[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 103 (Friday, May 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32203-32210]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11396]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94959; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2022-31]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 6.64P-O

May 23, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on May 20, 2022, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.64P-O (Auction Process). The
proposed change is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com,
at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.64P-O regarding the
automated process for both opening and reopening trading in a series on
the Exchange on Pillar as set forth below.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rule 6.64P-O (the ``Pillar Rule'') covers the opening and
reopening of option series, which process is identical on the Pillar
trading platform. As such, the Exchange will simply refer to the
``opening'' of a series herein. The Exchange notes that because it
has not yet migrated to the Pillar platform, Rule 6.64-O continues
to apply to the opening process, which rule is not being modified by
this filing. The Exchange has announced July 11, 2022 as the planned
migration date for Pillar, as announced here: https://www.nyse.com/trader-update/history#110000421498.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current Pillar Auction Process
    Rule 6.64P-O(d) sets forth the Auction Process.\5\ Per Rule 6.64P-
O(d)(1), once the Exchange receives the Auction Trigger for a
series,\6\ the Auction Process begins and the Exchange sends a
Rotational Quote \7\ to both OPRA and proprietary data feeds indicating
that the Exchange is in the process of transitioning from a pre-open
state to continuous trading for that series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Auction Process'' refers to the process that begins when
the Exchange receives an Auction Trigger for a series and ends when
the Auction is conducted. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(5).
    \6\ ``Auction Trigger'' refers to the information disseminated
by the Primary Market in the underlying security that triggers the
Auction Process for a series to begin. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(7).
    \7\ ``Rotational Quote'' refers to the highest Market Maker bid
and lowest Market Maker offer on the Exchange when the Auction
Process begins and such a Rotational Quote will be updated (for
price and size) during the Auction Process. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Per Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2), once a Rotational Quote has been sent, the
Exchange conducts an Auction,\8\ provided ``there is both a Legal Width
Quote and, if applicable, Market Maker quotes with a non-zero offer in
the series'' within the Opening Timer(s), per Rule 6.64P-O(d)(3).\9\
The Exchange deems the Legal Width Quote requirement satisfied if the
Calculated NBBO (described below) for the series is uncrossed, contains
a non-zero offer, and has a spread that does not exceed a maximum
differential that is determined by the Exchange on a class basis and
announced by Trader Update.\10\ The Calculated NBBO is comprised of the
highest bid and lowest offer among all Market Maker quotes and the ABBO
during the Auction Process.\11\ A Calculated NBBO does not require both
Market Maker quotes and ABBO to be present, and may be composed of
Market Maker quotes only, of the ABBO only, or a combination thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Auction'' refers to the opening or reopening of a series
for trading either with or without a trade. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(1).
    \9\ See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2). Rule 6.64P-O(d)(3) specifies the
parameters of the Opening MMQ Timers, which are designed to
encourage (but not require) any Market Maker(s) assigned to an
option series to submit Legal Width Quotes in connection with the
Auction Process. The Exchange proposes a non-substantive change of
``30'' to ``thirty'' regarding the Opening MMQ Timer(s), which would
add clarity and internal consistency to the to rule. See proposed
Rule 6.64P-O(d)(3).
    \10\ See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(A)-(C). The maximum spread
differential for a given series or class of options may be modified
by a Trading Official. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C).
    \11\ See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(8) (defining Calculated NBBO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the foregoing requirements are met (i.e., per Rule 6.64P-
O(d)(2)), the Exchange will conduct an Auction that will either result
in a trade or in a quote depending on whether there is (or is not)
Matched Volume \12\ that can trade at or within the Auction
Collars.\13\ If there is Matched Volume that can trade at or within the
Auction Collars, the Auction will result in a trade at the Indicative
Match Price.\14\ However, if there is no Matched Volume that can trade
at or within the Auction Collars, the Auction will instead result in a
quote and the Exchange transitions to continuous trading as set forth
in Rule 6.64P-O(f).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``Matched Volume'' refers to the number of buy and sell
contracts that can be matched at the Indicative Match Price,
excluding IO Orders. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(11). An Imbalance Offset
Order (``IO Order'') is a Limit Order that is to be traded only in
an Auction. See Rule 6.62P-O(c)(3).
    \13\ ``Auction Collar'' refers to the price collar thresholds
for the Indicative Match Price for an Auction, with the upper
Auction Collar being the offer of the Legal Width Quote and the
lower Auction Collar being the bid of the Legal Width Quote,
provided that if the bid of the Legal Width Quote is zero, the lower
Auction Collar will be one MPV above zero for the series. And, if
there is no Legal Width Quote, the Auction Collars will be published
in the Auction Imbalance Information as zero. See Rule 6.64P-
O(a)(2).
    \14\ See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2)(A). ``Indicative Match Price''
refers to the price at which the maximum number of contracts can be
traded in an Auction, including the non-displayed quantity of
Reserve Orders and excluding IO Orders, subject to the Auction
Collars. If there is no Legal Width Quote, the Indicative Match
Price included in the Auction Imbalance Information will be
calculated without Auction Collars. See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(9).
    \15\ See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, per Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4), unless otherwise specified by
Trader Update, for the first ninety seconds of the Auction Process
(inclusive of the thirty-second Opening MMQ Timer(s)), if there is no
Legal Width Quote, the Exchange will not conduct an Auction, even if
there is Matched Volume, i.e., the series will not open. After the
first ninety seconds of the Auction Process, if there is no Matched
Volume and the Calculated NBBO is wider than the Legal Width Quote, is
not crossed, and does not contain a zero offer, the Exchange will first
cancel any Market Orders and MOO Orders and then transition the option
series to continuous trading per Rule 6.64P-O(f).\16\ Thus, per Rule
6.64P-O(d)(4)(A), if after the first ninety seconds of the Auction
Process there is Matched Volume but the other elements of this
provision are satisfied, the series will not open and will remain
unopened and the Exchange will not transition to continuous trading
until the earlier of (i) a Legal Width Quote is established and an
Auction can be conducted; (ii) the series can be opened as provided for
in paragraph (d)(4)(A); (iii) the series is halted; or (iv) the end of
Core Trading Hours.\17\ In other words, a series that does not meet the
requirements of Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A) may be delayed in opening until
one of the conditions set forth in Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(B) occur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A).
    \17\ See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Change to Auction Process
    The Exchange notes that waiting for market conditions to change
before transitioning to continuous trading per the current Pillar Rule
may result in missed execution opportunities for eligible interest
submitted to the Exchange during the pre-open state. Moreover, this
potential (indefinite) delay is inconsistent with the Exchange's
intention of providing a timely and efficient Auction Process. As

