[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71379-71381]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25352]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96327; File No. SR-NSCC-2022-014]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Make Certain Changes To Addendum A To Adopt Fees for the
AIP Document Transfer Service as Part of AIP Attachments

November 16, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 14, 2022, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') 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 clearing agency.
NSCC filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \3\
of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) \4\ of Rule 19b-4 thereunder. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change of NSCC consists of modifications to
Addendum A (Fee Structure) (``Addendum A'') of NSCC's Rules &
Procedures (``Rules'') to adopt fees for the AIP document transfer
service (``Document Transfer'') as part of AIP Attachments set forth in
the Alternative Investment Product services (``AIP''), as described in
greater detail below.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined
shall have the meaning assigned to such terms in the Rules,
available at http://dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/legal/rules/
nscc_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
Overview of the Proposed Rule Change
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to adopt fees for
Document Transfer. Document Transfer is a result of enhancements of the
AIP Attachments service. The proposed fees will be $1 per item, per
side, as discussed below, and is designed to be consistent with NSCC's
cost-based plus markup fee model.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ NSCC has in place procedures to control costs and to
regularly review pricing levels against costs of operation. NSCC's
fees are cost-based plus a markup as approved by its Board of
Directors. This markup is applied to recover development costs and
operating expenses, and to accumulate capital sufficient to meet
regulatory and economic requirements. See NSCC Disclosure Framework
for Covered Clearing Agencies and Financial Market Infrastructures,
available at https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/legal/policy-and-compliance/NSCC_Disclosure_Framework.pdf, at 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    AIP, which was established in 2007, is a standardized, trading and
reporting platform that links the alternative investments industry to
securely and efficiently exchange data and money relating to
alternative investment products, including hedge funds, funds of funds,
private equity, non-traded real estate investment trusts, managed
futures and limited partnerships.\7\ One of the services offered within
AIP is a document transmission service, referred to as AIP Attachments
in the Rules, which enables AIP Members to electronically transmit
imaged documents, signatures and forms relating to alternative
investment products.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57813 (May 12,
2008), 73 FR 28539 (May 16, 2008) (SR-NSCC-2007-12) (Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To Provide a New Alternative
Investments Products Service) (``Initial Filing'').
    \8\ See id. See also Section 8 of Rule 53, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AIP Attachments has been in the Rules since the inception of AIP
but has not been used by AIP Members in production, and fees for AIP
Attachments have previously not been developed or placed in the Rules.
Initially, the service was marketed with the name ``paper workflow''
and was a basic document facility designed to automate the transmission
of imaged hard-copy documents between AIP Manufacturers and AIP
Distributors.\9\ Certain AIP Members did test the capability of paper
workflow, but the service was not used by AIP Members in production,
and fees were not developed for the service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Initial Filing, supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2018, NSCC enhanced AIP Attachments to, among other things,
provide that documents that were transmitted pursuant to AIP
Attachments would be tied to specific transactions, and the re-designed
AIP Attachments was marketed as ``E-Doc.'' Like paper workflow,
however, AIP Members tested the capability of E-Doc, but the service
was not used by AIP Members in production, and fees were not developed
for the service.
    During the COVID-19 pandemic, new challenges were presented to AIP
Members relating to the transfer of paper documents as a result of work
from home requirements for employees of AIP Members and the inability
of AIP Members to use certain industry services that had been used to
transmit paper documents prior to the pandemic. As a result, NSCC began
discussions again with AIP Members about enhancing AIP Attachments to
fulfill the needs of AIP Members with respect to the transfer of
documents. As a result of those discussions, NSCC enhanced AIP
Attachments to, among other things, make the requirements for the use
of AIP Attachments more user friendly. In addition, AIP Attachments has
been enhanced to provide the ability of AIP Members to transfer
documents that are tied to specific AIP transactions and to transfer
standalone documents that are not tied to specific AIP transactions.
NSCC would market the new enhanced AIP Attachments as ``Document
Transfer.''
    In order to offset the costs of building the enhancements, NSCC is
proposing to add fees for the service via a simple billing structure of
$1 per item, per side. NSCC believes this billing structure will align
the fees with the costs of services provided by NSCC by setting the
fees so that the revenue received by NSCC would be sufficient to
recover the costs of building the service.
Proposed Change to Addendum A
    To effectuate the proposed Document Transfer fees, Section IV.L. of
Addendum A would be updated to include a new subsection 4. for fees
relating to Document Transfer, which would be $1.00 per item, per side.
Expected Member/NSCC Impact
    The proposed fee changes would impact all users of the service. The
fees are intended to cover the costs of developing Document Transfer in
accordance with NSCC's cost-based plus

markup fee model \10\ and expected client volumes based on discussions
with AIP Members. Following implementation of the fees, assuming
revenues and expenses remain constant,\11\ NSCC anticipates recouping
the costs of enhancing AIP Attachments for Document Transfer within
approximately three years of implementing the fees and expects to have
a positive operating margin with respect to Document Transfer
thereafter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra note 6.
    \11\ It is not certain that revenues and expenses will remain
constant. Costs of providing the service may change, for instance,
if AIP Members request service enhancements or NSCC's technology
costs change. In addition, revenues may change depending on the
number of users of the service. NSCC regularly reviews pricing
levels against costs of operation. As with its other services, if
NSCC determines that its operating margin is too high or too low,
NSCC would propose changes to pricing levels accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Timeline
    NSCC expects to implement the proposed rule changes on November 17,
2022. As proposed, a legend would be added to Addendum A stating there
are changes that became effective upon filing with the Commission but
have not yet been implemented. The proposed legend also would include
November 17, 2022 as the date on which such changes would be
implemented and the file number of this proposal, and state that, once
this proposal is implemented, the legend would be automatically removed
from Addendum A.
2. Statutory Basis
    NSCC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act, and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a registered clearing agency. Specifically, NSCC believes
the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the
Act \12\ and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii),\13\ as promulgated under the Act,
for the reasons set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act \14\ requires that the rules of a
clearing agency provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its participants. NSCC believes the
proposed fees would be allocated equitably among AIP Members that use
Document Transfer. NSCC would apply a fee of $1.00 per side for each
item submitted. NSCC believes that the proposed fee changes are
reasonable because they were developed in consideration of the expected
investment costs to develop the Document Transfer enhancements, the
projected annual costs to run the service (including both technology
and non-technology run costs), and projected revenues for the service,
and are expected to recover such investment and operating costs in an
appropriate timeframe. NSCC notes that once the proposed Document
Transfer fees are implemented, the Document Transfer fees would be
periodically reviewed under NSCC's procedures to determine whether it
is continuing to appropriately control its costs and to regularly
review pricing levels against costs of operation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D).
    \15\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii) under the Act \16\ requires NSCC to
establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to provide sufficient information to
enable participants to identify and evaluate the risks, fees, and other
material costs they incur by participating in the covered clearing
agency. The proposed fees for Document Transfer would be clearly and
transparently published in Addendum A of the Rules, which are available
on a public website,\17\ thereby enabling Members to identify the fees
associated with participating in the Document Transfer service. As
such, NSCC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule
17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii) under the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
    \17\ See supra note 5.
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NSCC does not believe the proposed rule change would impose any
burden, or have any impact, on competition. The proposed fees would
apply equally to all AIP Members that use Document Transfer. NSCC
believes that the proposed Document Transfer fees would not advantage
or disadvantage any particular member or user of Document Transfer, or
unfairly inhibit access to Document Transfer. NSCC notes that members
may continue to engage in document transmission outside of Document
Transfer if they choose.

