 1.1E to modify the
definition of ``UTP Exchange Traded Product'' and (2) Rule 5.1E to
incorporate the definition of UTP Exchange Traded Product as set forth
in revised Rule 1.1E. The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend (1) Rule 1.1E to modify the
definition of ``UTP Exchange Traded Product'' and (2) Rule 5.1E to
incorporate the definition of UTP Exchange Traded Product as set forth
in revised Rule 1.1E.
Rule 1.1E
    Rule 1.1E(bbb) currently provides that the term ``Exchange Traded
Product'' means a security that meets the definition of ``derivative
securities product'' in Rule 19b-4(e) under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and a ``UTP Exchange Traded Product'' means an Exchange Traded
Product that trades on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted trading
privileges. The Exchange proposes to amend the definition of ``UTP
Exchange Traded Product'' to mean one of the following Exchange Traded
Products that trades on the Exchange pursuant to unlisted trading
privileges: Equity Linked Notes, Investment Company Units, Index-Linked
Exchangeable Notes, Equity Gold Shares, Equity Index-Linked Securities,
Commodity-Linked Securities, Currency-Linked Securities, Fixed-Income
Index-Linked Securities, Futures-Linked Securities, Multifactor-Index-
Linked Securities, Trust Certificates, Currency and Index Warrants,
Portfolio Depository Receipts, Trust Issued Receipts, Commodity-Based
Trust Shares, Currency Trust Shares, Commodity Index Trust Shares,
Commodity Futures Trust Shares, Partnership Units, Paired Trust Shares,
Trust Units, Managed Fund Shares, Managed Trust Securities, and Managed
Portfolio Shares.
    This proposed change is based on NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE
National'') Rule 1.1(m) and NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE Chicago'') Rule
1.1(k).\4\ This list is designed to align the rules of the Exchange
with the rules of NYSE National and NYSE Chicago and to enumerate the
types of Exchange Traded Products to which the Exchange would extend
unlisted trading privileges (``UTP'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NYSE National and NYSE Chicago have filed proposed rule
changes for immediate effectiveness to amend their respective rules
to add Managed Portfolio Shares to their definitions of UTP Exchange
Traded Products. See SR-NYSENAT-2020-16 (filed April 16, 2020) and
SR-NYSECHX-2020-13 (filed April 16, 2020).

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

Rule 5.1E
    Rule 5.1E(a)(1) provides that the Exchange may extend UTP to any
security that is an NMS stock (as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS
under the Act) that is listed on another national securities exchange
or with respect to which unlisted trading privileges may otherwise be
extended in accordance with Section 12(f) of the Act. Rule 5.1E(a)(2)
further specifies that a UTP Exchange Traded Product, which is defined
in that Rule as a ``new derivative securities product'' as defined in
Rule 19b-4(e) under the Exchange Act and traded pursuant to Rule 19b-
4(e) under the Act, would be subject to the additional rules enumerated
in Rule 5.1E(a)(2)(A)-(E).
    Because the Exchange proposes to modify the definition of UTP
Exchange Trading Product in Rule 1.1E(bbb) to conform to the rules of
NYSE National and NYSE Chicago, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
5.1E(a)(2) to eliminate redundant text and cross reference the term
``UTP Exchange Traded Product'' as it is defined in Rule 1.1E. This
proposed change would also conform Rule 5.1E(a)(2) with the comparable
NYSE National rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in particular, because it
is designed to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market, to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) & (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposed rule change ensures that Rule
1.1E identifies and publicly states the complete list of Exchange
Traded Products to which UTP may be extended for trading on the
Exchange. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market, promotes just and equitable principles of trade, and protects
investors and the public interest by promoting consistency with the
rules of the Exchange's affiliated markets and by providing additional
specificity, clarity, and transparency in the Exchange's rules with
respect to the Exchange Traded Products that may be traded on a UTP
basis on the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend Rule 5.1E(a)(2)
also removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and
open market, promotes just and equitable principles of trade, and
protects investors and the public interest because it proposes to
conform this rule governing the trading of UTP Exchange Traded Products
with the comparable rule of the Exchange's affiliated market, NYSE
National, which has been approved by the Commission.\7\ The proposed
rule change would also remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system and protect
investors and the public interest by promoting continuity across
affiliated exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In its Order approving the NYSE National rule on which this
proposed change is based, the Commission found that the NYSE
National rules set forth an ``appropriate framework for the trading
of Exchange Traded Products on a UTP basis on the Exchange'' and are
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act. See Securities and
Exchange Act Release No. 83289 (May 17, 2018), 83 FR 23968 (May 23,
2018), at 23975.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change would
conform Exchange rules, as described herein, with the comparable rules
of its affiliated exchanges, NYSE National and NYSE Chicago, and permit
UTP trading of Exchange Traded Products on the Exchange in a manner
consistent with its affiliated exchanges.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \10\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\11\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission notes that
the Exchange's proposal would conform the Exchange's rules, as
described herein, to the corresponding rules of its affiliated
exchanges.\12\ Accordingly, the Commission believes that the proposal
raises no new or novel regulatory issues and waiver of the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest. The Commission therefore waives the 30-day operative
delay and designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon
filing.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ See NYSE National Rules 1.1 and 5.1 and NYSE Chicago Rule
1.1.
    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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-NYSEAMER-2020-32 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-32. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-32 and should be submitted
on or before May 22, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-09252 Filed 4-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 17 (Friday, January 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 8613]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01887]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9031-5]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