such, the Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.64P-O. In short, the
Exchange proposes that after the first ninety seconds of the Auction
Process, the Exchange would conduct an Auction of marketable interest
based on the spread of the then-current market conditions (i.e., a
Calculated NBBO that is uncrossed with a non-zero offer), provided that
if the Calculated NBBO exceeds the Legal Width Quote differential
established per Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C) the Exchange would cancel any
Market Orders or MOO Orders before conducting the Auction. As further
proposed, marketable Limit Orders would trade in the Auction bound by
the Calculated NBBO (i.e., the highest bid and lowest offer among all
Market Maker quotes and the ABBO), which executions may be earlier and
more efficient than afforded under the current Pillar Rule. If there is
no marketable interest after such cancelation, the Exchange would open
on a quote.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ As described further below, consistent with Rule 6.64P-
O(d)(2)(B), an Auction conducted per proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A)
would open on a quote if there is no Matched Volume).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed change to the Pillar Rule (the
details of which are described below) would promote competitive
liquidity by allowing series to open at then-current market prices and
would promote a fair and orderly opening process by improving the speed
and efficiency of the Auction Process without impairing price
discovery.
    First, the Exchange proposes to codify existing rule text into the
defined phrase the ``initial Auction Process time period'' in proposed
Rule 6.64P-O(a)(5)(i). As proposed, the initial Auction Process time
period would mean, ``unless otherwise specified by Trader Update, the
first ninety seconds after the commencement of the Auction Process,''
which definition simply codifies (and relocates) identical text that
appears in the preamble of both sentences in Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4).\19\
The Exchange believes this proposed change is non-substantive and would
streamline and add clarity to the existing rule.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(a)(5)(i). See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)
(providing that ``[u]nless otherwise specified by Trader Update, for
the first ninety seconds of the Auction Process . . . .'' and
``[n]inety seconds after the Auction Process begins:'').
    \20\ See id. See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A) (replacing
reference to the first ninety-seconds after the Auction Process with
the proposed definition of the ``initial Auction Process time
period,'' which would add clarity and internal consistency to the
Rule, making it easier to navigate and comprehend).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to modify the definition of Legal Width
Quote, including by leveraging the newly defined ``initial Auction
Process time period.'' Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C) provides that, to be
deemed a Legal Width Quote, the spread of the Calculated NBBO may not
exceed a maximum differential that is determined by the Exchange on a
class basis and announced by Trader Update.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C) (which also provides a Trading
Official may establish maximum differentials for one or more series
or classes of options, which differ from those established by the
Exchange).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As such, by rule, the Exchange has discretion to establish for each
option class the maximum allowable spread of the Calculated NBBO within
which the Exchange will conduct an Auction, provided that the other
elements of a Legal Width Quote are met.\22\ Nothing in Rule 6.64P-
O(a)(10)(C) precludes the Exchange from establishing one set of
Calculated NBBO spreads for the first ninety seconds of the Auction
Process and a second (wider) set of Calculated NBBO spreads for any
time after the first ninety seconds. However, in the interest of
clarity and for the avoidance of potential confusion, the Exchange
proposes to expand the definition of Legal Width Quote (rather than
modify by Trader Update) in the Pillar Rule to provide that ``after the
initial Auction Process time period, the Exchange will not impose
limits for the maximum differential for the spread between the
Calculated NBBO.'' \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ To qualify as a Legal Width Quote, the Calculated NBBO must
also be uncrossed and must contain a non-zero offer, which
requirements are not being modified by this rule change. See Rule
6.64P-O(a)(10)(A)-(B).
    \23\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes adopting Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(D) is consistent
with its authority under the Pillar Rule to determine the maximum
allowable Calculated NBBO spread to qualify a series as having a Legal
Width Quote. However, this rule change would make clear that the
Exchange would no longer impose these established spread limits (as
announced by Trader Notice per Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C)) after the
initial Auction Process time period. The Exchange believes this rule
change would add clarity and transparency to the Auction Process to the
benefit of all market participants.\24\ Because the Auction Process,
including the Auction Collars, the presence of Matched Volume, and the
determination of the Indicative Match Price, are dependent upon a
Calculated NBBO that qualifies as a Legal Width Quote, the Exchange
proposes that any Auction conducted consistent with proposed 6.64P-
O(a)(10)(D) would follow the current Auction Process except as
described below.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Similar to the Exchange, other options exchanges have rules
granting them broad discretion to modify the opening parameters for
each option series, which modifications are disseminated or
announced to market participants over data feeds or trader notice.
See, e.g., Cboe Options Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') Rule 5.31(a)
(definitions of Maximum Composite Width and Opening Collar, each of
which the exchange ``may modify during the opening auction process
(which modifications the Exchange disseminates to all subscribers to
the Exchange's data feeds that deliver opening auction updates)'');
Cboe EDGX Options Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'') Rule 21.7(a) (same);
Cboe BZX Options Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') Rule 21.7(a) (definitions
of Maximum Composite Width and Opening Collar); Cboe C2 Exchange
Inc. (``C2'') Rule 6.11(a) (same); see also Miami Securities
Exchange, Inc. (``MIAX'') Rule 503(f)(2) (which permits MIAX to
determine by circular an acceptable range in which openings are
permissible if there is no valid width national best bid or offer
(``NBBO'')).
    \25\ See, e.g., Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2)(A)-(B) (describing the
process of opening a series with a trade or a quote depending on
whether there is Matched Volume).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4) regarding the
conduct of an Auction after the conclusion of the initial Auction
Process time period (i.e., after the first ninety seconds).\26\ As
noted herein, the Pillar functionality (per Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A))
permits a series to open based on a ``wide'' Calculated NBBO (that is
uncrossed with a non-zero offer), but only if there is no Matched
Volume, which requirement may delay openings and result in missed
execution opportunities.\27\ To address this unintended potential
delay, the Exchange proposes that after the initial Auction Process
time period and consistent with proposed paragraph (a)(10)(D) of this
Rule (which removes the limit on the maximum allowable Calculated NBBO
spread), the Exchange would conduct an Auction regardless of Matched
Volume as long as the Calculated NBBO is not crossed, and does not
contain a zero offer.\28\ This proposed functionality would allow
marketable Limit Orders to execute in the Auction, which may result in
certain option series opening earlier than are opened under the current
rule and