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

    NSCC has conducted outreach to AIP Members to provide them with
notice of the proposed fees.
    NSCC has not received or solicited any written comments relating to
this proposal. If any written comments are received by NSCC, they will
be publicly filed as an Exhibit 2 to this filing, as required by Form
19b-4 and the General Instructions thereto.
    Persons submitting comments are cautioned that, according to
Section IV (Solicitation of Comments) of the Exhibit 1A in the General
Instructions to Form 19b-4, the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. Commenters should
submit only information that they wish to make available publicly,
including their name, email address, and any other identifying
information.
    All prospective commenters should follow the Commission's
instructions on how to submit comments, available at https://www.sec.gov/regulatory-actions/how-to-submit-comments. General
questions regarding the rule filing process or logistical questions
regarding this filing should be directed to the Main Office of the
Commission's Division of Trading and Markets at
[email protected] or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    NSCC reserves the right not to respond to any comments received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \19\ of the Act and paragraph (f) \20\ of Rule 19b-4
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2022-014 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2022-014. 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 NSCC and on DTCC's website
(https://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received
will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2022-014 and should be submitted on
or before December 13, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25352 Filed 11-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 155 (Monday, August 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37936-37939]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17045]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81340; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2017-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Supplementary Material .01 and .02 to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3) To
Provide for the Inclusion of Cash in an Index Underlying a Series of
Investment Company Units

August 8, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on July 27, 2017, NYSE American LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE American'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Supplementary Material .01 and .02
to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3) to provide for the inclusion of cash
in an index underlying a series of Investment Company Units, which
amendments conform to amendments to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)
previously approved by the Commission. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site 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 (1) to amend Supplementary Material .01 and
.02 to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3) to provide for the inclusion of
cash in an index underlying a series of Investment Company Units
(``Units''), which amendments conform to amendments to NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) previously approved by the Commission.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80777 (May 25, 2017)
(SR-NYSEArca-2017-30) (order approving amendments to Commentary .01
and Commentary .02 to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) to provide
for the inclusion of cash in an index underlying a series of
Investment Company Units).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendments to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3)
    NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3) permits the trading of Units pursuant
to unlisted trading privileges (``UTP''). The Exchange proposes to
amend Commentaries .01 and .02 to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3) to
permit trading of Units based on an index or portfolio that includes
cash as a component. While Units, like mutual funds, will generally
hold an amount of cash, NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3) currently
provides that components of an index or portfolio underlying a series
of Units consist of securities--namely, US Component Stocks, Non-US
Component Stocks, Fixed Income Securities or a combination thereof. As
described below, the proposed amendments to Supplementary Material .01
and .02 to Rule 5.2E(j)(3) would