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

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs)
Filed 01/16/2017 Through 01/20/2017
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: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

EIS No. 20170016, Draft, USFS, CA, Strategic Community Fuelbreak
Improvement Project, Comment Period Ends: 03/13/2017, Contact: Jeff
Kwasny<PHONE_NUMBER>
EIS No. 20170017, Final, BR, CA, Long-Term Plan to Protect Adult Salmon
in the Lower Klamath River, Review Period Ends: 02/26/2017, Contact:
Julia Long<PHONE_NUMBER>
EIS No. 20170018, Final, DOE, LA, Adoption--Golden Pass LNG Export
Project, Review Period, Contact: Kyle Moorman<PHONE_NUMBER>

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has adopted the Federal
Regulatory Commission's FEIS No. 20160180, filed 07/29/2016 with the
U.S. EPA. DOE was a cooperating agency for this project. Therefore,
recirculating the document is not necessary under Section 1506.3(c) of
the CEQ Regulations.

EIS No. 20170019, Draft, USACE, CA, Malibu Creek Ecosystem Restoration,
Comment Period Ends: 03/27/2017, Contact: Lawrence Smith<PHONE_NUMBER>

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20160286, Draft, USACE, NJ, Rahway River Basin Flood Risk
Management Plan, Comment Period Ends: 02/07/2017, Contact: Kimberly
Rightler<PHONE_NUMBER>

    Revision to the FR Notice Published 12/09/2016: Extending Comment
Period from 01/23/2017 to 02/07/2017; and Change Contact Phone No. to
917-790-8722.

EIS No. 20160296, Final, USACE, AL, Update of the Water Control Manual
for the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin in Alabama,
Florida, and Georgia and a Water Supply Storage Assessment, Review
Period Ends: 02/01/2017, Contact: Lewis Sumner<PHONE_NUMBER>

    Revision to the FR Notice Published 12/16/2016; Extending Comment
Period from 01/17/2017 to 02/01/2017.

    Dated: January 23, 2017.
Dawn Roberts,
Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal
Activities.
[FR Doc. 2017-01887 Filed 1-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 91 (Monday, May 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27782-27787]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09954]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88810; File No. SR-BOX-2020-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt New Rule Regarding Transfer of
Positions

May 5, 2020.
    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 April 28, 2020, BOX Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') 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 the self-regulatory organization. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to establish BOX Rule 7160 (``Transfer of
Positions'') to provide a process by which Participants may transfer
option positions in limited circumstances off the floor. The text of
the proposed rule change is available from the principal office of the
Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the
Exchange's internet website at http://boxoptions.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in

Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to establish Rule 7160
(``Transfer of Positions'') to provide a process by which Participants
may transfer option positions in limited circumstances off the floor.
Rule 7160 will specify the circumstances under which a Participant may
effect transfers of positions to permit market participants to move
positions from one account to another without exposure to the BOX
Trading Floor and to permit transfers upon the occurrence of
significant, non-recurring events. The proposed rule change is similar
to Cboe Rule 6.7.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange notes the proposed rule change is also similar
to NASDAQ PHLX Options 6; Section 5 Transfer of Positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Exchange Rules do not specifically address transfers of
option positions between accounts, individuals or entities. The
Exchange, however, plans on aligning its Rules with its competitors by
allowing off the floor transfers in situations similar to those
permitted on other exchanges. The proposed rule will establish Exchange
policy with respect to off the floor transfers of options positions in
certain limited circumstances.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to state, ``existing positions
in options listed on the Exchange, of a Participant or person
associated with the Participant, or non-Participant, or person
associated with a non-Participant that are to be transferred on, from,
or to the books of a Clearing Participant may be transferred off the
Exchange if the transfer involves one or more of the flooring events: .
. . .'' The proposed rule language makes clear that the Rule will not
apply to products other than options listed on the Exchange.\4\ The
proposed rule text also mandates that a Participant or person
associated with the Participant must be on at least one side of the
transfer. The proposed rule change also states that transferred
positions must be on, from, or to the books of a Clearing
Participant.\5\ The proposed rule change also states that existing
positions of a Participant or person associated with a Participant, or
non-Participant, or person associated with a non-Participant may be
subject to a transfer, except under specified circumstances in which a
transfer may only be effected for positions of a Participant or person
associated with the Participant.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Proposed paragraph (h) also states that the transfer
procedure only applies to positions in options listed on the
Exchange, and that transfers of non-Exchange-listed options and
other financial instruments are not governed by Rule 7160.
    \5\ The Exchange understands that this is consistent with how
transfers are currently effected on competitor exchanges. See Nasdaq
Phlx LLC (``Phlx'') Options 6, Section 5; See also Cboe Exchange,
Inc. (``Cboe'') Rule 6.7.
    \6\ See proposed subparagraphs (a)(5) and (7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes transfers of positions in Exchange-listed
options may also be subject to applicable laws, rules, and regulations,
including rules of other self-regulatory organizations.\7\ Except as
explicitly provided in the proposed rule text, the proposed rule change
is not intended to exempt position transfers from any other applicable
rules or regulations, and proposed paragraph (g) makes this clear in
the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See proposed paragraph (h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change adds ten events where a transfer would be
permitted to occur.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(1) permits a transfer to occur
if it, pursuant to Rule 3000, is an adjustment or transfer in
connection with the correction of a bona fide error in the recording of
a transaction or the transferring of a position to another account,
provided that the original trade documentation confirms the error.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(2) permits a transfer if it is a
transfer of positions from one account to another account where there
is no change in ownership involved (i.e., the accounts are for the same
Person),\8\ provided the accounts are not in separate aggregation units
or otherwise subject to information barrier or account segregation
requirements. The proposed rule change provides market participants
with flexibility to maintain positions in accounts used for the same
trading purpose in a manner consistent with their businesses. Such
transfers are not intended to be transactions among different market
participants, as there would be no change in ownership permitted under
the provision, and would also not permit transfers among different
trading units for which accounts are otherwise required to be
maintained separately.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange proposes to define the term ``Person'' within
this proposed Rule 7160 as ``For purposes of this rule, the term
``Person'' shall be defined as an individual, partnership (general
or limited), joint stock company, corporation, limited liability
company, trust or unincorporated organization, or any governmental
entity or agency or political subdivision thereof.'' This definition
is identical to Cboe Rule 1.1.
    \9\ Various rules (for example, Regulation SHO in certain
circumstances) require accounts to be maintained separately, and the
proposed rule change is consistent with those rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proposed subparagraph (a)(3) similarly permits a transfer
if it is a consolidation of accounts \10\ where no change in ownership
is involved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ This refers to the consolidation of entire accounts (e.g.,
combining two separate accounts (including the positions in each
account into a single account)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Proposed subparagraph (a)(4) permits a transfer if it is a
merger, acquisition, consolidation, or similar non-recurring
transaction for a Person. For example, a Participant that is undergoing
a structural change and a one-time movement of positions may require a
transfer of positions.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(5) permits a transfer involving
the dissolution of a joint account in which the remaining Participant
or person associated with the Participant assumes the positions of the
joint account. For example, a person associated with a Participant is
leaving a firm that will no longer be in business may require a
transfer of positions to another firm.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(6) permits a transfer involving
the dissolution of a corporation or partnership in which a former
nominee of the corporation or partnership assumes the positions.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(7) permits a position transfer
as part of a Participant's or associated person's capital contribution
to a new joint account, partnership, or corporations.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(8) permits a transfer regarding
the donation of positions to a not-for-profit corporation. The Exchange
believes that permitting such a transfer in very limited circumstances
is reasonable, as it allows organizations to accomplish certain goals
more efficiently.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(9) permits the transfer of
positions to a minor under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act.
     Proposed subparagraph (a)(10) permits the transfer of
positions through operation of law from death, bankruptcy, or
otherwise. This provision is consistent with applicable laws, rules,
and regulations that legally require transfers in certain
circumstances. This proposed rule change is consistent with the
purposes of other circumstances in the current rule, such as the
transfer of positions to a minor or dissolution of a corporation.
    The Exchange believes these proposed events all have similar
purposes in that