increase execution opportunities for Limit Orders at then-current
market prices.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4) (which includes the
aforementioned non-substantive change to refer to the newly defined
``initial Auction Process time period'' rather than the first ninety
seconds after the Auction Process). The Exchange is not altering
Auction functionality for the initial Auction Process time period.
See id.
    \27\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(B) (setting forth the
necessary market conditions to open a series that has not opened per
paragraph (d)(4) of the Pillar Rule). If the Exchange opens a series
per Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A), it first cancels any Market Order or MOO
Orders before conducting an Auction and transitioning to continuous
trading. See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4).
    \28\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A). See also proposed Rule
6.64P-O(a)(10)(D).
    \29\ See id. See also Rule 6.64P-O(a)(9)(A) (providing, in
relevant part, that ``the Indicative Match Price would not be lower
(higher) than the highest (lowest) price of a Limit Order to buy
(sell) ranked Priority 2--Display Orders that is eligible to
participate in the Auction''). In addition, consistent with the
proposal, the Exchange proposes to remove as inapplicable the text
in current Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A) indicating that the ``Auction is
not intended to end with a trade, but it may result in a trade even
if there is no Legal Width Quote if orders or quotes arrive during
the period when the Exchange is evaluating the status of orders and
quotes'' as well as text indicating that the Exchange would
``transition to continuous trading as described in paragraph (f) of
this Rule.'' See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although Limit Orders would be eligible to execute based on this
proposed functionality, whether a Market Order or MOO Order may
participate in the proposed Auction depends on the width of the market
at the time of the Auction. Specifically, as further proposed, if the
Calculated NBBO spread is wider than the differential established per
paragraph (a)(10)(C) of this Rule, the Exchange would cancel Market
Orders and MOO Orders before conducting the Auction, which proposed
handling is consistent with the current Pillar Rule.\30\ Conversely, as
proposed, and consistent with the current Pillar Rule, Market Orders
and MOO Orders are not canceled and will participate in an Auction that
is based on a Calculated NBBO that is less than or equal to the
Calculated NBBO spread limit established per Rule 6.64P-
O(a)(10)(C).\31\ As further proposed, after the cancelation of any
Market Orders or MOO Orders as applicable, the Auction Process will
proceed consistent with paragraph (d)(2)(A)-(B) of this Rule and the
Exchange will execute Matched Volume (if any) to the extent possible
before transitioning to continuous trading.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A)(i) (providing that Market Orders
and MOO Orders are cancelled ``[a]ny time a series is opened or
reopened when there is no Legal Width Quote,'' i.e., when the
Calculated NBBO exceeds the maximum allowable spread limit set forth
in Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C)'').
    \31\ See id. To avoid potential confusion regarding the distinct
handling of Market Orders and MOO Orders under proposed Rule 6.64P-
O(d)(4)(A) depending upon whether an Auction is conducted based on a
Calculated NBBO spread that is in compliance with Rule 6.64P-
O(a)(10)(C) or with proposed Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(D), the Exchange
has intentionally avoided reference to the presence of a Legal Width
Quote in the proposed Rule. See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A).
    \32\ See, e.g., Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2)(A)-(B) (providing that ``[i]f
there is Matched Volume that can trade at or within the Auction
Collars, the Auction will result in a trade at the Indicative Match
Price'' or, ``[i]f there is no Matched Volume that can trade at or
within the Auction Collars,'' the Auction will not result in a trade
and the Exchange will transition to continuous trading as described
in paragraph (f) of this Rule and the Auction will result in a
quote'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Taken together, the proposed changes to Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(D) and
(d)(4) would allow any series that has not opened by the end of the
initial Auction Process time period the ability to open based on a
Legal Width Quote derived from then-market conditions. As such, the
Exchange proposes to modify Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(B) to update the cross-
reference from paragraph (d)(4)(A) to paragraph (d)(4) and to eliminate
as superfluous paragraph (d)(4)(B)(ii), which refers to waiting until
``the series can be opened as provided for in paragraph (d)(4)(A).''
\33\ The Exchange believes these proposed conforming changes are
necessary given that the proposed changes to Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(D)
(removing the limit on the Calculated NBBO spread to qualify as Legal
Width Quote) and (d)(4)(A) (addressing the conduct of an Auction after
the initial Auction Process time period under the expanded definition
of Legal Width Quote) render paragraph (d)(4)(B)(ii) of the Rule
unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4)(A). See proposed Rule
6.64P-O(d)(4)(B). The Exchange also proposes conforming changes to
re-number the remaining paragraphs in light of the proposed
deletion, which would add clarity and internal consistency to the
Rule. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that it is not making any changes to the
requirements to conduct an Auction during the initial Auction Process
time period. Instead, the proposed changes relate solely to those
series that remain unopened after the conclusion of the initial Auction
Process time period because the Calculated NBBO spread is too wide. The
Exchange believes that the initial Auction Process time period affords
market participants sufficient opportunity to absorb available pricing
information, including Market Makers that are generally responsible for
pricing the market. If the Calculated NBBO remains wide by the end of
the initial Auction Process time period, the Exchange believes it is
unlikely to tighten if the Exchange were to further delay the opening
of a series. The Exchange has observed that on a typical trading day,
in the current system, nearly 98% of all series are opened by 9:32 a.m.
Eastern Time. As such, the Exchange anticipates that the majority of
series would be opened within ninety seconds of the Auction Process and
would not be impacted by the proposed rule change. However, for the
minority of option series that have not opened within the first ninety
seconds, the Exchange believes it is necessary and appropriate to allow
such series to open based on prices consistent with then-current market
conditions, provided the Calculated NBBO for the series is not crossed,
and does not contain a zero offer.
    The Exchange believes the proposed modification to the Auction
Process would continue to protect Market Orders and MOO Orders from
being executed (by cancelling such orders before conducting the
proposed Auction) when the Calculated NBBO spread exceeds the spread
differential established per current Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C) before
conducting the proposed Auction. In addition, the proposed modification
would allow any eligible Limit Orders to be executed in the proposed
Auction, bound by the Calculated NBBO. The Calculated NBBO (even if
wide) represents the best-priced quotes by Market Makers (which
participants generally are responsible for pricing the market) and/or
the ABBO, the presence of which indicates that another market has
opened.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Options exchanges have varying opening processes and have
made separate determinations on what constitutes individual,
reasonable opening market widths. Thus, if other options exchanges
opened a series with a market width, it is reasonable to open the
series for trading on the Exchange as well (as orders submitted to
other exchanges may be trading at those widths).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with current functionality (and with the approved Pillar
Rule), the Exchange would not permit any opening transactions to trade
through any better-priced interest on any Away Market, even it is
permitted to do so.\35\ Rather, because interest in the Auction would
not trade outside of the Calculated NBBO (which defines the then-
current market for the series), any Limit Orders executed in the
proposed Auction would, bound by Auction Collars, would trade at a
price that is equal to or better than the price(s) available at other
exchanges.\36\ Per Rule 6.64P-O(f)(3)(A), any interest remaining after
such Action is then evaluated for potential routing prior to being
posted to the Consolidated Book. Further, the Exchange notes that there
are other price protections available to limit the