permit inclusion of cash as an index or portfolio component.
    Currently, Supplementary Material .01(a)(A) to NYSE American Rule
5.2E(j)(3) provides that an underlying index or portfolio of US
Component Stocks \5\ must meet specified criteria. The Exchange
proposes to amend Supplementary Material .01(a)(A) to provide that the
components of an index or portfolio underlying a series of Units may
also include cash. In addition, the percentage weighting criteria in
Supplementary Material .01(a)(A)(1) through (4) each would be amended
to make clear that such criteria would be applied only to the US
Component Stocks portion of an index or portfolio. For example, in
applying the criteria in proposed Supplementary Material
.01(a)(A)(1),\6\ if 85% of the weight of an index consists of US
Component Stocks and 15% of the index weight is cash, the requirement
that component stocks (excluding Exchange Traded Products) that in the
aggregate account for at least 90% of the weight of the US Component
Stocks portion of the index or portfolio (excluding such Exchange
Traded Products) each will have a minimum market value of $75 million
minimum would be applied only to the 85% portion consisting of US
Component Stocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rule 5.2E(j)(3) defines ``US Component Stock'' as an equity
security that is registered under Sections 12(b) or 12(g) of the Act
or an American Depositary Receipt, the underlying equity security of
which is registered under Sections 12(b) or 12(g) of the Act.
    \6\ Supplementary Material .01(a)(A)(1) provides that component
stocks (excluding Units and securities defined in Section 2 of Rule
8E, collectively, ``Exchange Traded Products'') that in the
aggregate account for at least 90% of the weight of the US Component
Stocks portion of the index or portfolio (excluding such Exchange
Traded Products) each shall have a minimum market value of at least
$75 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Supplementary Material .01 (a)(B) to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3),
which relates to international or global indexes or portfolios, would
be amended to provide that components of an index or portfolio
underlying a series of Units may consist of (a) only Non-US Component
Stocks, (b) Non-US Component Stocks and cash, (c) both US Component
Stocks and Non-US Component Stocks, or (d) US Component Stocks, Non-US
Component Stocks and cash. In addition, the percentage weighting
criteria in Supplementary Material .01(a)(B)(1) through (4) each would
be amended to make clear that such criteria would be applied only to
the combined US and Non-US Component Stocks portions of an index or
portfolio.
    Supplementary Material .02 to NYSE American Rule 5.2E(j)(3)
provides generic criteria applicable to trading of Units whose
underlying index or portfolio includes Fixed Income Securities.\7\
Currently, Commentary .02(a)(1) provides that an underlying index or
portfolio must consist of Fixed Income Securities. The Exchange
proposes to amend Commentary .02(a)(1) to provide that the index or
portfolio may also include cash. In addition, the percentage weighting
criteria in Supplementary Material .02(a)(2), (a)(4) and (a)(6) each
would be amended to make clear that such criteria would be applied only
to the Fixed Income Securities portion of an index or portfolio. For
example, in applying the criteria in proposed Supplementary Material
.02(a)(2),\8\ if 90% of the weight of an index or portfolio consists of
Fixed Income Securities and 10% of the index weight is cash, the
requirement that Fixed Income Security components accounting for at
least 75% of the Fixed Income Securities portion of the weight of the
index or portfolio each will have a minimum original principal amount
outstanding of $100 million would be applied only to the 90% portion
consisting of Fixed Income Securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As defined in Supplementary Material .02 to NYSE American
Rule 5.2E(j)(3), Fixed Income Securities are debt securities that
are notes, bonds, debentures or evidence of indebtedness that
include, but are not limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury
securities (``Treasury Securities''), government-sponsored entity
securities (``GSE Securities''), municipal securities, trust
preferred securities, supranational debt and debt of a foreign
country or a subdivision thereof.
    \8\ Supplementary Material .02(a)(2) provides that Fixed Income
Security components that in aggregate account for at least 75% of
the Fixed Income Securities portion of the weight of the index or
portfolio each shall have a minimum original principal amount
outstanding of $100 million or more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the Commission has previously approved NYSE
Arca rules allowing portfolios held by issues of Managed Fund Shares
(actively-managed exchange-traded funds) under Commentary .01 to NYSE
Arca Equities Rule 8.600 to include cash.\9\ Like the provision in
Supplementary Material .01(c) to Exchange Rule 8.600E (which is similar
to Commentary .01(c) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600), which states
that there is no limit to cash holdings by an issue of Managed Fund
Shares traded under Supplementary Material .01 to Exchange Rule 8.600E,
there is no proposed limit to the weighting of cash in an index
underlying a series of Units. The Exchange believes this is appropriate
in that cash does not, in itself, impose investment or market risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Commentary .01(c) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.600.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to make a non-substantive change to
Supplementary Material .02 to Exchange Rule 5.2E(j)(3) to change
``shall'' to ``will'' in one place to conform to other usages in Rule
5.2E(j)(3).
    The Exchange believes the proposed amendments, by permitting
inclusion of cash as a component of indexes underlying series of Units,
would provide issuers of Units with additional choice in indexes
permitted to underlie Units that are permitted to trade on the Exchange
pursuant to the Rule 19b-4(e), which would enhance competition among
market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
In addition, the proposed amendments would provide investors with
greater ability to hold Units based on underlying indexes that may
accord more closely with an investor's assessment of market risk, in
that some investors may view cash as a desirable component of an
underlying index under certain market conditions.
2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \10\ that an exchange have rules that
are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule changes are designed to perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The basis under the Exchange Act for this proposed
rule change is the requirement under Section 6(b)(5) that an exchange
have rules that are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
    With respect to the proposed amendments to Supplementary Material
.01(a)(B)(1) through (4) to Rule 5.2E(j)(3), as described above, the
percentage weighting criteria in Supplementary Material .01(a)(B)(1)
through (4) to Rule 5.2E(j)(3) each would be amended to make clear that
such criteria would be applied only to the combined US and Non-US
Component Stocks portions of an index or portfolio. The percentage
weighting criteria in Supplementary Material

.02(a)(2), (a)(4) and (a)(6) to Rule 5.2E(j)(3) each would be amended
to make clear that such criteria would be applied only to the Fixed
Income Securities portion of an index or portfolio. Such applications
of the proposed amendments would assure that the weighting requirements
in Supplementary Material .01 and .02 would continue to be applied only
to securities in an index or portfolio, and would not be diluted as a
result of inclusion of a cash component. In addition, the addition of
cash as a permitted component of indexes underlying Units traded on the
Exchange pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) does not raise regulatory issues
because cash does not, in itself, impose investment or market risk and
is not susceptible to manipulation. The non-substantive change to
Supplementary Material .02 to Exchange Rule 5.2E(j)(3) to change
``shall'' to ``will'' conforms to other usages in Rule 5.2E(j)(3).
    The Exchange believes these proposed amendments, by permitting
inclusion of cash as a component of indexes underlying series of Units,
would provide issuers of Units with additional choice in indexes
permitted to underlie Units that are permitted to trade on the Exchange
pursuant to UTP, which would enhance competition among market
participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace. In
addition, the proposed amendments would provide investors with greater
ability to hold Units based on underlying indexes that may accord more
closely with an investor's assessment of market risk.

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 purpose of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposed rule change will enhance intermarket competition by allowing
trading on the Exchange pursuant to UTP of the above-described
securities pursuant to rules that have been previously approved by the
Commission for NYSE Arca, Inc.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.
However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)T \13\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. As noted above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would provide
additional choices to issuers of Units and investors in Units. The
Exchange also noted that the amendments it is proposing to Rule
5.2E(j)(3) conform to amendments to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)
that the Commission previously approved,\14\ and that this proposed
rule change may enhance competition between the exchanges. The
Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and
designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \14\ See supra note 4.
    \15\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2017-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2017-03. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2017-03 and should
be submitted on or before September 5, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[FR Doc. 2017-17045 Filed 8-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on December 13, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2005-22725

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant: Swiss European Air Lines Ltd. d/b/a Swiss Too			Date Filed:
October 13, 2005

Relief requested:

Exemption from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to transport persons, property and
mail by displaying the airline designator codes of United Air Lines,
Inc. (United) and American Airlines, Inc. (American) on flights operated
by Swiss Too on behalf of Swiss International Air Lines (Swiss) between
points in Switzerland and between points in Switzerland and points in
third countries.

Statement of authorization under 14 CFR Part 212 to the extent necessary
to place the designator codes of United Air Lines, Inc. (United) and
American Airlines, Inc. (American) on flights it operates on behalf of
Swiss International Air Lines (Swiss).   Swiss Too proposes to operate
these operations between points in Switzerland and between points in
Switzerland and points in third countries.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representatives:  Evelyn D. Sahr & James G. Ehrig  (202)
289-0500

DOT Analyst:  Shelita A. Smith<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None filed

DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved in part (to code-share with American), remainder
deferred (to code-share with United); see below

Action date:  December 13, 2005

Effective dates of exemption authority granted: December 13, 2005 –
December 13, 2007

Effective dates of statement of authorization granted:  December 13,
2005 – Indefinite, subject to code-share conditions attached.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity): The authority is
provided for in the U.S.-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

   X     Standard exemption conditions (attached)
Foreign air carrier permit   (          )

Special conditions/Partial grant/ Remarks:  Based on the record in this
case, we found that Swiss Too is financially and operationally qualified
to perform the services authorized above.  We also note that Swiss Too
is wholly owned and controlled by Swiss International Air Lines Ltd.
(Swiss).  All of Swiss Too’s directors and key management officials
are citizens of Switzerland.  By memorandum dated December 7, 2005, the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) advised us that it knew of no
reason why we should act unfavorably on Swiss Too’s application.