they will enable market participants to move positions from one account
to another and to permit transfers upon the occurrence of significant,
non-recurring events.\11\ As noted above, the proposed rule change is
consistent with current rules of other self-regulatory organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed paragraph (g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Exchange Rule 7160(b) provides that unless otherwise
permitted by paragraph (f), no position may net against another
position (``netting''), and no position transfer may result in
preferential margin or haircut treatment.\12\ Netting occurs when long
positions and short positions in the same series ``offset'' against
each other, leaving no or a reduced position. For example, if a
Participant or associated person wanted to transfer 100 long calls to
another account that contained short calls of the same options series
as well as other positions, even if the transfer is permitted pursuant
to one of the 10 permissible events listed in the Proposed Rule, the
Participant or associated person could not transfer the offsetting
series, as they would net against each other and close the positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For example, positions may not transfer from a customer,
joint back office, or firm account to a Market Maker account.
However, positions may transfer from a Market Maker account to a
customer, joint back office, or firm account (assuming no netting of
positions occurs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, netting is permitted for transfers on behalf of a Market
Maker account for transactions in multiply listed options series on
different options exchanges, but only if the Market Maker nominees are
trading for the same Participant or associated person, and the options
transactions on the different options exchanges clear into separate
exchange-specific accounts because they cannot easily clear into the
same Market Maker account at the Clearing Corporation. In such
instances, all Market Maker positions in the exchange-specific accounts
for the multiply listed class would be automatically transferred on
their trade date into one central Market Maker account (commonly
referred to as a ``universal account'') at the Clearing Corporation.
Positions cleared into a universal account would automatically net
against each other. Options exchanges permit different naming
conventions with respect to Market Maker account acronyms (for example,
lettering versus numbering and number of characters), which are used
for accounts at the Clearing Corporation. A Market Maker may have a
nominee with an appointment in class XYZ on BOX, and have another
nominee with an appointment in class XYZ on Phlx, but due to account
acronym naming conventions, those nominees may need to clear their
transactions into separate accounts (one for BOX transactions and
another for Phlx transactions) at the Clearing Corporation rather into
a universal account (in which account the positions may net). The
proposed rule change permits transfers from these separate exchange-
specific accounts into the Market Maker's universal account in this
circumstance to achieve this purpose.
Transfer Price
    The Exchange proposes to state that the transfer price, to the
extent it is consistent with applicable laws, rules, and regulations,
including rules of other self-regulatory organizations, and tax and
accounting rules and regulations, at which a transfer is effected may
be: (1) The original trade prices of the positions that appear on the
books of the trading Clearing Participant, in which case the records of
the transfer must indicate the original trade dates for the positions;
provided, transfers to correct bona fide errors pursuant to proposed
subparagraph (a)(1) must be transferred at the correct original trade
prices; (2) mark-to-market prices of the positions at the close of
