[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61088-61091]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24504]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87461; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2019-093]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
To Adopt Fees for a New Data Product on Its Equity Options Platform
(``BZX Options'') To Be Known as Open-Close Data

November 5, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on October 29, 2019, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX Options'') is
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change to adopt fees for a new data product on its equity
options platform (``BZX Options'') to be known as Open-Close Data. The
text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt fees for a new data product on BZX
Options known as Open-Close Data, which is available for purchase to
BZX Options Members and Non-Members.\3\ Cboe LiveVol, LLC
(``LiveVol''), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Exchange's parent
company, Cboe Global Markets, Inc., will make the Open-Close Data
available for purchase to Members and Non-Members on the LiveVol
DataShop website (datashop.cboe.com). The Exchange proposes to amend
its Fee Schedule to adopt fees for the product.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86811 (August 29,
2019), 84 FR 46765 (September 5, 2019) (SR-CboeBZX-2019-079).
    \4\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fees on business
date August 30, 2019 (SR-CboeBZX-2019-080). On business date October
29, 2019, the Exchange withdrew that filing and submitted this
filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange recently introduced the Open-Close Data product. Open-
Close Data is a volume summary file for trading activity on BZX
Options. The Exchange notes it is proprietary BZX Options trade data
and does not include trade data from any other exchanges. It is also a
historical data product and not a real time data feed. The Open-Close
Data summarizes and buckets the volume by origin (customer,
professional customer, broker-dealer, and market maker), buying/
selling, and opening/closing criteria. The customer and professional
customer volume is further broken down into trade size buckets (less
than 100 contracts, 100-199 contracts, greater than 199 contracts). The
data currently goes back to January 2018 and contains all series in an
underlying security if it has volume.\5\ The Exchange anticipates a
wide variety of market participants to purchase Open-Close Data,
including, but not limited to, individual customers, buy-side
investors, investment banks and academic institutions. For example, the
Exchange notes that academic institutions may utilize Open-Close Data
and as a result promote research and studies of the options industry to
the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange believes the Open-
Close Data product may also provide helpful trading information
regarding investor sentiment and may be used to create

and test trading models and analytical strategies and provides
comprehensive insight into trading on BZX Options. It is a completely
voluntary product, in that the Exchange is not required by any rule or
regulation to make this data available and that potential subscribers
may purchase it only if they voluntarily choose to do so. The Exchange
notes that its affiliate, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe Options''), as
well as other exchanges, offer a similar data product.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Open-Close data file format specifications can be found
at https://datashop.cboe.com/Themes/Livevol/Content/static/OpenCloseSpecification.pdf.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55062 (January 8,
2007), 72 FR 2048 (January 17, 2007) (approving SR-CBOE-2006-88);
See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56254 (August 15,
2007), 72 FR 47104 (August 22, 2007) (SR-ISE-2007-70).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to provide in its Fee Schedule that Members
and non-Members may purchase Open-Close Data on a subscription basis
(end of day file) or by ad hoc request for a specified month
(historical file). The Exchange proposes to assess a monthly fee of
$500 for subscribing to a daily update which will consist of Open/Close
data covering all Exchange-listed securities. Members and non-Members
purchasing Open/Close data on a subscription basis will receive access
to a daily data file. The Exchange proposes to assess a fee of $400 per
request per month for an ad-hoc request of historical Open/Close data
covering all Exchange-listed securities. An ad-hoc request can be for
any number of months beginning with January 2018 for which the data is
available.\7\ The proposed subscription and ad-hoc fees will apply both
to Members or non-Members. The Exchange notes that other exchanges,
including its affiliate Exchange Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe Options'')
provide similar data products that may be purchased on both a
subscription and ad-hoc basis and are similarly priced.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For example, a Member or non-Member that requests historical
Open/Close Data for the months of October 2018 and November 2018,
would be assessed a total of $800. The Exchange notes that it may
make historical data prior to January 2018 available in the future
and that such historical data would be available to all Member or
non-Member.
    \8\ See e.g., Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Livevol Fees, Open-
Close Data. See also Nasdaq ISE Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section
10.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
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 to protect investors and the public
interest, and that it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination
among customers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange also believes that
its proposal to adopt fees for Open-Close Data is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \11\ in particular, in that it is an
equitable allocation of dues, fees and other charges among its members
and other recipients of Exchange data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs'') and broker-dealers increased authority and
flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the public. It was
believed that this authority would expand the amount of data available
to consumers, and also spur innovation and competition for the
provision of market data. Particularly, Open-Close Data further
broadens the availability of U.S. option market data to investors
consistent with the principles of Regulation NMS. The data product also
promotes increased transparency through the dissemination of Open-Close
Data and benefits investors by providing access to the Open-Close Data,
which may promote better informed trading, as well as research and
studies of the options industry. Particularly, information regarding
opening and closing activity across different option series may
indicate investor sentiment, which can be helpful research and/or
trading information. Subscribers to the data may be able to enhance
their ability to analyze option trade and volume data, and create and
test trading models and analytical strategies. The Exchange believes
Open-Close Data provides a valuable tool that subscribers can use to
gain comprehensive insight into the trading activity in a particular
series, but also emphasizes such data is not necessary for trading.
Moreover, the Exchange's affiliate Cboe Options, along with other
exchanges, also offer a similar data product.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive environment. Indeed,
there are currently 16 registered options exchanges that trade options.
The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition
over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and
services in the securities markets. Particularly, in Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \12\ Making similar data
products available to market participants fosters competition in the
marketplace, and constrains the ability of exchanges to charge
supracompetitive fees. In the event that a market participant views one
exchange's data product as more or less attractive than the competition
they can and do switch between similar products. The proposed fees are
a result of the competitive environment, as the Exchange seeks to adopt
fees to attract purchasers of the recently introduced Open-Close Data
product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable as the
proposed fees are both modest and similar to, or even lower than, the
fees assessed by other exchanges that provide similar data
products.\13\ Indeed, proposing fees that are excessively higher than
established fees for similar data products would simply serve to reduce
demand for the Exchange's data product, which as noted, is entirely
optional. Like the Exchange's Open-Close Data product, other exchanges
offer similar data products that each provide insight into trading on
those markets and may likewise aid in assessing investor sentiment.
Although each of these similar open-close data products provide only
proprietary trade data and not trade data from other exchanges, it's
possible investors are still able to gauge overall investor sentiment
across different option series based on open and closing interest on
any one exchange.\14\ Similarly, market participants may be able to
analyze option trade and volume data, and create and test trading
models and analytical strategies using only open-close data relating to
trading activity on one or more of the other markets that provide
similar data products. As such, if a market participant views another
exchange's open-close data as more attractive than its Open-Close Data
product, then such market participant can merely choose not to purchase
the Exchange's Open-Close Data and instead purchase another exchange's
open-close data product, which offer similar data