We are deferring action on that portion of the request that would allow
Swiss Too to carry the designator code of United, pending further advice
from the FAA concerning United’s audit of Swiss Too under the DOT/FAA
Code-share Safety Program Guidelines.

The code-share operations authorized here are subject to the following
conditions:

(a)  The statement of authorization will remain in effect only as long
as (i) Swiss Too and/or American continue to hold the necessary
underlying authority to operate the code-share services at issue, and
(ii) the code-share agreement providing for the code-share operations
remains in effect.

(b)  Swiss Too and American must promptly notify the Department (Office
of International Aviation) if the code-share agreement providing for the
code-share operations is no longer effective or the carriers decide to
cease operating any or all of the approved code-share services.  Such
notices should be filed in Docket OST-2005-22725.

(c)  Swiss Too and American must notify the Department no later than 30
days before they begin any new code-share service under the code-share
services authorized here.  Such notice shall identify the market(s) to
be served and the date on which the service will begin.  Such notices
should be filed in Docket OST-2005-22725.

(d)  The code-sharing operations conducted under this authority must
comply with 14 CFR Part 257 and with any amendments to the
Department’s regulations concerning code-share arrangements that may
be adopted.  Notwithstanding any provisions in the contract between the
carriers, our approval here is expressly conditioned upon the
requirements that the subject foreign air transportation be sold in the
name of the carrier holding out such service in computer reservation
systems and elsewhere; that the carrier selling such transportation
(i.e., the carrier shown on the ticket) accept responsibility for the
entirety of the code-share journey for all obligations established in
its contract of carriage with the passenger; and that the passenger
liability of the operating carrier be unaffected.  Further, the
operating carrier shall not permit the code of its U.S. carrier
code-sharing partner to be carried on any flight that enters, departs or
transits the airspace of any area for whose airspace the Federal
Aviation Administration has issued a flight prohibition.

(e)  The authority granted here is specifically conditioned so that
neither carrier shall give any force or effect to any contractual
provisions between themselves that are contrary to these conditions.

(f)  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted at any time
without hearing at our discretion.

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		   Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant is qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied

all requests in the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke
the authority granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our
discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

Foreign Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

 Swiss Too states that Swiss is in the process of ending its
code-sharing arrangement with American and commencing its arrangement
with United, and that Swiss Too proposes, for a finite period of time,
to operate codeshare service with both carriers.

  We expect this notification to be received within 10 days of such
non-effectiveness or of such decision.