trading on the transfer date; (3) mark-to-market prices of the
positions at the close of trading on the trade date prior to the
transfer date; \13\ or (4) the then-current market price of the
positions at the time the transfer is effected.\14\ The proposed rule
text regarding permissible transfer prices provides market participants
with flexibility to determine the transfer price at which the transfer
may be effected. The Exchange proposes the four options noted above
with respect to the transfer price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For example, for a transfer that occurs on a Tuesday, the
transfer price may be based on the closing market price on Monday.
    \14\ See proposed paragraph (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule change provides market participants that effect
transactions with flexibility to select a transfer price based on
circumstances of the transfer and their business. However, for
corrections of bona fide errors, because those transfers are necessary
to correct processing errors that occurred at the time of transaction,
those transfers would occur at the original transaction price, as the
purpose of the transfer is to create the originally intended result of
the transaction.
Prior Written Notice
    Proposed Exchange Rule 7160(b) requires a Participant or person(s)
associated with the Participant and its Clearing Participant(s) (to the
extent the Participant or associated person are not self-clearing) to
submit to the Exchange, in a manner determined by the Exchange, written
notice prior to effecting a transfer from or to the account of a
Participant(s) or associated person(s).\15\ The notice must indicate:
The Exchange-listed options positions to be transferred; the nature of
the transaction; the enumerated provision(s) under proposed paragraph
(a) pursuant to which the positions are being transferred; the name of
the counterparty(ies); the anticipated transfer date; the method for
determining the transfer price; and any other information requested by
the Exchange.\16\ The proposed notice will ensure the Exchange is aware
of all transfers so that it can monitor and review them (including the
records that must be retained pursuant to proposed paragraph (e)) to
determine whether they are effected in accordance with the Rules. The
proposed rule text requires additional information with respect to the
prior written notification that is required to effect a transfer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ This notice provision applies only to transfers involving a
Participant's or associated persons' positions and not to positions
of non-Participants and non-Participant associated persons, as they
are not subject to the Rules. In addition, no notice would be
required to effect transfers to correct bona fide errors pursuant to
proposed subparagraph (a)(1).
    \16\ See proposed paragraph (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, requiring notice from the Participant or person(s)
associated with the Participant and its Clearing Participant will
ensure both parties are in agreement with respect to the terms of the
transfer. As noted in proposed subparagraph (d)(2), receipt of notice
of an transfer does not constitute a determination by the Exchange that
the transfer was effected or reported in conformity with the
requirements of the proposed Rule 7160. Notwithstanding submission of
written notice to the Exchange, Participants or person(s) associated
with the Participant and Clearing Participant(s) that effect transfers
that do not conform to the requirements of the proposed Rule will be
subject to appropriate disciplinary action in accordance with the
Rules.
Records
    The proposed Exchange Rule 7160(e) requires each Participant or
person(s) associated with the Participant and each Clearing Participant
that is a party to a transfer must make and retain records of