points, albeit based on that other market's trading activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See e.g., Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Livevol Fees, Open-
Close Data. See also Nasdaq ISE Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section
10.A.
    \14\ The exchange notes that its open-close data product does
not include data on any exclusive, singly-listed option series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes the proposed fees are reasonable as they
would support the Open-Close Data product, which is designed to aid
investors by providing insight into trading on BZX Options. The Open-
Close Data would provide options market participants with valuable
information about opening and closing transactions executed on the
Exchange, similar to other historical trade data products offered by
competing options exchanges. In turn, this data would assist market
participants in gauging investor sentiment and trading activity,
resulting in potentially better informed trading decisions. As noted
above, users may also use such data to create and test trading models
and analytical strategies.
    Selling historical market data, such as Open-Close Data, is also a
means by which exchanges compete to attract business. To the extent
that the Exchange is successful in attracting subscribers for the Open-
Close Data, it may earn trading revenues and further enhance the value
of its data products. If the market deems the proposed fees to be
unfair or inequitable, firms can diminish or discontinue their use of
the data and/or avail themselves of similar products offered by other
exchanges.\15\ The Exchange therefore believes that the proposed fees
for Open-Close Data reflect the competitive environment and would be
properly assessed on Member or non-Member users. The Exchange also
believes the proposed fees are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory as the fees would apply equally to all users who choose
to purchase such data. The Exchange's proposed fees would not
differentiate between subscribers that purchase Open-Close Data, and
are set at a modest level that would allow any interested Member or
non-Member to purchase such data based on their business needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See e.g., Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Livevol Fees, Open-
Close Data. See also Nasdaq ISE Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section
10.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Exchange anticipates a wide variety of market
participants to purchase Open-Close Data, including but not limited to
individual customers, buy-side investors, investment banks and academic
institutions. For example, on its affiliate exchange Cboe Options,
which also offers an Open-Close Data product, approximately 38% of
purchases of historical ad hoc Open-Close Data files are individuals,
33% are buy-side investors or investment banks and 25% are academic
institutions. Accordingly, the Exchange anticipates that open-close
data may be used not just for commercial or monetizing purposes, but
also for educational use and research. The Exchange reiterates that the
decision as to whether or not to purchase the Open-Close Data is
entirely optional for all potential subscribers. Indeed, no market
participant is required to purchase the Open-Close Data, and the
Exchange is not required to make the Open-Close Data available to all
investors. Rather, the Exchange is voluntarily making historical Open-
Close Data available, as requested by customers, and market
participants may choose to receive (and pay for) this data based on
their own business needs. Potential purchasers may request the data at
any time if they believe it to be valuable, or may decline to purchase
such data.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the
Exchange believes that the proposal will promote competition by
permitting the Exchange to sell a data product similar to those offered
by other competitor options exchanges.\16\ The Exchange made Open-Close
Data available for BZX Options in order to keep pace with changes in
the industry and evolving customer needs, and believes the data product
will contribute to robust competition among national securities
exchanges. At least three other U.S. options exchanges offer a market
data product that is substantially similar to the Open-Close Data. As a
result, the Exchange believes this proposed rule change permits fair
competition among national securities exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Furthermore, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
environment, and its ability to price Open-Close Data is constrained by
competition among exchanges that offer similar data products to their
customers. As discussed, there are currently a number of similar
products available to market participants and investors. At least three
other U.S. options exchanges offer a market data product that is
substantially similar to the Open-Close Data, which the Exchange must
consider in its pricing discipline in order to compete for the market
data.\17\ For example, proposing fees that are excessively higher than
established fees for similar data products would simply serve to reduce
demand for the Exchange's data product, which as discussed, market
participants are under no obligation to utilize. In this competitive
environment, potential purchasers are free to choose which, if any,
similar product to purchase to satisfy their need for market
information. As a result, the Exchange believes this proposed rule
change permits fair competition among national securities exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See e.g., Cboe Options Fees Schedule, Livevol Fees, Open-
Close Data. See also Nasdaq ISE Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section
10.A and Nasdaq PHLX Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 10, PHLX
Options Trade Outline (``PHOTO'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also does not believe the proposed fees would cause
any unnecessary or inappropriate burden on intermarket competition as
other exchanges are free to introduce their own comparable data product
and lower their prices to better compete with the Exchange's offering.
The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change would cause any
unnecessary or inappropriate burden on intramarket competition.
Particularly, the proposed product and fees apply uniformly to any
purchaser, in that it does not differentiate between subscribers that
purchase Open-Close Data. The proposed fees are set at a modest level
that would allow any interested Member or non-Member to purchase such
data based on their business needs.