risk of executions at a wider market price.\37\ Thus, the Exchange
believes that the risk of an extreme execution based on the Calculated
NBBO available after the initial Auction Process time period may be
mitigated for the aforementioned reasons. The Exchange believes that,
on balance, the benefits to market participants of having the series
open earlier outweighs this mitigated risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Although the intermarket linkage rules exempt from trade-
through liability trades occurring during the opening process, the
Exchange would continue to restrict transactions occurring at the
open to the NBBO. See Rule 6.94-O(b)(2) (exempting from trade-
through liability those transactions that ``traded through a
Protected Quotation being disseminated by an Eligible Exchange
during a trading rotation''). A ``Protected Quotation'' is the Best
Bid or Best Offer disseminated by OPRA and displayed by an Eligible
Exchange. See Rule 6.92-O(15)-(16).
    \36\ See Rule 6.64P-O(b)(2)(A) (A) (providing that, `[i]f there
is Matched Volume that can trade at or within the Auction Collars,
the Auction will result in a trade at the Indicative Match Price).
See also Rule 6.64-O(a)(3),(9), and (11) (defining Auction Collars,
Indicative Match Price, and Matched Volume, respectively).
    \37\ See Rule 6.41P-O(a)(1), (b) (regarding the Arbitrage Check,
which is applied pre-open). The Exchange notes that the price
protection mechanisms it employs during continuous trading are based
on the NBBO, or Auction Prices as applicable. See, e.g., Rules
6.41P-O(c)(4)(B) (regarding the Intrinsic Value Check); Rule 6.62P-
O(a)(4)(A) (regarding Limit Order Price Protection); and Rule 6.62P-
O(a)(4)(B) (regarding Trading Collars).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange also proposes to modify the requirements to
open a series during the initial Auction Process time period for option
series with two or more assigned Market Makers, per Rule 6.64P-
O(d)(3)(C). Per Rule 6.64P-O(3)(C)(i), if there are two or more Market
Makers assigned to a series, the Exchange will conduct the Auction,
without waiting for the Opening MMQ Timer to end, as soon as there is
both a Legal Width Quote and at least two assigned Market Makers have
submitted a quote with a non-zero offer. Per Rule 6.64P-O(3)(C)(ii), if
at least two Market Makers assigned to a series have not submitted a
quote with a non-zero offer by the end of the Opening MMQ Timer, the
Exchange will begin a second Opening MMQ Timer. The Exchange proposes
to modify these provisions to provide that the Exchange would require
that at least two quotes with non-zero offers be submitted during the
Opening MMQ Timer, which quotes may be sent by one or more Market
Makers.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See proposed Rule 6.64P-O(d)(2) (providing that ``[o]nce a
Rotational Quote has been sent, the Exchange will conduct an Auction
when there is both a Legal Width Quote and, if applicable, Market
Maker quotes with a non-zero offer in the series (subject to the
Opening MMQ Timer(s) requirements in paragraph (d)(3) of this
Rule'') and Rule 6.64P-O(d)(3)(C)(i) (providing that ``[t]he
Exchange will conduct the Auction, without waiting for the Opening
MMQ Timer to end, as soon as there is both a Legal Width Quote and
at least two quotes with a non-zero offer submitted by assigned
Market Maker(s)'') and (d)(3)(C)(ii) (providing that ``[i]f the
Exchange has not received at least two quotes with a non-zero offer
from any Market Maker(s) assigned to a series by the end of the
Opening MMQ Timer, the Exchange will begin a second Opening MMQ
Timer'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change continues to
encourage (but not require) Market Makers to participate at the open,
which may increase the availability of Legal Width Quotes in more
series, thereby allowing more series to open in a timely manner. The
Exchange believes that expanding the opportunities for each Market
Maker to enter the market--whether by each Market Maker submitting one
quote or a single Market Maker submitting two quotes--could result in
the depth of liquidity that market participants have come to expect in
options with multiple assigned Market Makers, and a more stable trading
environment. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would
provide more flexibility in terms of how market depth is achieved
(i.e., based on quotes from a single Market Maker as opposed to two)
and may result in a more timely and efficient opening process. Further,
the proposed change may increase the availability of Legal Width Quotes
in more series and would add clarity and transparency to Exchange
rules.
Other Exchange Rules: Proposed Non-Substantive or Clarifying Changes
    The Exchange also proposes to make several clarifying or non-
substantive changes to certain of its rules. First, the Exchange
proposes to modify paragraph (c) of Rule 6.37-O (Obligations of Market
Makers) regarding ``Unusual Conditions--Auctions'' to add an open
parenthesis in the cross reference to Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10).\39\ The
Exchange believes this proposed change would correct an inadvertent
omission and would add clarity and transparency to Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See proposed Rule 6.37-O(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to correct several cross-references in
Rule 6.62P-O (Orders and Modifiers). The Exchange proposes to update
the reference in Rule 6.62P-O(e)(3)(C)(ii) regarding Day ISO ALO Orders
to correctly cross-reference paragraphs (e)(2)(C)-(F) (rather than to
paragraphs (e)(2)(C)-(G)) to cover the processing of such ALO Orders
once resting.\40\ The proposed change would correct an inadvertent
error adding clarity and transparency to Exchange rules. Similarly, the
Exchange proposes to update the reference in Rule 6.62P-O(h)(6)(B) to
correctly cross-reference the defined term Complex Order, which is set
forth in Rule 6.62P-O(f) (rather than paragraph (e)).\41\ The proposed
change would correct an inadvertent error adding clarity and
transparency to Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(e)(3)(C)(ii).
    \41\ See proposed Rule 6.62P-O(h)(6)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\42\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\43\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Change to Pillar Auction Process
    Overall, the Exchange believes the proposed changes to its Auction
Process would promote a fair and orderly market by improving the speed
and efficiency of the Exchange's opening process without impairing
price discovery, which should result in better and more consistent
prices on Auction executions and facilitate a fair and orderly
transition to continuous trading. As noted herein, the Exchange
believes that the (continued) requirement that interest executed in an
Auction must trade at or within the Calculated NBBO (which defines the
then-current market for the series) would provide protection for such
interest.
    The Exchange believes modifying the definition of Legal Width Quote
to make clear that after the initial Auction Process time period the
Exchange would no longer impose its own established limits on the
maximum allowable Calculated NBBO spread to qualify a series as having
a Legal Width Quote would promote just and equitable principles of
trade and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system and protect investors because
it would add clarity and transparency to the Auction Process to the
benefit of all market participants.\44\ The Exchange notes that it
currently has discretion to establish for each option class the maximum
allowable spread of the Calculated NBBO within which the Exchange will
conduct an Auction, provided that the other elements of a Legal Width
Quote are met, which authority is consistent with other options
exchanges. Although the Exchange has rule authority (per current Rule
6.64P-O(a)(10)(C)) to establish one set of Calculated NBBO spreads for
the first ninety seconds of