the information provided in the written notice to the Exchange pursuant
to proposed subparagraph (e)(1), as well as information on the actual
Exchange-listed options that are ultimately transferred, the actual
transfer date, and the actual transfer price (and the original trade
dates, if applicable), and any other information the Exchange may
request the Participant or associated persons, or Clearing Participant
to provide.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See proposed paragraph (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Presidential Exemption
    Proposed paragraph (f) provides exemptions approved by the
Exchange's Chief Executive Officer or President (or senior-level
designee). Specifically, this provision is in addition to the
exemptions set forth in proposed paragraph (a). The Exchange proposes
that the Exchange Chief Executive Officer or President (or senior-level
designee) may grant an exemption from the requirement of this proposed
Rule, on his or her own motion or upon application of the Participant
or person(s) associated with the Participant (with respect to the
Participant or person(s) associated with the Participant's positions)
or a Clearing Participant (with respect to positions carried and
cleared by the Clearing Participants). The Chief Executive Officer, the
President, or his or her designee, may permit a transfer if necessary
or appropriate for the maintenance of a fair and orderly market and the
protection of investors and is in the public interest, including due to
unusual or extraordinary circumstances. For example, an exemption may
be granted if the market value of the Person's positions would be
compromised by having to comply with the requirement to trade on the
Exchange pursuant to the normal auction process or when, in the
judgment of the Chief Executive Officer, President, or his or her
designee, market conditions make trading on the Exchange
impractical.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See proposed Rule (f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Routine, Recurring Transfers
    The Exchange proposes to state that the transfer procedure set
forth in Rule 7160 is intended to facilitate non-routine, nonrecurring
movements of positions.\19\ The transfer procedure is not to be used
repeatedly or routinely in circumvention of the normal auction market
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See proposed Rule (g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exchange-Listed Options
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes paragraph (h) which notes that the
transfer procedure set forth in the proposed rule is only applicable to
positions in options listed on the Exchange. Transfers of positions in
Exchange-listed options may also be subject to applicable laws, rules,
and regulations, including rules of other self-regulatory
organizations. Transfers of non-Exchange listed options and other
financial instruments are not governed by the proposed rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\20\ in general, and Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\21\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed transfer rule is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \22\ requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \23\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that permitting the transfers in very limited
circumstances, such as where there is no change in beneficial
ownership, a transfer by operation of law or an adjustment or transfer
in connection with the correction of a bona fide error, is reasonable
to allow a Participant or associated person(s) to accomplish certain
goals efficiently. As noted above for example, a Participant or
associated person that is undergoing a structural change and a one-time
movement of positions may require a transfer of positions, or a
Participant or associated person that is leaving a firm that will no
longer be in business may require a transfer of positions to another
firm. Also, a Participant or associated person may require a transfer
of positions to make a capital contribution. The above-referenced
circumstances are non-recurring situations where the transferor
continues to maintain some ownership interest or manage the positions
transferred. By contrast, repeated or routine transfers between
entities or accounts--even if there is no change in beneficial
ownership as a result of the transfer--is inconsistent with the
purposes for which the proposed rule will be adopted. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that such activity should not be permitted under the
rules and thus, seeks to adopt language in proposed paragraph (f) that
dictates the transfer of positions procedures set forth in the proposed
rule are intended to facilitate non-recurring movements of positions.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would benefit
investors, as it adds transparency and consistency between BOX's
rulebook and other exchange rulebooks.\24\ The purpose of the proposed
rule allowing for limited circumstances in which market participants
may conduct transfers is consistent with the purpose of the
circumstances currently permitted on another exchange.\25\ The proposed
rule change will provide market participants that experience these
limited, non-recurring events with an efficient and effective means to
transfer positions in these situations. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change regarding permissible transfer prices provides
market participants with flexibility to determine the price appropriate
for their business, which maintain cost bases in accordance with normal
accounting practices and removes impediments to a free and open market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Phlx Options 6, Section 5; See also Cboe Rule 6.7.
    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-88424 (March 19,
2020), 85 FR 16981 (March 25, 2020) (Notice of Filing of Amendment
Nos. 1 and 2 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, Regarding Off-
Floor Position Transfers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change which requires notice and maintenance of
records will ensure the Exchange is able to review transfers for
compliance with the Rules, which prevents fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices. The requirement to retain records is consistent
with the requirements of Rule 17a-3 and 17a-4 under the Act.