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 written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \18\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \19\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2019-093 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-CboeBZX-2019-093. 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-CboeBZX-2019-093 and  should be
submitted on or before December 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24504 Filed 11-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 61108]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21820]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-026, OMB Control No. 3235-0033]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 17a-3

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information provided for in Rule 17a-3 (17 CFR 240.17a-
3), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).
    Rule 17a-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 establishes
minimum standards with respect to business records that broker-dealers
registered with the Commission must make and keep current. These
records are maintained by the broker-dealer (in accordance with a
separate rule), so they can be used by the broker-dealer and reviewed
by Commission examiners, as well as other regulatory authority
examiners, during inspections of the broker-dealer.
    The collections of information included in Rule 17a-3 are necessary
to enable Commission, self-regulatory organization (``SRO''), and state
examiners to conduct effective and efficient examinations to determine
whether broker-dealers are complying with relevant laws, rules, and
regulations. If broker-dealers were not required to create these
baseline, standardized records, Commission, SRO, and state examiners
could be unable to determine whether broker-dealers are in compliance
with the Commission's antifraud and anti-manipulation rules, financial
responsibility program, and other Commission, SRO, and State laws,
rules, and regulations.
    As of December 31, 2021 there were 3,528 broker-dealers registered
with the Commission. The Commission estimates that these broker-dealer
respondents incur a total hour burden of approximately 8,342,195 hours
per year to comply with Rule 17a-3.
    In addition, Rule 17a-3 contains ongoing operation and maintenance
costs for broker-dealers, including the cost of postage to provide
customers with account information, and costs for equipment and systems
development. The Commission estimates that the total cost burden
associated with Rule 17a-3 would be approximately $105,320,999 per
year.
    Rule 17a-3 does not contain record retention requirements.
Compliance with the rule is mandatory. The required records are
available only to the staffs of the Commission, self-regulatory
organizations of which the broker-dealer is a member, and the states
during examination, inspections and investigations.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following website, www.reginfo.gov. Find
this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under
30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search
function. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent by November 7, 2022 to (i)
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email
to: [email protected].

    Dated: October 3, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-21820 Filed 10-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11337-11340]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04635]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77243; File No. SR-FINRA-2016-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA Rule 7620A (FINRA/Nasdaq Trade
Reporting Facility Reporting Fees)

February 26, 2016.
    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 February 23, 2016, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') 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 FINRA. FINRA has
designated the proposed rule change as ``establishing or changing a
due, fee or other charge'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon receipt of this filing by the Commission. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    FINRA is proposing to adjust one of the thresholds required to
qualify for the Media/Contra fee cap under FINRA Rule 7620A (FINRA/
Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility Reporting Fees).
    Below is the text of the proposed rule change. Proposed new
language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.
* * * * *
7000. CLEARING, TRANSACTION AND ORDER DATA REQUIREMENTS, AND FACILITY
CHARGES
* * * * *
7600. DATA PRODUCTS AND CHARGES FOR TRADE REPORTING FACILITY SERVICES
7600A. DATA PRODUCTS AND CHARGES FOR FINRA/NASDAQ TRADE REPORTING
FACILITY SERVICES
* * * * *
7620A. FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility Reporting Fees
    The following charges shall be paid by participants for use of the
FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility. In the case of trades where the
same market participant is on both sides of a trade report, applicable
fees assessed on a ``per side'' basis will be assessed once, rather
than twice, and the market participant will be assessed applicable Non-
Comparison/Accept (Non-Match/Compare) Charges as the Executing Party
side only.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Non-Comparison/Accept (Non-Match/Compare) Charges
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tape:                                    Daily Average Number of Media/
                                          Executing Party Trades During
                                          the Month Needed to Qualify
                                          for Cap:
    A..................................     2500.
    B..................................     2500.
    C..................................     2500.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Media/Executing Party
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monthly Charge:                          Maximum Monthly Charge if
                                          Capped:
    ($0.018) x (Number of Media/            ($0.018) x (Required Daily
     Executing Party Reports During the      Average Number of Media/EP
     Month).                                 Trades for Tape A, B or C)
                                             x (Number of Trading Days
                                             During the Month).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Non-Media/Executing Party
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monthly Charge:                          Maximum Monthly Charge if
                                          Capped:
    ($0.018) x (Number of Non-Media/        ($0.018) x 2500 for Tape A,
     Executing Party Reports During the      B or C x (Number of Trading
     Month).                                 Days During the Month).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Media/Contra
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monthly Charge:                          Maximum Monthly Charge if
                                          Capped:
    ($0.013) x (Number of Media/Contra      ($0.013) x 2500 for Tape A,
     Reports During the Month).              B or C x (Number of Trading
                                             Days During the Month).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Media/Contra Cap
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants making markets in alternative trading systems registered
 pursuant to Regulation ATS will qualify for a fee cap applied to all
 trades under Rule 7620A if they meet the following criteria on a
 monthly basis:
     Participant's percentage of contra media trades must
     represent at least [5]35% of their total [TRF] FINRA/Nasdaq Trade
     Reporting Facility volume..
     Participant must be contra to a minimum of 1,000,000 trades
     in Tape A, 500,000 trades in Tape C and 250,000 trades in Tape B..
     Participant must complete an attestation form stating that
     they maintain a two-sided quote in each symbol traded on an
     alternative trading system registered pursuant to Regulation ATS
     and display a quotation size of at least one normal unit of trading
     (specific for each security) thereon. Participants will be audited
     by Nasdaq, Inc. periodically..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Monthly Charge if Capped.......  $5,000 per Tape (A, B or C).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Non-Media/Contra
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monthly Charge:                          Maximum Monthly Charge if
                                          Capped:
    ($0.013) x (Number of Non-Media/     ($0.013) x 2500 for Tape A, B
     Contra Reports During the Month).    or C x (Number of Trading Days
                                          During the Month).
Standard Fees:
    Clearing report to transfer a        $0.03/side.
     transaction fee charged by one
     member to another member pursuant
     to Rule 7230A(h).
    Comparison/Accept..................  $0.0144/side per 100 shares
                                          (minimum 400 shares; maximum
                                          7,500 shares).
    Late Report--T+N...................  $0.288/trade (charged to the
                                          Executing Party).
    Query..............................  $0.50/query.
    Corrective Transaction Charge......  $0.25/Cancel, Error, Inhibit,
                                          Kill, or `No' portion of No/
                                          Was transaction, paid by
                                          reporting side; $0.25/Break,
                                          Decline transaction, paid by
                                          each party.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Supplementary Material:---------------------