the Auction Process and a second (wider) set of Calculated NBBO spreads
for any time after the first ninety seconds, it believes the proposed
change to the definition of Legal Width Quote would help avoid
potential investor confusion to the benefit of all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See supra note 24 (citing the discretion of Cboe and its
affiliates and MIAX to modify the opening auction parameters).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposal to amend Rule 6.64P-O(d)(4) to
allow the Exchange to conduct an Auction after the conclusion of the
initial Auction Process time period and consistent with proposed
paragraph (a)(10)(D) of this Rule (i.e., without imposing certain
limits established on the Calculated NBBO spread) would promote just
and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
and protect investors. First, the Exchange believes that the proposal
to wait a ninety-second initial Auction Process time period before
removing the limits on the permissible Calculated NBBO spread to open a
series (i.e., proposed Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(D)) would continue to
provide opportunities for price discovery based on then-current market
conditions, including affording sufficient time to Market Makers (who
are generally responsible for pricing the market) to absorb available
pricing information and, if so inclined, to update their quotes
potentially resulting in tighter spreads. The Exchange has observed
that on a typical trading day, in the current system, nearly 98% of all
series are opened by 9:32 a.m. Eastern Time. As such, the Exchange
anticipates that the majority of series would be opened within ninety
seconds of the Auction Process and would not be impacted by the
proposed rule change. For the minority of option series that have not
opened within the first ninety seconds because of a ``wide'' Calculated
NBBO, the Exchange believes it is unlikely that such spread would
tighten if the Exchange were to further delay the opening of a series.
Thus, the Exchange believes it is necessary and appropriate to allow
such series to open based on prices consistent with then-current market
conditions, provided the Calculated NBBO for the series is not crossed,
and does not contain a zero offer.
    Further, the Exchange believes the proposed modification would
promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and protect investors because the proposed Auction
Process would continue to protect Market Orders and MOO Orders from
being executed (by cancelling such orders before conducting the
proposed Auction) when the Calculated NBBO spread exceeds the spread
differential established per (current) Rule 6.64P-O(a)(10)(C) before
conducting the proposed Auction. In addition, the proposed modification
would allow any eligible Limit Orders to be executed in the proposed
Auction, bound by the Calculated NBBO. The Calculated NBBO (even if
wide) represents the best-priced quotes by Market Makers (which
participants generally are responsible for pricing the market) and/or
the ABBO, the presence of which indicates that another market has
opened.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Options exchanges have varying opening processes and have
made separate determinations on what constitutes individual,
reasonable opening market widths. Thus, if other options exchanges
opened a series with a market width, it is reasonable to open the
series for trading on the Exchange as well (as orders submitted to
other exchanges may be trading at those widths).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with current functionality (and with the approved Pillar
Rule), the Exchange would not permit any opening transactions to trade
through any better-priced interest on any Away Market, even it is
permitted to do so.\46\ Rather, because interest in the Auction would
not trade outside of the Calculated NBBO (which defines the then-
current market for the series), any Limit Orders executed in the
proposed Auction would, bound by Auction Collars, would trade at a
price that is equal to or better than the price(s) available at other
exchanges.\47\ Per Rule 6.64P-O(f)(3)(A), any interest remaining after
such Action is then evaluated for potential routing prior to being
posted to the Consolidated Book. Further, the Exchange notes that there
are other price protections available to limit the risk of executions
at a wider market price.\48\ Thus, the Exchange believes that the risk
of an extreme execution based on the Calculated NBBO available after
the initial Auction Process time period may be mitigated for the
aforementioned reasons. The Exchange believes that, on balance, the
benefits to market participants of having the series open earlier
outweighs this mitigated risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Although the intermarket linkage rules exempt from trade-
through liability trades occurring during the opening process, the
Exchange would continue to restrict transactions occurring at the
open to the NBBO. See Rule 6.94-O(b)(2) (exempting from trade-
through liability those transactions that ``traded through a
Protected Quotation being disseminated by an Eligible Exchange
during a trading rotation''). A ``Protection Quotation'' is the Best
Bid or Best Offer disseminated by OPRA and displayed by an Eligible
Exchange. See Rule 6.92-O(15)-(16).
    \47\ See Rule 6.64P-O(b)(2)(A) (A) (providing that, `[i]f there
is Matched Volume that can trade at or within the Auction Collars,
the Auction will result in a trade at the Indicative Match Price).
See also Rule 6.64-O(a)(3),(9), and (11) (defining Auction Collars,
Indicative Match Price, and Matched Volume, respectively).
    \48\ See Rule 6.41P-O(a)(1), (b) (regarding the Arbitrage Check,
which is applied pre-open). The Exchange notes that the price
protection mechanisms it employs during continuous trading are based
on the NBBO, or Auction Prices as applicable. See, e.g., Rules
6.41P-O(c)(4)(B) (regarding the Intrinsic Value Check); Rule 6.62P-
O(a)(4)(A) (regarding Limit Order Price Protection); and Rule 6.62P-
O(a)(4)(B) (regarding Trading Collars).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to modify the requirements to
open a series for option series that have two or more assigned Market
Makers would promote just and equitable principles of trade and remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and protect investors because it would
continue to provide Market Makers assigned to such series the
opportunity to submit a quote while potentially promoting a more timely
opening once at least two quotes (even if from a single Market Maker)
have been submitted and would add clarity and transparency to Exchange
rules. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would provide
more flexibility in terms how of market depth in the affected series is
achieved (i.e., based on quotes from a single Market Maker as opposed
to two) and may result in a more timely and efficient opening process.
Further, the proposed change may increase the availability of Legal
Width Quotes in more series and would add clarity and transparency to
Exchange rules. Improving the validity of the opening price benefits
all market participants and also benefits the reputation of the
Exchange as being a venue that provides accurate price discovery. To
the extent that this proposed rule change results in an option series
opening sooner, which, in turn would increase the times during which
investors may conduct trading in these options, this proposed change
would benefit investors and the investing public.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive and
conforming changes to Rule 6.64P-O (including to paragraph (d)(4)(B))
would promote just and equitable principles of trade because such
changes would streamline Rule 6.64P-O, thus adding clarity to the
Auction Process making it easier to comprehend and navigate to the
benefit of market participants and would promote transparency and
internal consistency within Exchange rules making them easier to
comprehend and navigate.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See supra notes 20, 26, 29 and 33.

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

Additional Proposed Non-Substantive or Clarifying Changes to Exchange
Rules
    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive and
clarifying changes that update/correct inaccurate references would
promote transparency and internal consistency within Exchange rules
making them easier to comprehend and navigate.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See supra notes 39-41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange operates in a
competitive market and regularly competes with other options exchanges
for order flow. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule
change would impose any burden on intra-market competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because all market participants may trade in any series that opens
subject to the proposed (modified) opening process.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it is
designed to open series on the Exchange in a fair and orderly manner.
The Exchange believes the proposed opening process will continue to
provide market participants with an opportunity for price discovery
based on then-current market conditions when the Exchange opens series
for trading. This will facilitate the presence of sufficient liquidity
in a series when it opens, and increase the ability of series to open
at prices consistent with then-current market conditions (at the
Exchange and on other exchanges). As noted herein, several options
exchanges likewise have discretion to modify their opening procedures
to address then-current market conditions.\51\ Further, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intra-market competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as all market participants that
participate in the opening process may benefit equally from the
proposal, as the rules of the Exchange apply equally to all market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See, e.g., supra note 24 (citing the discretion of Cboe and
its affiliates and MIAX to modify the opening auction parameters).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change to open
those series with more than one assigned Market Maker based on two
quotes regardless of the source would result in an undue burden on
competition. Market Makers are encouraged but not required to quote in
their assigned series at the open regardless of whether a Market Maker
is one of several assigned to a series or is the only one. As such,
this proposal would not subject any Market Maker to additional
obligations. Thus, the Exchange does not believe this proposed change
would result in an undue burden on intra-market competition as it would
apply equally to all similarly-situated Market Makers regarding their
assigned series. The Exchange believes that the proposal to allow a
series with more than one assigned Market Maker to open based on two
quotes regardless of the source would continue to encourage
participation of Market Makers at the open, may increase the
availability of Legal Width Quotes in more series, thereby allowing
more series to open (sooner). Improving the validity of the opening
price benefits all market participants and also benefits the reputation
of the Exchange as being a venue that provides accurate price
discovery. With respect to inter-market competition, the Exchange notes
that most options exchanges do not require Market Makers to quote
during the opening.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See, e.g., Cboe and its affiliated exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the non-substantive changes proposed by the Exchange
provide additional clarity and detail in the Exchange's rules and are
not changes made for any competitive purpose.

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

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

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory
organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2022-31 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-NYSEArca-2022-31. 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-NYSEArca-2022-31 and should be submitted
on or before June 17, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-11396 Filed 5-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR STANDARD FORM 83-I

	PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

1.  IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) TITLE AND NUMBER OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

Alternative Affirmative Defense Requirements for Ultra-low Sulfur
Diesel.  The current OMB control number is 2060-NEW.  The EPA number for
this proposed ICR is 2364.01.  The docket number for the direct final
rule related to this information collection is EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1158.
The Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for the direct final rule
related to this information collection is 2060-AO71.