    Similar to Cboe and Phlx rules, the Exchange would permit a
presidential exemption. The Exchange believes that this exemption is
consistent with the Act because the Exchange's Chief Executive Officer
or President (or senior-level designee) would consider an exemption in
very limited circumstances. The transfer process is intended to
facilitate non-routine, nonrecurring movements of positions and,
therefore, is not to be used repeatedly or routinely in circumvention
of the normal auction market process. The proposed rule text
specifically provides within the rule text that the Exchange's Chief
Executive Officer or President (or senior-level designee) may in his or
her judgment allow a transfer if it is necessary or appropriate for the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market and the protection of
investors and is in the public interest, including due to unusual or
extraordinary circumstances such as the market value of the Person's
positions will be comprised by having to comply with the requirement to
trade on the Exchange pursuant to the normal auction process or, when
in the judgment of President or his or her designee, market conditions
make trading on the Exchange impractical. These standards within the
proposed rule paragraph (f) are intended to provide guidance concerning
the use of this exemption which is intended to provide the Exchange
with the ability to utilize the exemption for the maintenance of a fair
and orderly market and the protection of investors and is in the public
interest. The Exchange believes that the exemption is consistent with
the Act because it would allow the Exchange's Chief Executive Officer
or President (or senior-level designee) to act in certain situations
which comply with the guidance within paragraph (f) which is intended
to protect investors and the general public. Although Cboe's rule
grants an exemption to the President (or senior-level designee),\26\
the Exchange has elected to parallel Phlx and grant an exemption to the
Exchange's Chief Executive Officer or President (or senior-level
designee), who are similarly situated within BOX's organization as
senior-level individuals.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Cboe Rule 6.7(f).
    \27\ See Phlx Section 5(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose
an undue burden on intra-market competition as the transfer procedure
may be utilized by any Participant or person associated with the
Participant and the rule will apply uniformly to all Participants and
associated persons. Use of the transfer procedure is voluntary, and all
Participants or associated persons may use the procedure to transfer
positions as long as the criteria in the proposed rule are satisfied.
With the establishment of the proposed rule, a Participant or person(s)
associated with a Participant that experiences limited permissible,
non-recurring events would have an efficient and effective means to
transfer positions in these situations. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change regarding permissible transfer prices provides
market participants with flexibility to determine the price appropriate
for their business, which determine prices in accordance with normal
accounting practices and removes impediments to a free and open market.
The Exchange does not believe the proposed notice and record
requirements are unduly burdensome to market participants. The Exchange
believes the proposed requirements are reasonable and will ensure the
Exchange is aware of transfers and would be able to monitor and review
the transfers to ensure the transfer falls within the proposed rule.
    Adopting an exemption, similar to Phlx Section 5(f), to permit the
Exchange's Chief Executive Officer or President (or senior-level
designee) to grant an exemption, in addition to the limited
circumstances of the proposed rule, in his or her judgment, does not
impose an undue burden on competition. Such an exemption would only be
applied when in the judgment of the Chief Executive Officer, or
President or his or her designee, the off-floor transfer is necessary
or appropriate for the maintenance of a fair and orderly market and the
protection of investors and is in the public interest, including due to
unusual or extraordinary circumstances, such as the possibility that
the market value of a Person's positions would be compromised by having
to comply with the requirement to trade on the Exchange pursuant to the
normal auction process or when market conditions make trading on the
Exchange impractical.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose
an undue burden on inter-market competition. The proposed position
transfer procedure is not intended to be a competitive trading tool.
The proposed rule change is an accommodative trading tool because it
permits, in limited circumstances, a transfer to facilitate non-
routine, nonrecurring movements of positions. As provided for in
proposed paragraph (g), it would not be used repeatedly or routinely in
circumvention of the normal auction market process. In addition,
proposed paragraph (f) provides within the rule text that the
Exchange's Chief Executive Officer or President (or senior-level
designee) may in his or her judgment allow a transfer for the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market and the protection of
investors and is in the public interest. The Exchange believes that the
exemption does not impose an undue burden on competition as the
Exchange's Chief Executive Officer or President (or senior-level
designee) would apply the exemption consistent with the guidance laid
out in the proposed rule text. Additionally, as discussed above, the
proposed rule change is similar to Cboe Rule 6.7 and Phlx Options 6,
Section 5 rule text, therefore, the Exchange believes having similar
rules related to transfer positions to those of other options exchanges
will reduce the administrative burden on market participants of
determining whether their transfers complies with multiple sets of
rules.
    As such, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule
change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \28\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