    .01 through .02 No Change.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
Background
    The FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility (``TRF'') is a facility
of FINRA that is operated by Nasdaq, Inc. (``NASDAQ'') \5\ and utilizes
Automated Confirmation Transaction (``ACT'') Service technology. In
connection with the establishment of the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF, FINRA and
NASDAQ entered into a limited liability company agreement (the ``LLC
Agreement''). Under the LLC Agreement, FINRA, the ``SRO Member,'' has
sole regulatory responsibility for the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF. NASDAQ, the
``Business Member,'' is primarily responsible for the management of the
FINRA/Nasdaq TRF's business affairs, including establishing pricing for
use of the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF, to the extent those affairs are not
inconsistent with the regulatory and oversight functions of FINRA.
Additionally, the Business Member is obligated to pay the cost of
regulation and is entitled to the profits and losses, if any, derived
from the operation of the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As approved by its board of directors and the Commission,
effective September 8, 2015, NASDAQ changed its legal name from The
NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. to Nasdaq, Inc. See Nasdaq, Inc. Form 8-K
Current Report (filed September 8, 2015) (available at www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1120193/000119312515314459/d48431d8k.htm).
    FINRA and NASDAQ are in the process of amending the LLC
Agreement to reflect the name change, and FINRA will file a separate
proposed rule change to update the FINRA manual accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the FINRA Rule 7600A Series, FINRA members that are
FINRA/Nasdaq TRF participants are charged fees and may qualify for fee
caps (Rule 7620A) and also may qualify for revenue sharing payments for
trade reporting to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF (Rule 7610A). These rules are
administered by NASDAQ, in its capacity as the Business Member and
operator of the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF on behalf of FINRA,\6\ and NASDAQ
collects all fees on behalf of the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ FINRA's oversight of this function performed by the Business
Member is conducted through a recurring assessment and review of TRF
operations by an outside independent audit firm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Rule 7620A, FINRA members are charged fees for ``Non-
Comparison/Accept (Non-Match/Compare)'' trades. Such trades are defined
as transactions that are not subject to the ACT Comparison process, and
they may be submitted as media or non-media,\7\ clearing or non-
clearing, AGU (automated give-up), QSR (Qualified Service
Representative), one-sided or internalized crosses.\8\ Under the fee
schedule there are four categories of fees, each of which is applicable
to transactions of the three Tapes: \9\ (1) Media/Executing Party; (2)
Non-Media/Executing Party; (3) Media/Contra; (4) Non-Media/Contra.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Media eligible trade reports are those that are submitted to
the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF for public dissemination by the Securities
Information Processors. By contrast, non-media trade reports are not
submitted to the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF for public dissemination, but are
submitted for regulatory and/or clearance and settlement purposes.
    \8\ See FINRA Rule 7620A.01.
    \9\ Market data is transmitted to three tapes based on the
listing venue of the security: New York Stock Exchange securities
(``Tape A''), American Stock Exchange and regional exchange
securities (``Tape B''), and Nasdaq Stock Market securities (``Tape
C''). Tape A and Tape B are generally referred to as the
Consolidated Tape.
    \10\ Pursuant to the rule's Supplementary Material, the
``Executing Party (EP)'' is defined as the member with the trade
reporting obligation under FINRA rules, and the ``Contra (CP)'' is
defined as the member on the contra side of a trade report. These
positions formerly were identified in FINRA rules as the ``Market
Maker'' or ``MM'' side and the ``Order Entry'' or ``OE'' side,
respectively. See FINRA Rule 7620A.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA recently filed a proposed rule change \11\ that would allow
FINRA