(b) SHORT CHARACTERIZATION/ABSTRACT

The highway diesel program regulations require most motor vehicle
(highway) diesel fuel sold at retail stations to contain 15 parts per
million (ppm) sulfur or less (hereafter referred to as ultra low sulfur
diesel fuel, or ULSD) beginning October, 2006. [Recordkeeping and
reporting related to diesel fuel regulations for on-road, non-road and
performance-based test methods are included in EPA ICR 1718.08 (OMB
Control Number 2060-0277).]

Under the regulation, where a violation of the 15 ppm sulfur standard is
identified at a retail outlet, the retailer responsible for dispensing
the noncompliant fuel is deemed liable, as well as the refiner(s),
importer(s) and distributor(s) of such fuel.  The highway diesel
regulations further provide, however, that any person deemed liable can
rebut this presumption by establishing an affirmative defense that
includes, among other things, showing that it conducted a quality
assurance sampling and testing program as prescribed by the regulations.
This proposed ICR covers burdens and costs associated with a direct
final rule which would allow refiners and importers of ULSD an
alternative means of meeting the affirmative defense requirements in the
diesel sulfur regulations by participating in a nationwide diesel fuel
sampling and testing program.  This program would result in lower
overall compliance costs for nearly all affected parties and the survey
would be carried out by independent surveyor funded by industry.  The
reporting burden covered by this proposed ICR related to reports that
refiners, importers and distributors, have to submit in the event of a
non-complying sulfur test result.

The direct final rule affects the regulations at 40 Code of Federal
Regulations § 80.613.  The authority citation for the direct final rule
and the association information collection is for the following Clean
Air Act sections:  42 United States Code §§ 7414, 7542, 7545, and
7601(a).

2.  NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

(a) NEED/AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION

The basic need and authority for the collection of information have
been established in the ICR for the highway diesel final rule.  The rule
established specific recordkeeping and reporting requirements in order
to enforce compliance with the 15 ppm sulfur standard for highway diesel
fuel.

(b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/USERS OF THE DATA

The practical utility and use of the collection of information related
to highway diesel fuel have been established in the ICR for the highway
diesel final rule. The Federal Register notice for the direct final rule
describes in greater detail the information collection activities
related to establishing an alternative defense in the event of a
violation of the 15 ppm sulfur standard for highway diesel fuel.  In
general, the direct final rule is designed to grant flexibility to
refiners and importers by permitting them to conduct activities normally
conducted on a facility basis on a nationwide basis.  The associated
information collection is designed to monitor compliance on a nationwide
basis.

The EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and EPA’s
Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
will be the governmental users of the information contained in this
proposed information collection.

3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

(a) NONDUPLICATION

This proposed ICR is not unnecessarily duplicative of information
otherwise reasonably accessible to the Agency.  Wherever possible, we
have designed the proposed regulation to make sure that there is no
unnecessary duplication.  Many recordkeeping activities are already
conducted as part of customary business practice (CBP).

(b) PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ICR SUBMISSION TO OMB

The proposed ICR changes are included in the direct final rule.  A copy
of the direct final rule and an accompanying notice of proposed
rulemaking published in the Federal Register on the same day are
available in the docket.  We are handling this action as a direct final
rule, because we do not expect adverse comment.  If adverse comment is
received, we will withdraw the direct final rule and consider any
comment(s) received prior to issuing a final rule.

(c) CONSULTATIONS

Industry was consulted in making the assumptions related to the original
information collection burden and in developing the NPRM and the
additional information requirements that this proposed ICR are based on.
We are seeking further industry comment via this supporting statement
and encourage all interest parties to submit comments to us.

(d) EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION

Less frequent reporting would make discovery and correction of
violations take too long to discover from the date of violation, and
would give non-complying parties a competitive advantage for long
periods of time.  A lesser recordkeeping burden would make verification
of compliance extremely difficult.

(e) GENERAL GUIDELINES

The general guidelines for the collection of information pursuant to the
highway diesel rule are approved in the ICR for the final highway diesel
rule.  The record retention requirements specified is five (5) years.
This proposed ICR also specifies five (5) years as the retention period.

(f) CONFIDENTIALITY AND SENSITIVE QUESTIONS

 (i) Confidentiality

Any information submitted to EPA for which a claim of confidentiality is
made will be safeguarded according to EPA regulations at 40 C.F.R. 2.201
etc. seq.

(ii) Sensitive Questions

This section is not applicable as this proposed ICR does not involve
matters of a sensitive nature.

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

(a) RESPONDENTS/NAICS and SIC CODES

Recordkeeping and, in some cases, reporting affects the following
respondents: petroleum refiners (2911), pipelines (4613), diesel fuel
marketers and distributors (5171 and 5172), diesel fuel carriers (4212
and 4213) and terminals (4226).  Many recordkeeping activities are
already performed in the normal course of business (CBP).

(b) INFORMATION REQUESTED

(i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

Knowledge of the following definitions at 40 CFR 80.2 is important for a
thorough understanding of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements:

“Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel” means any diesel fuel or other
distillate fuel sold in any State (State means a State, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands) that is used, intended
for use in, or made available for use in for use in motor vehicles or
motor vehicle engines.

“Refiner” means any person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or
supervises a refinery.

“Importer” means a person who imports diesel fuel from a foreign
country into the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana
Islands).

There is a new respondent burden associated with refiners, importers and
distributors preparing a report for EPA explaining the circumstances
behind and root causes for any noncompliant ULSD samples.  There is also
an Agency burden associated with reviewing each report.  This burden is
estimated below under “ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE
COLLECTION”.  The following sections describe respondent and Agency
activities.

 (ii) 	Respondent Activities

The following are required:

Read and comprehend the regulations.

Train personnel to meet the requirements, employing new technologies if
warranted.

Develop the information that is not already available.

Gather and organize the information.

Review the information, perform quality assurance, and take corrective
action, if necessary, to meet the regulatory requirements.

Report the information to EPA, as specified in the regulations.

5.  	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED--AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

(a) AGENCY ACTIVITIES

The following are required:

Develop a thorough understanding of the regulatory requirements.
Prepare guidance documents and forms.

Convey the requirements in a manner that is understandable.  Emphasize
the benefits of submitting data electronically.

Respond to inquiries.

Provide access to the regulations and guidance documents.

Review the submitted information prior to data entry for compliance with
submission requirements.

Contact the respondent when the information has not been submitted
properly and provide guidance on correction of the problem.

Maintain and refine hardware and software systems for handling
confidential data via hard copy and electronically.

Administer a contract for data entry.

Input information into databases and store the information.

Perform data analysis and identify violations.

	 (b) COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

The information collection has been developed by EPA offices that have
planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective
management and use of the information to be collected, including the
processing of the information in a manner which will enhance the utility
of the information for the Agency and the public.  The information
collection, to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate
information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, Agency
efficiency, and responsiveness to the public.

The information is carefully reviewed for compliance with the
requirements.  Most of the information submitted to the Agency under the
diesel sulfur program is claimed as business confidential (CBI).  It is
stored in a secure area and on secure databases.