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

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative for 30 days from the date of filing. However, Rule
19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \30\ permits the Commission to designate a shorter
time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest. The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the
30-day operative delay. The Commission notes that the proposal is
substantively similar to rules of Cboe and Phlx and raises no new or
novel issues.\31\ The Commission therefore believes that waiver of the
30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest and hereby waives the 30-day operative delay
and designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \31\ See CBOE Rule 6.7 and NASDAQ PHLX Options 6; Section 5.
    \32\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or 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-BOX-2020-09 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2020-09. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2020-09 and should be submitted on
or before June 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\33\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-09954 Filed 5-8-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 230 (Wednesday, November 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86325-86326]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28765]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL17-21-000]

Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. Southwest Power Pool,
Inc.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on November 21, 2016, pursuant to sections 206 and
306 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 (2016) and section 306 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824(e) and 825(e), Kansas Electric
Power Cooperative, Inc. (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against
Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Respondent) alleging that, Respondent's
direct cost assignment of approximately $6.2 million to Complainant in
connection with the Attachment Z2 revenue crediting process is unlawful
under Respondent's Open Access Transmission Tariff, all as more fully
explained in the complaint.
    Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served on
the contacts for Respondent as listed on the Commission's list of
Corporate Officials as well as the Kansas Corporation Commission.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and

interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for 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_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 12, 2016.

    Dated: November 22, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-28765 Filed 11-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 210)]
[Notices]
[Page 64316-64317]
[DOCID:fr29oc08-52]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0422; FRL-8736-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Metal Coil Surface
Coating, EPA ICR Number 0660.10, OMB Control Number 2060-0107

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR that is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 28,
2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2008-0422, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Schaefer, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-
05), Measurement Policy Group, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919)
541-0296; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 30, 2008 (73 FR 31088), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0422, which is available for public viewing
either online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at
the Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER> and the
telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202)
566-1927.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in
the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified
above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public
viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA receives them and without
change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, Confidential
Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public
disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NSPS for Metal Coil Surface Coating (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 0660.10, OMB Control Number 2060-0107.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2009.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for the
regulations published at 40 CFR part 60, subpart TT were proposed on
January 5, 1981 and promulgated on November 1, 1982. These regulations
apply to the following surface coating lines in the metal coil surface
coating industry: each prime coat operation, each finish coat
operation, and each prime and finish coat operation cured
simultaneously where the finish coat is applied wet on wet over the
prime coat.
    In general, all New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) require
initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports. Owners
or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence
and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation
of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring
system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are
essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources
subject to NSPS.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 41
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and requirements which have
subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of metal coil
surface coating facilities.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 158
    Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, semiannually, and
annually
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 15,643
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,594,680, which is comprised of
$331,800 in Operations and Maintenance (O&M) cost, $1,262,880 in annual
labor costs, and no capital/startup costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a change of $200 in the total
estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved
ICR Burdens since the O&M cost, which was previously rounded to the
nearest thousand, has been actually reduced by $200.00.

    Dated: October 23, 2008.
Sara Hisel-McCoy,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E8-25804 Filed 10-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 31, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 16717]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06623]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 2574-000, 2574-090, 2574-091; Project Nos. 2611-088,
2611-090; Project Nos. 2322-068, 2322-069, 2322-070, 2325-000, 2325-
096, 2325-097]

Merimil Limited Partnership; Hydro-Kennebec, LLC; Brookfield
White Pine Hydro, LLC; Notice of Teleconference

    a. Project Names and Numbers: Lockwood Hydroelectric Project No.
2574; Hydro-Kennebec Hydroelectric Project No. 2611; Shawmut
Hydroelectric Project No. 2322; and Weston Hydroelectric Project No.
2325.
    b. Project licensees: Merimil Limited Partnership; Hydro-Kennebec,
LLC; Brookfield White Pine Hydro, LLC.
    c. Date and Time of Teleconference: Thursday, April 8, 2021 from
11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
    d. FERC Contact: Marybeth Gay,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    e. Purpose of Meeting: Commission staff will hold a teleconference
with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and Brookfield
Renewable Partners (Brookfield) to discuss issues related to options
for moving forward with Endangered Species Act consultation raised by
NMFS in recent filings made with the Commission regarding the Lockwood,
Hydro-Kennebec, Shawmut, and Weston Projects.
    f. Members of the public and intervenors in the referenced
proceedings may attend the teleconference; however, participation will
be limited to representatives of the NMFS and Brookfield, and the
Commission's representatives.
    g. Please call or email Marybeth Gay at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by Wednesday, April 7, 2021, to RSVP and to
receive the teleconference call-in information.

    Dated: March 25, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-06623 Filed 3-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P