members that are a Contra Party to qualify for a monthly fee cap of
$5,000 per Tape applied to trades in each fee category. Eligibility for
the Media/Contra fee cap is based on a FINRA member's trade reporting
of Media/Contra trades to the TRF and its participation on an
alternative trading system registered pursuant to Regulation ATS \12\
(an ``ATS'') as a market maker. Specifically, the FINRA member must
make markets on an ATS by maintaining a two-sided quote. The member
also must complete and provide a form to NASDAQ, in which the member
attests that (1) it maintains two-sided quotes for each security that
the member maintains interest in within each ATS and displays a
quotation size of at least one normal unit of trading (specific for
each security), and (2) it will continue to meet the ATS-based
requirements to be eligible for the fee cap. In addition, to qualify a
FINRA member must have its Media/Contra trades equal, or exceed, 55% of
its total FINRA/Nasdaq TRF volume. Lastly, the FINRA member must be
contra to a minimum of 1 million trades in Tape A, 500,000 trades in
Tape C, and 250,000 trades in Tape B to qualify for the fee cap in the
securities of the Tapes, respectively. NASDAQ, as the Business Member,
set the required level of trades reported for each of the Tapes based
on the differing levels of overall trades reported to the FINRA/Nasdaq
TRF as Contra Party.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76556 (December 4,
2015), 80 FR 76724 (December 10, 2015) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of File No. SR-FINRA-2015-053).
    \12\ 17 CFR 242.300-303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Adjustment
    In proposing the Media/Contra fee cap, NASDAQ, as the Business
Member, advised FINRA that following implementation, it would monitor
the fees paid by Contra Parties and would consider whether any
adjustments to the fee cap or qualifying thresholds would be
appropriate. Since adopting the Media/Contra fee cap, no FINRA member
has achieved the level of Media/Contra trades to equal, or exceed, 55%
of its total FINRA/Nasdaq TRF volume. NASDAQ, as the Business Member,
designed the Media/Contra fee cap to make pricing more competitive to
attract and retain participants on the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF, and because no
FINRA member currently qualifies for the Media/Contra fee cap, NASDAQ
has determined to reduce the level of Media/Contra trades required to
qualify for the fee cap. Specifically, NASDAQ has determined to reduce
the level from 55% of the member's total FINRA/Nasdaq TRF volume to
35%. NASDAQ believes that reducing the level of Media/Contra trades
required to qualify will make the fee cap more attainable for FINRA
members.
    Accordingly, FINRA, as the SRO Member, is proposing to amend Rule
7620A to reflect the proposed reduction in the level of Media/Contra
trades required to qualify for the Media/Contra fee cap. FINRA also is
proposing a technical amendment to clarify that the reference to a
member's ``total TRF volume'' means its total FINRA/Nasdaq TRF volume.
    FINRA has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness. The effective date will be the date of filing, February
23, 2016.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and
other persons using any facility or system that FINRA operates or
controls. NASDAQ, as the Business Member, proposed the $5,000 per tape
Media/Contra fee cap for FINRA members that could not qualify for a fee
cap under the then-current rules. However, as noted, NASDAQ has
determined that the level of Media/Contra trades required to qualify
for [sic] fee cap is set too high, resulting in no FINRA member
qualifying for the fee cap since its adoption. By reducing this level
from 55% to 35% of total FINRA/Nasdaq TRF trades, NASDAQ has advised
FINRA that it believes that more FINRA members will be able to qualify
for the Media/Contra fee cap and thus the proposed reduction is
reasonable. The proposed reduction in the level of Media/Contra trades
required to qualify for the Media/Contra fee cap is equitably allocated
because it will apply to all FINRA members that use the FINRA/Nasdaq
TRF. Any FINRA member that meets the reduced level of Media/Contra
trades together with the other requirements under the Rule will qualify
for the capped fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in SR-FINRA-2015-053, NASDAQ, as the Business Member,
advised FINRA that the Media/Contra fee cap is not unfairly
discriminatory because the fee cap would most benefit those Contra
Parties that have significant volume on the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF and thus
may pay larger trade reporting fees than firms with comparable
``Executing Party'' volume that qualify for a fee cap. NASDAQ
anticipates that the proposed rule change will make the fee cap more
attainable for these Contra Parties. In addition, FINRA members that
are not subject to capped fees can choose to report trades to a
competing TRF (or, in this instance, a market maker may elect to route
its orders to an ATS that reports to a competing TRF).

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

    FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change would
not impose new fees or fee rate increases on any member firm, and will
reduce the fees paid by some members to the extent they qualify under
the new, lower criteria. NASDAQ, as the Business Member, has advised
FINRA that the estimated fee savings to member firms that qualify for
the Media/Contra fee would be in the range of $0-$20,000 per month per
firm based on overall market and participant activity and number of
trading days in the month. NASDAQ has further advised FINRA that, based
on current trading practices, NASDAQ estimates that approximately three
to eight member firms may be able to take advantage of the fee
reductions associated with the Media/Contra fee cap with the proposed
reduction in the level of trades required to qualify.
    As discussed in SR-FINRA-2015-053, FINRA members have trade
reporting alternatives other than the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF, so to the
extent the proposed rule change is viewed as burdensome among market
participants, those participants may choose not to avail themselves of
the fee cap and maintain the status quo with respect to fees or adjust
their trading practices. This would permit members to mitigate any
direct or indirect costs imposed by this proposal. Moreover, by making
the fee cap more attainable, the proposed rule change may promote
competition among FINRA members by reducing the fee burden on certain
FINRA members who are unable to qualify for the existing fee cap, and
FINRA members can choose their trading partners, which determination
may in part be based on the fees of the particular TRF applicable to
Contra Parties. Lastly, FINRA does not believe that the proposed rule
change burdens competition among reporting facilities because each is
free to adjust their [sic] respective fees to remain competitive with
the FINRA/Nasdaq TRF, to the extent the proposed rule change makes the
FINRA/Nasdaq

TRF a more attractive facility on which to report trades.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\15\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If
the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved
or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2016-009 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-FINRA-2016-009. 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 Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of FINRA. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2016-009, and should
be submitted on or before March 24, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-04635 Filed 3-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 125 (Monday, June 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 36799]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15221]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 4608-006]

Richard Kaster, BC Hydro, LLC; Notice of Transfer of Exemption

    1. By letter filed April 23, 2014, Richard Kaster informed the
Commission that the exemption from licensing for the Kaster Riverview
Project, FERC No. 4608, originally issued February 26, 1982,\1\ has
been transferred to BC Hydro, LLC. The project is located on Box Canyon
Springs in Twin Falls County, Idaho. The transfer of an exemption does
not require Commission approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 FERC ] 62,320, Order Granting Exemption From Licensing of
a Small Hydroelectric Project of 5 Megawatts or Less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. BC Hydro, LLC is now the exemptee of the Kaster Riverview
Project, FERC No. 4608. All correspondence should be forwarded to: Mr.
Scott Kaster, Hydro Plus, 4580 Clear Lakes Rd., Buhl, ID 83316, and Mr.
Rick Kaster, Energy Systems, 208 Sunny Hill Circle, Twin Falls, ID
83301.