05/2004


               Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Final Rule
       Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards:
                    State Implementation Plan Requirements
                                 RIN 2060-AQ48
General Comments:
 Reviewer recommends that EPA add a bright-line threshold for precursor thresholds.  There does not appear to be a good rationale provided by EPA about why a threshold is not appropriate.
 Reviewer recommends providing states the flexibility to develop and submit contingency resources.  EPA states on page 66 that it is unlikely that states would use this; however, reviewer recommends providing this flexibility to states in case they wish to use it.
Specific Comments:
 Page 4  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence that is from page 434 of the preamble after the second sentence in the section "entities affected by this rule":
 Parties affected by the conformity-related elements include state and local transportation and air quality agencies, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and federal agencies including the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
 Page 21, Table 1  -  In published and on-line material from EPA showing results from the NEI for 2011, Fires (excluding residential wood combustion) don't align with the data in the table in the Rule. As the PM2.5 nonattainment boundaries are now known, the table should reflect the pollutants from the NEI for the nonattainment counties as this more accurately reflects the sources of emissions for all following discussions in the Rule.  The table distorts the view of "mainly fire's" contribution to the PM2.5 that will need control with it being the largest category for PM2.5, VOC and NH3.  Nationally, agricultural burning, prescribed fire and wildfires are attributed in posted NEI summaries as only contributing 34% of PM2.5, (2,123,966 tons), 29% VOC (5,287,143 tons) and 9% of NH3 (369,141 tons).  The reality for addressing nonattainment emissions sources which is the focus of this Rule is substantially different than the national totals for PM2.5 and precursor emissions as can be noted in the EPA's supporting materials for the nonattainment boundaries in the Federal Register.
 Page 26  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence at the end of the second paragraph in section d. SOA formation
 Along these lines, research shows that on a per unit fuel consumed basis, wildfires in forests will produce significantly more VOC emissions than a typical understory prescribed fire.  Wildfires typically occur during the summer whereas wildland prescribed fire activity is typically in other seasons.
 Page 26  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the sentence that starts "For example, chemical reactions involving VOC . . ."
 Total secondary organic aerosol formation potential of coniferous canopy fuels is found to be twice that of understory fuels (litter and grasses) and six times that of Southwestern semi-arid shrubland fuels. These findings indicate that even though canopy fires involve largely flaming combustion, they are likely a potent source of SOA precursors. Canopy fires are frequently associated with catastrophic wildfires and not prescribed fires or lower intensity wildfires.
 Page 36  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the sentence that starts "This is reflective of the distribution of urban . . ."
 With regard to aging biomass burning plumes, field studies show highly variable secondary organic aerosol formation rates as pointed out earlier.  Research indicates there was generally no increase in organic aerosol mass as smoke plumes age, despite compositional changes and increasing oxidation with age and this was in contrast with the substantial levels of SOA formation associated with urban sources.
 Page 36  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the sentence that begins "Section IV.D of this preamble provides . . ."
 See Section IV.D.3. as it pertains to approaches for emissions inventories for primary PM2.5 and precursors for wildfire and wildland prescribed fire.
 Page 37  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the sentence that begins "The EPA interprets the CAA to require states to inventory emissions . . ."
 For technical reasons noted above and in Section IV.D.3, EPA is not requiring the state to conduct a precursor analysis for wildland fire sources within the nonattainment area.
 Page 46  -  Reviewer recommends clarifies how the following sentence will affect both general and transportation conformity
 The use of the term "comprehensive" here refers to the fact that the demonstration covers all existing stationary, area, and mobile sources, rather than major sources alone.
 Page 51  -  Reviewer recommends clarifying whether "significant" in the sentence below is the same as in the transportation conformity rule.
 The proposal described the concept of including a bright-line threshold of 3 percent of the relevant NAAQS in the rule for precursor demonstrations other than the expeditious attainment approach, such that if an air quality impact was found to exceed the threshold amount, then it would be considered significant.
 Page 52  -  Reviewer recommends clarifying when the draft technical guidance document will be available.
 Page 52  -  Reviewer recommends clarifying whether "insignificant" is the same as the one in the conformity rule.
 Page 57  -  Reviewer recommends providing the timing for moderate nonattainment areas within the first full paragraph.
 Page 58  -  Reviewer recommends providing where a nonattainment area must submit the concentration-based contribution analysis to.
 Page 72-73  -  Reviewer recommends clarifying whether the following sentence will change the definition of base year in the transportation conformity rule.
 Accordingly, this final rule requires that the base year inventory for Moderate nonattainment areas must meet the following minimum criteria (1) through (7):
 Page 111  -  Reviewer recommends placing, at the beginning of a section on wildland fire, a summary of the impacts of wildfire emissions and management of the vegetation that is the source of those emissions.  The proposed text appears elsewhere in this Rule as well as in other rules, and will be a useful preface to EPA's discussion of the topic that follows.  Recommended text is provided below after the first full sentence within the final rule section:
 The large contribution that wildfire can make to air pollution (including PM2.5), and wildfire's threat to public safety is well understood.  It is further recognized that this effect can be mitigated through management of wildland vegetation, including through fuels treatments, prescribed fire and some wildfire. Such mitigation can help manage the contribution of fires to PM2.5 levels in nonattainment areas.
 Page 111  -  Reviewer recommends that the use of prescribed fire related to forestry activities (logging slash) be grouped with prescribed fire used for other land management and ecological applications, rather than with the burning of land clearing debris and agricultural residues.  The fact that timber removed may generate revenue to offset the cost of treatments or risk reductions should not be the determining factor in the category that prescribed fire is assigned.  Commercial timber harvest ad management of consequent slash are important tools for managing for timber value, ecosystem benefits and wildfire risk on forested wildlands (e.g., removed dead trees from beetle kill stands or reducing stand density to lessen the vulnerability of trees to beetle kill can be completed as commercial timber sales).  Furthermore, in the Exception Events proposed rule, managed timber is generally grouped with the wildlands, and with the use of fire for ecological benefits.  Reviewer recommends revising the sentence as stated below:
 There are other uses of prescribed fire and other types of burning that occur in nonattainment areas, or that affect downwind nonattainment areas, such as burning of land clearing debris, and agricultural burning, and burning of logging slash on land where the primary purpose of the logging is for commercial timber sale.
 Page 112  -  Rather than simply reducing prescribed fire emissions, the reviewer suggests that a greater emphasis be placed on reducing impacts from emissions, which has a direct bearing on the purpose of the primary (human health) and secondary (ecosystem protection) air quality standards, as well as a role in the management and improvement of air quality in nonattainment areas.  Reviewer recommends revising the first full paragraph as provided below:
 The EPA also wants to clarify that it is not the intention to in any way discourage federal, state, local or tribal agencies or private land owners from taking situation-appropriate steps to minimize impacts from prescribed fires emissions from prescribed fires on wildlands. The EPA encourages all land owners and managers to apply appropriate basic smoke management practices to reduce impacts and emissions from prescribed fires, especially where a state has determined that prescribed fires are a significant source affecting air quality. The EPA believes that prescribed fire can be used where appropriate and with adequate oversight and diligent implementation, as prescribed fire mimics a natural process necessary to manage and maintain fire-adapted ecosystems and climate change adaptation, while reducing risk of uncontrolled emissions from catastrophic wildfires.  The EPA expects that communication and public comments on draft SIPs and on EPA actions on SIPs may help develop non-binding narratives within SIP submissions that address prescribed fire when it is determined to be a significant source within a nonattainment area.  However, for several reasons, the EPA does not believe it would be effective policy or technically appropriate to recommend that control measures for wildland fire be adopted into the SIP as enforceable measures and credited for emissions reductions (for PM2.5 and precursors) that would help the area attain the standard.
 Page 113  -  Reviewer recommends adding language that was previously discussed regarding wildland fire management policy and in the rationale for not including a wildland fire Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM).
 Page 113  -  Reviewer recommends revising the sentence as stated below:
 Rather, it simply recommends that once this base level is established, PM2.5 plans should not attempt to expressly project changes in emissions from wildfires or prescribed fires on wildland within the nonattainment area, or in upwind areas included in the modeling domain, over the planning period due to changes in variability in wildfire occurrence and the use of prescribed fire, or other wildland fire management practices.  Moreover, the EPA anticipates that natural trends spatial and temporal patterns of wildland fire emissions will likewise be too uncertain for them to be allowed to have the effect of reducing or increasing the control requirement on conventional anthropogenic sources.
 Page 113  -  Reviewer recommends changing the wording form "some variability" in fire emissions to "high variability" in fire emissions.
 Page 114  -  Reviewer recommends a number of edits concerning the variability in wildfire occurrences as provided below:
 Rather, it simply recommends that once this base level is established, PM2.5 plans should not attempt to expressly project changes in emissions from wildfires or prescribed fires on wildland within the nonattainment area, or in upwind areas included in the modeling domain, over the planning period due to variability in wildfire occurrence and the use of prescribed fire, or other changes in wildland fire management practices. Moreover, the EPA anticipates that natural trends in recent spatial and temporal patterns of wildfire fire emissions will likewise be too uncertain for them to be allowed to have the effect of reducing or increasing the control requirement on conventional anthropogenic sources. The EPA believes that states should plan for the high variability of wildfire occurrence and the ability of landowners to use prescribed fire to mitigate some of the effects of increasing climate extremes. The EPA therefore recommends that baseline wildland fire emissions should generally be held constant over the planning period, regardless of whether wildland fire management practices by land managers are expected, and possibly encouraged, to change.
 Page 115  -  The EPA states that the policy does not require the use of prescribed fire.  Reviewer requests that, as a counterpart to that statement, clear language be inserted to describe that states, communities and land managers may wish to consider the use of fire and other vegetation management to mitigate risk.  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the first full sentence in the second full paragraph:
 If wildfire risks are significant in a particular area, air agencies and communities may be able to lessen the impacts of wildfires by working collaboratively with land managers and land owners to employ various mitigation measures including taking steps to minimize fuel loading in areas vulnerable to fire through the use of fuels treatments, prescribed fire and some wildfires.
 Page 117  -  Reviewer recommends EPA insert language that has previously been used in other rulemaking to assure EPA's commitment to work with states, tribes, federal land managers, other landowners and stakeholders to help determine an acceptable and appropriate way to use prescribed fire, within the context of air quality regulations and policies.  Reviewer recommends adding the sentence below at the end of the first paragraph:
 The EPA is committed to a dialogue with states, tribes, federal agencies and other stakeholders on an appropriate use of prescribed fires.
 Page 159  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence at the end of the 1[st] full paragraph that begins with "In addition, the commenters . . ."
 EPA and USDA are also working collaboratively to better understand agricultural ammonia related inputs to photochemical modeling in order to more accurately represent the emission and impacts of ammonia in relation to PM2.5.
 Page 190-195  -  Reviewer strongly recommends discussing some of the comments in detail within the preamble.  This is a rather significant policy change from the previous PM2.5 SIP and significant comments should be discussed in the same level of detail, if not more, than in other sections.
 Page 435  -  Reviewer recommends revising the following section as stated below:
 With regard to transportation conformity, the conformity grace period applies to all areas designated nonattainment for a new or revised PM2.5 NAAQS including the 2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirements differ depending on whether the nonattainment area is within or adjacent to a includes any part of an MPO designated area designated under 23 U.S.C. 134 or is an isolated rural area. Within 1 year after the effective date of the initial nonattainment designation for a given pollutant and the NAAQS, the MPOs and DOT must make a transportation conformity determination with regard to that pollutant and standard for all of the metropolitan transportation plans and TIPs in the nonattainment area.
 Page 436  -  Reviewer recommends revising the sentence as stated below:
 During a conformity lapse, only certain projects can receive additional federal funding or approvals to proceed.
 Page 436  -  Reviewer recommends revising the sentence as stated below:
 Per the transportation conformity rule, an isolated rural area would be required to make a transportation conformity determination only at the point when a an applicable transportation project needs funding or approval.
 Page 439  -  Reviewer recommends revising the section as stated below:
 This means that, after the effective date of the revocation, areas redesignated to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS will no longer be required to make metropolitan transportation plan, TIP, or project-level transportation conformity determinations for that NAAQS. In addition, federal agencies will no longer be required to make conformity determinations for that NAAQS. Areas that remain designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS will continue to make transportation plan, TIP, and project-level conformity determinations for that NAAQS and federal agencies will be required to continue to make conformity determinations for that NAAQS in these areas until such time as they attain that NAAQS and are redesignated to attainment (e.g. the effective date of the redesignation notice).
 Page 440, Table 3  -  Reviewer recommends revising the table as stated below:
          Attainment Status
          1997 Primary and Secondary Annual NAAQS
          2012 Primary Annual NAAQS
          Nonattainment
          X
          X
          Redesignated to Attainment (e.g., Maintenance)