No changes to the collection methodologies in the existing ICR for the
diesel rule are anticipated as a result of this proposed ICR
modification.

(c) SMALL BUSINESS FLEXIBILITY

This proposed rule will grant flexibility to all affected parties,
regardless of size.

(d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE

There is no change in collection schedules relative to the ICR for the
diesel rule as a result of this proposed ICR modification.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

 	(a) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT BURDEN

We drew upon consultation with industry and our own experience
implementing similar regulations among the same or similar entities to
develop estimates of the burden associated with this modification.

(b) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT COST

Three labor categories are involved:  managerial (includes legal and
professional review), technical, and clerical. The estimates use Bureau
of Labor Statistics, "Employer Costs for Employee Compensation - Table
12 - Private Industry, Manufacturing, and Non-Manufacturing Industries
by Occupational Group (December 2003), with a 3% inflation factor
applied to bring the values to present dollars.  Using this method, the
following wages and benefits apply by category:

Wages and Benefits

Managerial 	$53.87 per hour

Technical	$35.29 per hour

Clerical	$24.56 per hour

Doubling for company overhead beyond wages and benefits, and for
convenience, rounding up to the dollar, gives the following rates for
this ICR:

Total Employer Cost

Managerial	$108 per hour

Technical	$71 per hour

Clerical	$49 per hour

The labor mix for the activities estimated will be about the same for
each and is consistent with prior ICRs in this series.  It is assumed
that for each hour of activity the mix will be about 0.1 hour
managerial, 0.7 hour technical, and 0.2 hour clerical.  This gives an
average labor cost of $71 per hour, which will be used in this ICR
modification.

"Purchased services" relates to the survey related to sampling diesel
fuel at retail outlets, which would be conducted by an outside surveyor
hired by industry.  There are no capital/start-up costs associated with
this ICR.

(c) ESTIMATING THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSE

We were able to estimate the number of regulated entities by drawing
upon our experience regulating the same entities.  Respondents for this
action may include refiners, importers, and distributors.  Based on
history and enforcement experience, we expect that approximately 20
instances of non-compliance will result in 20 reports to be submitted
each year.

Annual Respondent Burden Hours & Costs

(Including Non-Postage "Other Costs")

Collection

Activity 	# of Respondents	# of Reports per Respondent

 	Total # of Reports

	# of Hours per Report

	Total

Hours

Submit report for each exceedance	20	1	20	16	320

	The estimated respondent burden for reviewing each report for a
noncompliant sample is 16 hours, or $1,136 per response, so the total
respondent burden for evaluating 20 reports per year would be $22,270.

	(d) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST

The annual Agency burden is determined using the 2009 OPM hourly pay
table applicable for the Washington DC area, with values multiplied by
1.6, the standard government benefits multiplier. The hourly wage rates
are as follows, rounded up to the nearest five dollars:

EPA Manager (GS-15, step one) = $93

Technical Staff (GS-13, step one) = $67

Clerical Staff (GS-5, step one) = $26

The total annual Agency burden hours are estimated as follows:

Activity	# of Responses	Manager

Hours per Response	Technical

Hours per Response	Clerical

Hours per Response	Total Agency Hours

Review report for each exceedance	20	0	2	0	40

Based on historical experience, we expect to find approximately 20
noncompliant samples per year.  The estimated Agency burden for
reviewing each report for a noncompliant sample is 2 hours, or $134 per
response, so the total Agency burden for evaluating 20 reports per year
would be $2,680.

(e) BOTTOM LINE BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS

The annual estimates in burden hours and costs associated with this rule
are as follows:

TOTALS FROM THE TABLES:

TOTAL NO. OF REPORTS:   20

TOTAL BURDEN HOURS:   360

TOTAL COST: $24,950

(f) REASON FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN

	The proposed change in burden is due to issuance of a regulation
affecting sampling and testing requirements for ULSD sold at retail
stations.

(g) BURDEN STATEMENT

 The average respondent burden in hours per response for this ICR is
estimated at 16 hours.  The average Agency burden in hours per response
for this ICR is estimated at 2 hours.

 Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are
listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this and comments may be
submitted to the attention of this docket number:  EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1158.
Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA.  Please include
the docket number in any correspondence.

B.	COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS

This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used
in the data collection associated with the diesel fuel regulations.

 See “Salary Table 2009 – DCB,” US Office of Personnel Management,
accessed July 16, 2009 at http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/dcb.asp.

 PAGE  1

 PAGE

 PAGE   8


[Federal Register: July 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 133)]
[Notices]
[Page 38073-38074]
[DOCID:fr12jy07-53]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. QF07-198-000]

Warm Springs Biomass Project, LLC; Notice of Filing of Notice of
Self-Certification of Qualifying Status of a Small Power Production
Facility and Cogeneration Facility

July 5, 2007.
    Take notice that on July 2, 2007, Warm Springs Biomass Project, LLC
(Warm Springs Biomass) filed with the Commission a notice of self-
certification of a facility as a qualifying small power production
facility and cogeneration facility pursuant to 18 CFR 292.207(a) of the
Commission's regulations.
    Warm Springs Biomass will construct, own, and operate an
approximately 20 MW cogeneration facility using biomass as fuel. The
two biomass-fueled steam boilers will produce steam that will be
directed to the steam turbine generator. Up to 60,000 pounds per hour
of steam will be extracted at 75 psi to operate lumber dry kilns. The
remaining portion of the steam will run through the entire steam
turbine and condensed to produce power. The facility will be located on
reservation of the Confederated tribes of Warm Springs Indian
Reservation of Oregon in Jefferson County, Oregon.
    The facility will interconnect with the transmission system of Warm
Springs Power and Water Enterprises and sell electric energy to
Portland General Electric Company. The facility will purchase
supplementary, standby, back-up and maintenance power from PacificCorp.
    A notice of self-certification does not institute a proceeding
regarding qualifying facility status; a notice of self-certification
[or self-recertification] provides notice that the entity making filing
has determined the facility meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii).
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

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

(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-13512 Filed 7-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13741-13742]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05076]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0153]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0101

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0101,
Periodic Gauging and Engineering Analyses for Certain Tank Vessels Over
30 Years Old; without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek
to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the
Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 9, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2022-0153] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available
from: Commandant (CG-6P), ATTN: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S.
Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave SE, STOP 7710, Washington,
DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.L. Craig, Office of Privacy
Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions
on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an
application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a
Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains
information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's
likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity
of the Collection, and other important information describing the
Collection. There is one ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    In response to your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not
to seek an extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider
all comments and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2022-0153], and
must be received by May 9, 2022.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Periodic Gauging and Engineering Analyses for Certain Tank
Vessels Over 30 Years Old.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0101.
    Summary: The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 required the issuance of
regulations related to the structural integrity of tank vessels,
including periodic gauging of the plating thickness of tank vessels
over 30 years old. This collection of information is used to verify the
structural integrity of older tank vessels.
    Need: 46 U.S.C. 3703 authorizes the Coast Guard to prescribe
regulations related to tank vessels, including design, construction,
alteration, repair, and maintenance. 46 CFR 31.10-21a prescribes the
regulations related to periodic gauging and engineering analyses of
certain tank vessels over 30 years old.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of certain tank vessels.
    Frequency: Every 5 years.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from 2,784
hours to 2,842 hours a year, due to an increase in the estimated annual
number of responses.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended.