    Dated: June 24, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-15221 Filed 6-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 76 (Thursday, April 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24462-24463]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 2022-0176]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewal Approval of Information Collection 2120-0768, Part
107 Authorizations and Waivers Under 14 CFR Part 107

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew information collection
2120-0768.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by May 22, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria Gallagher by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day
comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of
information was published on January 6, 2023 (88 FR 91105). The FAA
proposes renewal of the collection of information related to requests
made under 14 CFR part 107 to operate small Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(UAS) in controlled airspace. FAA will use the collected information to
make determinations whether to authorize or deny the requested
operation of UAS in controlled airspace. The proposed information
collection is necessary to issue such authorizations or denials
consistent with the FAA's mandate to ensure safe and efficient use of
national airspace. The FAA received no comments to the 60-day notice.

    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0768.
    Title: Part 107 Authorizations and Waivers under 14 CFR part 107.
    Form Numbers: There are no forms associated with this collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of existing information collection.
    Background: There has been an increased number of operations of
small Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Air Space (NAS) in
recent years and regulations and statutes have been enacted to
establish the use of small UAS in the NAS. Included in these is 14 CFR
part 107. Section 107.41 states that ``no person may operate a small
unmanned aircraft in Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within
the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class E airspace
designated for an airport unless that person has prior authorization
from Air Traffic Control (ATC).'' Such authorization may be obtained in
the form of either an airspace authorization issued by the FAA or a
waiver of the authorization requirements of 14 CFR 107.41 (known as an
airspace waiver).
    In order to process authorization and airspace waiver requests, the
FAA requires the operator's name, the operator's contact information,
and information related to the date, place, and time of the requested
small UAS operation. This information is necessary for the FAA to meet
its statutory mandate of maintaining a safe and efficient national
airspace. See 49 U.S.C. 40103, 44701, and 44807. The FAA will use the
requested information to determine if the proposed UAS operation can be
conducted safely.
    The FAA proposes to use the Low Altitude Authorization and
Notification Capability (LAANC) and a web portal to process
authorization requests from the public to conduct part 107 flight
operations pursuant to Section 107.41. The FAA also proposes to use the
web portal to process requests from the public to conduct Part 107
flight operations that requires an airspace waiver.
    Respondents: Small UAS operators seeking to conduct flight
operations under 14 CFR part 107 within controlled airspace or flight
operations that require waiver from the provisions of 14 CFR 107.41.
Between 2023-2026, the FAA estimates that it will receive a total of
1,477,965 requests for airspace authorizations and 0 requests for
airspace waivers.
    Frequency: The requested information will need to be provided each
time a respondent requests an airspace authorization to operate a small
UAS under 14 CFR part 107 in controlled airspace and each time a
respondent requests a waiver from the provisions of 14 CFR 107.41 to
operate a small UAS in controlled airspace.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: The FAA estimates the
respondents using LAANC will take five (5) minutes per airspace
authorization request and those using the web portal will take thirty
(30) minutes per request. For those making airspace waiver requests
through the web portal, the FAA estimates it takes 30 minutes per
request.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: For airspace authorizations, the FAA
estimates that the average annual burden will be 61,582 burden hours.
This includes 36,949 burden hours for 443,389 LAANC respondents and
24,633 burden hours for 49,266 web portal respondents.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 17, 2023.
Victoria Gallagher,
UAS LAANC Program Manager.
[FR Doc. 2023-08357 Filed 4-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 37273]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16226]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0669; FRL-9997-39-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Oil and Natural Gas Production
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Oil and Natural Gas
Production (EPA ICR Number 1788.12, OMB Control Number 2060-0417), to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through September 30,
2019. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal
Register, on May 30, 2018 during a 60-day comment period. This notice
allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 30,
2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0669, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Oil and Natural Gas Production (40 CFR part 63,
subpart HH) were proposed on February 06, 1998, and promulgated on June
17, 1999, only for major sources. On July 8, 2005, a supplemental
proposal was proposed for area sources with the final rule, effective
date on January 03, 2007. The rule was subsequently amended on August
16, 2012 to include emission sources for which standards were not
previously developed. These regulations apply to emission points
located at both new and existing oil and natural gas production
facilities that are both major and area sources. A major source of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) is one that has the potential to emit 10
tons or more of any single HAP or 25 tons or more of total HAP per
year; an area source is one with the potential to emit less than this.
New facilities include those that commenced either construction or
reconstruction after the date of proposal. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart HH.
    In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any 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 affected facilities
subject to NESHAP.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: New and existing area source and
major source facilities that produce oil and natural gas (new
facilities include those that commenced construction, modification or
reconstruction after the date of proposal).
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart HH).
    Estimated number of respondents: 4,669 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 54,400 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $7,340,000 (per year), which includes
$1,040,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: This ICR reflects an increase in burden
from the most recently-approved ICR. This increase is not due to any
program changes. The adjustment increase in burden from the most
recently approved ICR is due to an increase in the number of new and
modified sources. The industry growth rate from the prior ICRs was
adjusted to more accurately reflect current estimates of affected
facilities from data reported to EPA's ECHO database. There is a
projected industry growth; an additional 18 new major sources and 141
new area sources are expected to become subject to these rules each
year. The adjustment to burden also corrects an error in the
calculations for the number of respondents from the prior ICR, which
double-counted existing respondents that became `new respondents' due
to construction, reconstruction, and/or modification. The number of
respondents required to perform O&M on CMS monitoring equipment has
been increased to include area sources with monitoring requirements.
Overall, there is an increase in the number of respondents, resulting
in an estimated increase in the respondent labor hours, O&M costs, and
number of responses. Finally, the burden to develop a startup, shutdown
and malfunction (SS&M) plan has been removed, consistent with the
vacatur of those provisions (Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019) (D.C.
Cir. 2008). Items which were previously reported under the SS&M
provisions are now reported under the affirmative defense and
malfunction reports, so that burden has not changed.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-16226 Filed 7-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


From:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Wednesday, June 29, 2022 11:11 AM
To:
Long, Michael E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
STUCKEY, MATT<EMAIL_ADDRESS>mahammond<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Fernandez, Cristina<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mooney, John<EMAIL_ADDRESS>French, Chuck<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Coke ICR2<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
CAA section 114 request for Coke Ovens RTR - email for Cleveland Cliffs

Hello Mr. Long,

I hope this email finds you well. Attached you'll find a Clean Air Act Section (CAA) section 114 information and test request letter signed on June 28, 2022, that requests information from Cleveland Cliff's Burns Harbor, IN, Monessen, PA, and Warren, OH, coke oven battery facilities. Please read the letter carefully and respond to this email acknowledging your receipt of the letter. Along with the letter I have attached the following files:

-- Enclosures 1&2 as PDF files
-- Enclosures #3 through #9 as a combined PDF file (these are standard enclosures we include with all section 114 requests)
-- 2 Excel files to use to submit data to Enclosure 1 to be used by each of the three Cleveland Cliff facilities
-- 3 Excel files to use to submit data to Enclosure 2 to be used by the three Cleveland Cliff facilities, as needed

Please let me know if you have any questions about this request.

Thank you in advance for your efforts on this CAA section 114 request.

Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>  Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

<< 114_Letter_CokeOvens-06-28-22-Cleveland-Cliffs.pdf >>
<< Encl-1-114-Coke RTR-FINAL-06-29-22.pdf >>
<< Encl-2-114-Coke RTR-FINAL-06-29-22.pdf >>
<< Encl-3-through-9-114-Coke-RTR-FINAL-06-29-22.pdf >>
<< ANSWER-Coke-Enc1-Questionnaire ICR-2016&2022-Cleveland-Cliffs.xlsx >>
<< ANSWER-COMS-Coke_Enc1_Operations_1-Minute_2-weeks-Company_Facility.csv >>
<< ANSWER-Coke-Enc2-Emission-Test-Data_Company-Facility.xlsx >>
<< ANSWER-FUGITIVE-Coke Enc2_Test Results_Company_Facility.xlsx >>
<< ANSWER-DOOR-LEAKS_Coke-Enc2-Method303_Company_Facility.xlsx >>


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48716-48719]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20966]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0502; FRL-9984-48--Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major
Stationary Sources for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of
Air Quality

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of West
Virginia. This revision pertains to West Virginia's Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 29, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0502. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Talley,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 5, 2018 (83 FR 31348), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of West Virginia. In the NPRM, EPA
proposed approval of a revision to the PSD regulations found at title
45, chapter 14 of the Code of State Rules (CSR) as a revision to the
West Virginia SIP. The formal SIP revision was submitted by West
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) on behalf of
the State of West Virginia on June 6, 2017.
    WVDEP's June 6, 2017 SIP submittal included a number of revisions
to West Virginia's PSD regulations under 45CSR14. The revisions were
largely non-substantive and administrative in nature. However, as
discussed in subsequent sections of this notice, WVDEP's SIP submittal
also contained revisions to PSD provisions relating to the regulation
of greenhouse gases (GHGs).
    In a June 3, 2010 final rulemaking action, EPA promulgated
regulations known as ``the Tailoring Rule,'' which phased in permitting
requirements for GHG emissions from stationary sources under the CAA
PSD and title V permitting programs. See 75 FR 31514. For Step 1 of the
Tailoring Rule, which began on January 2, 2011, PSD or title V
requirements applied to sources of GHG emissions only if the sources
were subject to PSD or title V ``anyway'' due to their emissions of
non-GHG pollutants. These sources are referred to as ``anyway
sources.'' Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on July 1, 2011,
applied the PSD and title V permitting requirements under the CAA to
sources that were classified as major, and, thus, required to obtain a
permit, based solely on their potential GHG emissions. Step 2 also
applied to modifications of otherwise major sources that required a PSD
permit because they increased only GHGs above applicable levels in the
EPA regulations.
    On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in Utility Air
Regulatory Group (UARG) v. Environmental Protection Agency,\1\ issued a
decision addressing the Tailoring Rule and the application of PSD
permitting requirements to GHG emissions. The Supreme Court said that
the EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of
determining whether a source is a major source required to obtain a PSD
permit. The Court also said that the EPA could continue to require that
PSD permits, otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other
than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the
application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT). The Supreme
Court decision effectively upheld PSD permitting requirements for GHG
emissions under Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for ``anyway sources'' and
invalidated PSD permitting requirements for Step 2 sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 134 S.Ct. 2427.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with the Supreme Court decision, on April 10, 2015,
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) issued an amended judgment vacating the regulations that
implemented Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, but not the regulations that
implement Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule.\2\ The amended judgment
preserves, without the need for additional rulemaking by the EPA, the
application of the BACT requirement to GHG emissions from sources that
are required to obtain a PSD permit based on emissions of pollutants
other than GHGs (i.e., the ``anyway'' sources). The D.C. Circuit's
judgment vacated the regulations at issue in the litigation, including
40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v), ``to the extent they require a stationary
source to obtain a PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the only
pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above
the applicable major source thresholds, or (ii) for