          X

 Page 440, Table 3  -  Reviewer recommends clarifying what the note means as it is unclear.
 Page 441  -  Reviewer recommends clarifying whether EPA is making any similar changes to 40 CFR Part 93 for transportation precursors (e.g., 93.102) related to the sentence below:
 However, because the definition of precursors currently in the general conformity regulations at 40 CFR 93.152(b)(1) does not reflect the rebuttable presumptions for certain PM2.5 precursors, the EPA is finalizing changes to these conformity provisions to make them consistent with the agency's revised precursor requirements.
 Page 556  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the sentence that starts "1) A comprehensive precursor demonstration must show . . ."
 It is not required to conduct a precursor analysis which includes wildland fire sources within the nonattainment area if these sources are found to be present.
 Page 560  -  Reviewer recommends adding the following sentence after the sentence that starts "The state shall include in this inventory projected emissions growth . . ."
 The inventory projection is not required for wildland fire sources.


[Federal Register: May 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 91)]
[Notices]
[Page 26784]
[DOCID:fr12my10-84]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0342]

Certificate of Alternative Compliance for the Crew Boat CAPT
PEYTON P

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that a Certificate of Alternative
Compliance was issued for the crew boat CAPT PEYTON P as required by 33
U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33 CFR 81.18.

DATES: The Certificate of Alternate Compliance was issued on April 22,
2010.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this notice is available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this
docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov,
inserting USCG-2010-0342 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking
''Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call LTJG Christine Dimitroff, District Eight, Prevention Branch, U.S.
Coast Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing
or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    A Certificate of Alternative Compliance as allowed under title 33,
Code of Federal Regulation, parts 81 and 89, has been issued for the
crew boat CAPT PEYTON P, O.N. 1224730. Full compliance with 72 COLREGS
and the Inland Rules Act would hinder the vessel's ability to maneuver
within close proximity of offshore platforms. Due to the design of the
vessel it would be difficult and impractical to build a supporting
structure that would put the side lights within 2'11-\7/8\
from the greatest breadth of the vessel, as required by Annex I,
paragraph 3(b) of the 72 COLREGS and Annex I, Section 84.05(b), of the
Inland Rules Act. Compliance with the rule would cause the lights on
the crew boat CAPT PEYTON P to be in a location which would be highly
susceptible to damage from offshore platforms. The crew boat CAPT
PEYTON P cannot comply fully with lighting requirements as set out in
international regulations without interfering with the special function
of the vessel (33 U.S.C. 1605(c); 33 CFR 81.18). Locating the side
lights 5'7-\1/16\ inboard from the greatest breadth of the
vessel on the pilot house will provide a sheltered location for the
lights and allow maneuvering within close proximity to offshore
platforms.
    In addition, the forward masthead light may be located on the top
forward portion of the pilothouse 18'-2 above the hull.
Placing the forward masthead light at the height as required by Annex
I, paragraph 2(a) of the 72 COLREGS, and Annex I, Section 84.03(a) of
the Inland Rules Act, would result in a masthead light location highly
susceptible to damage when working in close proximity to offshore
platforms.
    Furthermore the horizontal distance between the forward and aft
masthead lights may be 16'-9\15/16\. Placing the aft
masthead light at the horizontal distance from the forward masthead
light as required by Annex I, paragraph 3(a) of the 72 COLREGS, and
Annex I, Section 84.05(a) of the Inland Rules Act, would result in an
aft masthead light location directly over the aft cargo deck where it
would interfere with loading and unloading operations.
    The Certificate of Alternative Compliance allows for the placement
of the side lights to deviate from requirements set forth in Annex I,
paragraph 3(b) of 72 COLREGS, and Annex I, paragraph 84.05(b) of the
Inland Rules Act. In addition the Certificate of Alternative Compliance
allows for the vertical placement of the forward masthead light to
deviate from requirements set forth in Annex I, paragraph 2(a), and
Annex I, Section 84.03(a) of the Inland Rules Act. Furthermore the
Certificate of Alternative Compliance allows for the horizontal
separation of the forward and aft masthead lights to deviate from the
requirements of Annex I, paragraph 3(a) of 72 COLREGS, and Annex I,
Section 84.05(a) of the Inland Rules Act.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1605(c), and 33
CFR 81.18.