    Dated: March 4, 2022.
Kathleen Claffie,
Chief, Office of Privacy Management, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2022-05076 Filed 3-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 75)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18149-18152]
[DOCID:fr21ap09-14]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket ID FEMA-2008-0020; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-8071]

Suspension of Community Eligibility

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule identifies communities, where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP), that are scheduled for suspension on the effective
dates listed within this rule because of

noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements of the
program. If the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives
documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain
management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in
this rule, the suspension will not occur and a notice of this will be
provided by publication in the Federal Register on a subsequent date.

DATES: Effective Dates: The effective date of each community's
scheduled suspension is the third date (``Susp.'') listed in the third
column of the following tables.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you want to determine whether a
particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for
further information, contact David Stearrett, Mitigation Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP enables property owners to purchase
flood insurance which is generally not otherwise available. In return,
communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management
aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future flooding.
Section 1315 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended,
42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage as authorized under
the NFIP, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., unless an appropriate public body
adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective
enforcement measures. The communities listed in this document no longer
meet that statutory requirement for compliance with program
regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be
suspended on the effective date in the third column. As of that date,
flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. However,
some of these communities may adopt and submit the required
documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures
after this rule is published but prior to the actual suspension date.
These communities will not be suspended and will continue their
eligibility for the sale of insurance. A notice withdrawing the
suspension of the communities will be published in the Federal
Register.
    In addition, FEMA has identified the Special Flood Hazard Areas
(SFHAs) in these communities by publishing a Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM). The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated
in the fourth column of the table. No direct Federal financial
assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act not in connection with a
flood) may legally be provided for construction or acquisition of
buildings in identified SFHAs for communities not participating in the
NFIP and identified for more than a year, on FEMA's initial flood
insurance map of the community as having flood-prone areas (section
202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a),
as amended). This prohibition against certain types of Federal
assistance becomes effective for the communities listed on the date
shown in the last column. The Administrator finds that notice and
public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and unnecessary
because communities listed in this final rule have been adequately
notified.
    Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification
letters addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the
community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management
measures are met prior to the effective suspension date. Since these
notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less
than 30 days.
    National Environmental Policy Act. This rule is categorically
excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental
Considerations. No environmental impact assessment has been prepared.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Administrator has determined that
this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act because the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage unless an appropriate
public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with
effective enforcement measures. The communities listed no longer comply
with the statutory requirements, and after the effective date, flood
insurance will no longer be available in the communities unless
remedial action takes place.
    Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR
51735.
    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This rule involves no policies
that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.
    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule meets the
applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.
    Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule does not involve any collection
of information for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

    Flood insurance, Floodplains.

0
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:

PART 64--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 64 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp.; p. 376.

Sec.  64.6  [Amended]

0
2. The tables published under the authority of Sec.  64.6 are amended
as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Effective date
                                                 authorization/
                                   Community    cancellation of    Current effective map   Date certain Federal
       State and location             No.        sale of flood             date            assistance no longer
                                                  insurance in                              available in SFHAs
                                                   community
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Region III
Virginia: Amelia County,               510314  March 22, 1976,    April 16, 2009........  April 21, 2009.
 Unincorporated Areas.                          Emerg; September
                                                1, 1987, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
           Region IV
Florida: Gulf County,                  120098  August 7, 1975,    ......do*.............   Do.
 Unincorporated Areas.                          Emerg; June 15,
                                                1983, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
            Region V
Ohio:

    Delaware, City of, Delaware        390148  January 31, 1975,  ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; November
                                                2, 1983, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
    Delaware County,                   390146  February 16,       ......do..............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      1977, Emerg;
                                                October 18,
                                                1983, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Powell, Village of,                390626  July 8, 1975,      ......do..............   Do.
     Delaware County.                           Emerg; March 4,
                                                1985, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Sunbury, Village of,               390152  June 18, 1975,     ......do..............   Do.
     Delaware County.                           Emerg; September
                                                1, 1987, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
          Region VIII
North Dakota:
    Belmont, Township of, Trail        380653  July 12, 1982,     ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; August 5,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Benson County,                     380682  January 31, 1995,  ......do..............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      Emerg; May 2,
                                                1995, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Bingham, Township of, Trail        380640  February 8, 1980,  ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; August 5,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Buxton, Township of, Trail         380676  April 9, 1984,     ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; March 12,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Caledonia, Township of,            380638  January 3, 1980,   ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              Emerg; August 5,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Eldorado, Township of,             380645  April 25, 1980,    ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              Emerg; August
                                                19, 1986, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
    Elm River, Township of,            380636  September 13,      ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              1979, Emerg;
                                                August 5, 1986,
                                                Reg; April 21,
                                                2009, Susp.
    Garfield, Township of,             380669  April 5, 1983,     ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              Emerg; December
                                                11, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
    Herberg, Township of, Trail        380621  September 25,      ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    1978, Emerg;
                                                August 5, 1986,
                                                Reg; April 21,
                                                2009, Susp.
    Hillsboro, City of, Trail          380132  March 3, 1975,     ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; September
                                                27, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
    Kelso, Township of, Trail          380644  April 11, 1980,    ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; August 5,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Lindaas, Township of, Trail        380300  April 11, 1980,    ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; September
                                                29, 1986, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
    Mayville, City of, Trail           380133  March 21, 1975,    ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 19,
                                                1982, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Mayville, Township of,             380301  November 23,       ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              1979, Emerg;
                                                September 29,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Minnewaukan, City of,              380240  April 24, 1995,    ......do..............   Do.
     Benson County.                             Emerg; May 4,
                                                1998, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Norman, Township of, Trail         380670  April 5, 1983,     ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; March 12,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Norway, Township of, Trail         380643  March 24, 1980,    ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; August 5,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Portland, City of, Trail           380134  October 14, 1975,  ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 19,
                                                1982, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Roseville, Township of,            380641  February 21,       ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              1980, Emerg;
                                                September 29,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Spirit Lake Tribe, Benson          380700  August 19, 1997,   ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; May 4,
                                                1998, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Stavanger, Township of,            380642  February 29,       ......do..............   Do.
     Trail County.                              1980, Emerg;
                                                August 5, 1986,
                                                Reg; April 21,
                                                2009, Susp.
    Trail County,                      380130  June 30, 1997,     ......do..............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      Emerg; May 4,
                                                1998, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
    Viking, Township of, Trail         380322  March 30, 1978,    ......do..............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; September
                                                4, 1986, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
    South Dakota: Sturgis, City        460055  February 9, 1973,  ......do..............   Do.
     of, Meade County.                          Emerg; June 1,
                                                1977, Reg; April
                                                21, 2009, Susp.
           Region IX
California: Sonora, City of,           060412  February 13,       ......do..............   Do.
 Tuolumne County.                               1976, Emerg; May
                                                25, 1978, Reg;
                                                April 21, 2009,
                                                Susp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*do = Ditto.
Code for reading third column: Emerg.--Emergency; Reg.--Regular; Susp.--Suspension.

    Dated: April 9, 2009.
Michael K. Buckley,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Mitigation Directorate, Department of
Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-9070 Filed 4-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-12-P