which there is a significant emissions increase from a modification.''
\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No.
09-1322, 06/26/20, judgment entered for No. 09-1322 on 04/10/2015.
    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to these court decisions, EPA took final action on
August 19, 2015 to remove the vacated elements from the federal PSD
program. See 80 FR 50199. As discussed further in Section II of this
notice, WVDEP's June 6, 2017 submittal included revisions enacted in
order to make WVDEP's PSD program consistent with the federal program.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    WVDEP's June 6, 2017 submittal included revisions to the definition
of ``subject to regulation'' at subdivision 2.80 of 45-14-2.
Specifically, subdivisions 2.80.e, 2.80.f, and 2.80.g were deleted in
their entirety. These subdivisions were the mechanism through which
WVDEP implemented the Tailoring Rule Step 2 provisions which were
vacated and revised by EPA as a result of the UARG v. EPA decision
discussed in Section I of this notice. WVDEP's revised definition of
``subject to regulation'' is consistent with the federal definition at
40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 52.21(b)(49)(v), and ensures that the
preconstruction permitting requirements of WVDEP's PSD program will be
applied to GHG sources in a manner consistent with the Supreme Court
decision in UARG v. EPA. Further, EPA finds that these deletions are in
accordance with section 110(l) of the CAA because they will not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress, or any other applicable CAA requirement.
    In addition to the previously discussed revisions, WVDEP's June 6,
2017 submittal included a number of non-substantive, clarifying or
administrative revisions. These include the filing date and effective
date at subdivisions 45-14-1.3 and 45-14-1.4, and the removal of
references to the deleted subdivisions discussed in Section II.A of
this notice. WVDEP provided an underline/strikeout version of 45CSR14
so that all of the revisions can be tracked. A copy of this is included
in the docket for today's action.
    Other specific requirements of West Virginia's June 6, 2017
submittal and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in
the NPR and will not be restated here.

III. Public Comments

    EPA received one set of comments on the July 5, 2018 NPR. These
comments are included in the docket for this action. However, the
comments did not concern any of the specific issues raised in the NPR,
nor did they address EPA's rationale for the proposed approval of
WVDEP's submittal. Therefore, EPA is not addressing them here.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving WVDEP's June 6, 2017 submittal as a revision to
the West Virginia SIP.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the West
Virginia rules regarding definitions and permitting requirements
discussed in Section II of this preamble. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region III Office (please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have
been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated
by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it

is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 26, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action.
    This action pertaining to West Virginia's PSD program may not be
challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 10, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart XX--West Virginia

0
2. In Sec.  52.2520, the table entitled ``EPA-Approved Regulations in
the West Virginia SIP'' in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the
entries for sections 45-14-1 through 45-14-21, 45-14-25, and 45-14-26
to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                EPA-Approved Regulations in the West Virginia SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Additional
 State citation [Chapter 16-20                             State                                explanation/
          or 45 CSR]                Title/subject        effective     EPA approval date     citation at 40 CFR
                                                           date                                    52.2565
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  [45CSR] Series 1 Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution
                                 for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 45-14-1...............  General..............       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                                                      Federal Register       changes.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-2...............  Definitions..........       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                                                      Federal Register       changes; revised
                                                                      citation].             definition of
                                                                                ``subject to
                                                                                regulation''.
Section 45-14-3...............  Applicability........       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                                                      Federal Register       date.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-4...............  Ambient Air Quality         6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                 Increments and                       Federal Register       date.
                                 Ceilings.                            citation].
Section 45-14-5...............  Area Classification..       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                                                      Federal Register       date.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-6...............  Prohibition of              6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                 Dispersion                           Federal Register       date.
                                 Enhancement                          citation].
                                 Techniques.
Section 45-14-7...............  Registration, Report        6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 and Permit                           Federal Register       changes.
                                 Requirements for                     citation].
                                 Major Stationary
                                 Sources and Major
                                 Modifications.
Section 45-14-8...............  Requirements Relating       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 to Control                           Federal Register       changes.
                                 Technology.                          citation].
Section 45-14-9...............  Requirements Relating       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 to the Source's                      Federal Register       changes.
                                 Impact on Air                        citation].
                                 Quality.
Section 45-14-10..............  Modeling Requirements       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                                                      Federal Register       date.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-11..............  Air Quality                 6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Monitoring                           Federal Register       changes.
                                 Requirements.                        citation].
Section 45-14-12..............  Additional Impacts          6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                 Analysis                             Federal Register       date.
                                 Requirements.                        citation].
Section 45-14-13..............  Additional                  6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Requirements and                     Federal Register       changes.
                                 Variances for Source                 citation].
                                 Impacting Federal
                                 Class 1 Areas.
Section 45-14-14..............  Procedures for              6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Sources Employing                    Federal Register       changes.
                                 Innovative Control                   citation].
                                 Technology.
Section 45-14-15..............  Exclusions From             6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Increment                            Federal Register       changes.
                                 Consumption.                         citation].
Section 45-14-16..............  Specific Exemptions..       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                                                      Federal Register       changes.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-17..............  Public Review               6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Procedures.                          Federal Register       changes.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-18..............  Public Meetings......       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                                                      Federal Register       date.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-19..............  Permit Transfer,            6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Cancellation and                     Federal Register       changes.
                                 Responsibility.                      citation].

Section 45-14-20..............  Disposition of              6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      New state effective
                                 Permits.                             Federal Register       date.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-21..............  Conflict with Other         6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Permitting Rules.                    Federal Register       changes.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-25..............  Actual PALs..........       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                                                      Federal Register       changes.
                                                                      citation].
Section 45-14-26..............  Inconsistency Between       6/1/17   9/27/2018 [Insert      Administrative
                                 Rules.                               Federal Register       changes.
                                                                      citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-20966 Filed 9-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P