    Dated: April 27, 2010.
J.W. Johnson,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Inspections and Investigations
Branch, By Direction of the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010-11303 Filed 5-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 157 (Thursday, August 13, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49327-49328]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17689]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0735; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANE-8]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment and Revocation of Air Traffic Service (ATS)
Routes in the Vicinity of Lebanon, NH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR)
Federal airways V-141, and V-542, and revoke airways V-151 and V-496,
due to the planned decommissioning of the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME
navigation aid which provides navigation guidance for segments of the
routes. The Lebanon VOR/DME is planned for decommissioned as part of
the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 28, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1
(800) 647-5527 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-
2020-0735; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANE-8 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the VOR Federal airway route structure in
the northeastern United States to maintain the efficient flow of air
traffic.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2020-0735; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANE-8 and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2020-0735; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANE-8''. The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal
Aviation Administration, Room 210,

1701 Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective
September 15, 2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this proposed rule. FAA Order 7400.11D
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend VOR Federal airways V-141 and V-
542, and to revoke airways V-151 and V-496, due to the planned
decommissioning of the Lebanon, NH VOR/DME. An Area Navigation (RNAV)
waypoint (WP) is being developed to be charted in the vicinity of the
Lebanon VOR/DME location. The proposed changes are described below.
    V-141: V-141 currently consists of two parts: first, extending
between the Nantucket, MA, VOR/DME and the Boston, MA, VOR/DME; and
second, extending between the Manchester, NH, VOR/DME and the Massena,
NY, VORTAC. This proposal would remove the part between Manchester, NH,
and Massena, NY. As amended, V-141 would extend between Nantucket, MA,
and Boston, MA.
    V-542: V-542 currently extends between the Elmira, NY, VOR/DME, and
the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to remove the route segments
of V-542 that extend between the Rockdale, NY, VOR/DME, and the
Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME. As amended, V-542 would extend between Elmira,
NY, and Rockdale, NY.
    V-151: V-151 currently extends between the intersection of the
Nantucket, MA, VOR/DME 334[deg] and the Providence, RI VOR/DME 079[deg]
radials, and the Burlington, VT, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to remove
this entire route. A low altitude RNAV route is being developed to
replace V-151.
    V-496: V-496 currently extends between the Utica, NY, VORTAC, and
the Kennebunk, ME, VOR/DME. This action proposes to remove the entire
route.
    Domestic VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR
Federal airways listed in this document would be subsequently published
in, or removed from, the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-141 [Amended]

    From Nantucket, MA; INT Nantucket 334[deg] and Boston, MA,
138[deg] radials; to Boston.
* * * * *

V-151 [Remove]

* * * * *

V-496 [Remove]

* * * * *

V-542 [Amended]

    From Elmira, NY; Binghamton, NY; to Rockdale, NY.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 7, 2020.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-17689 Filed 8-12-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 148 (Wednesday, August 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47414-47416]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16590]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC22-24-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725Z); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is soliciting public comment on the currently

approved information collection, FERC-725Z (Mandatory Reliability
Standards: IRO Reliability Standards).

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due October 3,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments (identified by Docket No. IC22-
24-000) by one of the following methods:
    Electronic filing through https://www.ferc.gov, is preferred.
     Electronic Filing: Documents must be filed in acceptable
native applications and print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or picture
format.
     For those unable to file electronically, comments may be
filed by USPS mail or by hand (including courier) delivery:
    [cir] Mail via U.S. Postal Service Only: Addressed to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    [cir] Hand (including courier) delivery: Deliver to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: https://www.ferc.gov. For
user assistance, contact FERC Online Support by email at
[email protected], or by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll-free).
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at https://www.ferc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
[email protected], telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-725Z (Mandatory Reliability Standards: IRO Reliability
Standards).
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0276.
    Type of Request: Extension to this currently approved information
collection.
    Abstract: On August 8, 2005, The Electricity Modernization Act of
2005, which is Title XII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005),
was enacted into law.\1\ Under section 215 of the Federal Power Act
(FPA) implemented in 18 CFR 40, the Commission requires a Commission-
certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory
and enforceable Reliability Standards \2\, which are subject to
Commission review and approval. In 2006, the Commission established a
process to select and certify an ERO and, subsequently, certified the
North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) as the ERO.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), Public Law No 109-58,
Title XII, Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (2005), codified at 16
U.S.C. 824o (2000).
    \2\ The Federal Power Act (as modified by the EPAct) states
``[t]he terms ``reliability standard'' means a requirement, approved
by the Commission under this section, to provide for reliable
operation of the bulk-power system. The term includes requirements
for the operation of existing bulk-power system facilities,
including cybersecurity protection, and the design of planned
additions or modifications to such facilities to the extent
necessary to provide for reliable operation of the bulk-power
system, but the term does not include any requirement to enlarge
such facilities or to construct new transmission capacity or
generation capacity.''
    \3\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
order on compliance, 118 FERC ] 61,190, order on reh'g, 119 FERC ]
61,046 (2007), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342
(D.C. Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ERO develops proposed Reliability Standards \4\ and, if
approved by NERC, submits them to the Commission for review and
approval. When the standards are approved by the Commission, the
Reliability Standards become mandatory and must be enforced by the ERO,
subject to Commission oversight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The NERC Standard Processes Manual, Appendix 3A of the NERC
Rules Of Procedure, (posted at https://www.nerc.com/FilingsOrders/us/RuleOfProcedureDL/SPM_Clean_Mar2019.pdf) describes the process
for developing, modifying, withdrawing, or retiring a Reliability
Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NERC established the following IRO standards within FERC-725Z:
    IRO-001-4 purpose is to establish the responsibility of Reliability
Coordinators to act or direct other entities to act.
    In a joint petition dated May 30, 2019, the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (``NERC'') and Western Electricity Coordinating
Council (``WECC'') requested Commission approval for Reliability
Standard IRO-002-6 (now IRO-002-7) (Reliability Coordination,
Monitoring and Analysis). NERC and WECC stated that the ``Reliability
Standard IRO-002-7 reflects the addition of a regional Variance
containing additional requirements applicable to Reliability
Coordinators providing service to entities in the Western
Interconnection.'' NERC maintains that the data exchange capability
requirement in Reliability Standard IRO-002-7, Requirement R1 is
covered by Reliability Standard IRO-008-2, Requirement R1, which
obligates the reliability coordinator to perform operational planning
analyses to assess whether the planned operations for the next-day will
exceed System Operating Limits and Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limits within its Wide Area. NERC asserts that ``to perform
the required operational planning analyses, the Reliability Coordinator
must have the data it deems necessary from those entities that possess
it.''
    Currently effective IRO-009-2 applicable to reliability
coordinators and the purpose of the standard is to prevent instability,
uncontrolled separation, or cascading outages that adversely impact the
reliability of the interconnection by ensuring prompt action to prevent
or mitigate instances of exceeding Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limits (IROLs).
    Additionally, regarding data exchange, NERC cites Reliability
Standard IRO-010-2 (Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and
Collection) and its stated purpose of preventing instability,
uncontrolled separation, or cascading outages ``by ensuring the
Reliability Coordinator has the data it needs to monitor and assess the
operation of its Reliability Coordinator Area.'' NERC states that under
Reliability Standard IRO-010-2, Requirements R1, R2 and R3, the
reliability coordinator must specify the data necessary for it to
perform its operational planning analyses and provide the
specifications to the entities from which it needs data who then must
comply with the data request using a mutually agreeable format and
security protocols.
    IRO-014-3 purpose is to ensure that each Reliability Coordinator's
operations are coordinated such that they will not adversely impact
other Reliability Coordinator Areas and to preserve the reliability
benefits of interconnected operations.
    IRO-017-1 (Outage Coordination) purpose is to ensure that outages
are properly coordinated in the Operations Planning time horizon and
Near-Term Transmission Planning Horizon. Reliability coordinators,
planning coordinators, balancing authorities, transmission owners and
transmission planners are applicable entities for IRO-017-1.
    IRO-018-1 (Reliability Coordinator Real-time Reliability Monitoring
and Analysis Capabilities), submitted by North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC). Requirement R3 requires reliability
coordinators to have an alarm process monitor that provides
notification to system operators when the failure of a real-time
monitoring alarm processor has occurred. In this order, the Reliability
Standards build on monitoring, real-time assessments and support
effective situational awareness. The Reliability Standards accomplish
this by requiring applicable entities to:

(1) provide notification to operators of real-time monitoring alarm
failures; (2) provide operators with indications of the quality of
information being provided by their monitoring and analysis
capabilities; and (3) address deficiencies in the quality of
information being provided by their monitoring and analysis
capabilities.
    NERC observes that the performance of the requirements it cites is
premised on the existence of data exchange capabilities, regardless of
whether a separate requirement expressly requires the reliability
coordinator to have data exchange capabilities in place. In review the
725Z collection for the IRO Reliability Standards, the number of
entities/respondents was checked and broken down into the appliable
type of entity for each reliability standard. In the past combining
reliability standards caused the same reliability standard to be
accounted for multiple times, resulting in the previously recorded
6,686 responses. These numbers were revised and updated to be the new
calculated total of 953 responses. Staff looked at each reliability
standard as its own unique project and in doing so eliminated the
multiple entity count by making a more accurate representation of the
number of responses.
    Type of Respondents: Reliability coordinators (RC), planning
coordinators (PC), balancing authorities (BA), transmission owners
(TO), transmission planners (TP), Transmission Operators (TOP) are
included entities for Estimate of Annual Burden: \5\ The Commission
estimates the changes in the annual public reporting burden and cost
\6\ as follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Burden is defined as 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. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, refer to 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.
    \6\ The hourly cost figures, for salary plus benefits, for the
new standards are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
information (at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm), as of
May 2021, and benefits information for March 2021 (at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). For salary plus benefits,
for reporting requirements, an electrical engineer (code 17-2071) is
$72.15/hour; for the recordkeeping requirements.

FERC-725Z--Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Reliability Standards IRO-001, IRO-002, IRO-008, IRO-009, IRO-010, IRO-014, IRO-017, and IRO-018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Number of    Annual  number
    Information collection       respondents &   of  responses   Total number   Average burden hours & cost  Total annual burden hours &   Total annual
         requirements           type of entity  per respondent   of responses         per response ($)          total annual cost ($)       burden cost
                                           (1)             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4)........................  (3) * (4) = (5)............         (5)/(1)
                                                                           (3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRO-001-4.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  24 hrs. $1,731.6...........  288 hrs. $20,779.2.........        $1,731.6
                                     168 (TOP)               1             168  12 hrs. 865.8..............  2,016 hrs. 145,454.4.......           865.8
IRO-002-7.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  24 hrs., 1,731.6...........  288 hrs., 20,779.2.........         1,731.6
IRO-008-2.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  160 hrs., 11,544...........  1,920 hrs., 138,528........          11,544
IRO-009-2.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  12 hrs. 865.8..............  144 hrs. 10,389.6..........           865.8
IRO-010-3.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  24 hrs., 1,731.6...........  288 hrs., 20,779.2.........         1,731.6
IRO-014-3.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  12 hrs., 865.8.............  144 hrs., 10,389.6.........           865.8
IRO-017-1.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  1,200 hrs., 86,580.........  14,400 hrs., 1,038,960.....          86,580
                                       63 (PC)               1              63  96 hrs., 6,926.4...........  6,048 hrs., 436,363.2......         6,926.4
                                      204 (TP)               1             204  96 hrs., 6,926.4...........  19,584 hrs., 1,412,985.6...         6,926.4
                                      326 (TO)               1             326  8 hrs, 577.2...............  2,608 Hrs., 188,167.2......           577.2
                                       96 (BA)               1              96  8 hr., 577.2...............  758 hrs., 54,689.7.........           577.2
IRO-018-1.....................         12 (RC)               1              12  34 hrs., 2,453.1...........  288 hrs., 20,779.2.........        $2,453.1
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total for FERC-725Z.......  ..............  ..............             953  ...........................  48,774 hrs., 3,519,044.1...  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: July 28, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-16590 Filed 8-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P