[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 231 (Thursday, December 1, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86573-86575]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28811]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 375 and 388

[Docket No. RM17-5-000; Order No.832]

Regulations Implementing the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 and
Clarifying the FOIA Regulations

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------F
inal rule.

SUMMARY: On June 30, 2016, President Obama signed the Freedom of
Information Act Improvement Act of 2016. The Act requires agencies to
revise their regulations within 180 days to account for the new
statutory mandates. After undertaking a review of Commission
regulations in accordance with Section 3 of the Act, the Commission is
revising its FOIA regulations to incorporate the statutory mandates.
Additionally, this rule updates the delegation regulations with respect
to determinations made by the General Counsel in response to FOIA
administrative appeals.

DATES: This rule will become effective January 3, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Hershfield, Office of the General Counsel, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Christopher MacFarlane, Office of the General Counsel, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

ORDER NO. 832

FINAL RULE

I. Introduction

    1. On June 30, 2016, President Obama signed the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) Improvement Act of 2016 (FOIA Improvement Act or
the Act).\1\ The Act directs agencies to: (1) Make information that has
been requested and disclosed three times publically accessible in an
electronic format; \2\ (2) institute a sunset period of 25 years on
records protected under the deliberative process privilege; (3) codify
the Department of Justice's foreseeability of harm standard when
rendering FOIA determinations; \3\ (4) take reasonable steps to
segregate exempt information from nonexempt information; (5) limit fees
in unusual circumstances when the agency response is delayed; and (6)
provide additional notice requirements to FOIA requesters in agency
determination letters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, Public Law 114-185, 130 Stat.
538 (June 2016). The Act also requires several actions that do not
necessitate a revising of the regulations such as FOIA officers
offering additional FOIA training.
    \2\ See Proactive Disclosure of Non-Exempt Agency Information:
Making Information Available Without the Need to File a FOIA
Request, OIP Guidance (Oct. 5, 2015), https://www.justice.gov/oip/oip-guidance-5.
    \3\ See 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(5)(2012) (incorporating various
privileges including the deliberative process privilege covering
``inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which would
not be available by law to a party other than an agency in
litigation with the agency.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Section 3 of the Act requires agencies to revise their
regulations to account for the new statutory mandates. The Act provides
that agencies must revise their rules within 180 days to incorporate
the statutory changes. Accordingly, the Commission is revising its
regulations to implement the FOIA Improvement Act. Consistent with the
FOIA administrative appeal provisions in section 388.110, the
Commission also is clarifying under section 375.309 that the General
Counsel or a designee may issue final determinations on administrative
FOIA appeals.

II. Discussion

    3. After undertaking a review of Commission regulations in
accordance with Section 3 of the Act, the Commission is revising its
FOIA regulations in 18 CFR 388.106-388.10, as follows.

A. Revisions to Section 375.309

    4. The FOIA administrative appeal provisions in section 388.110
provide that a FOIA administrative appeal must be directed to the
General Counsel for determination, and that the General Counsel or the
General Counsel's designee will make a determination on that appeal
within the statutory timeframe.\4\ Consistent with the Commission's
FOIA administrative appeal provisions in section 388.110, the
Commission is clarifying, in section 375.309, that the General Counsel
or a designee will provide determinations in response to FOIA
administrative appeals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A)(ii) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Revisions to Section 388.106

    5. The FOIA Improvement Act requires agencies to ``make available
for public inspection in an electronic format'' records that have been
released and ``that have been requested 3 or more times.'' Section
388.106 concerns Commission records available in the public reference
room at the

Commission's headquarters or on the Commission's Web site. The
Commission is revising that section to codify this requirement.

C. Revisions to Section 388.107

    6. The FOIA Improvement Act provides that the deliberative process
privilege no longer exempts a document that is 25 years or older.
Section 388.107 describes material that is exempt from public
disclosure under the Commission's regulations, and a provision in that
section describes material that would traditionally fall under the
protection of deliberative process privilege. The Commission is
revising section 338.107(e) to reflect the 25 year limitation on
material that would otherwise be exempt under the deliberative process
privilege.

D. Revisions to Section 388.108

    7. The FOIA Improvement Act requires agencies to codify the
Department of Justice's foreseeable harm standard. Under that standard,
agencies ``shall withhold information'' under the FOIA ``only if the
agency reasonably foresees that disclosure would harm an interest
protected by an exemption'' or ``disclosure is prohibited by law.'' The
standard does not require the release of material ``that is otherwise
prohibited from disclosure by law, or otherwise exempted from
disclosure under [Exemption] 3.'' The Act also directs agencies to make
reasonable efforts to segregate and release nonexempt material.
Consistent with Section 3 of the Act, the Commission revises section
388.108 to codify these practices.

E. Revisions to Section 388.109

    8. The Act directs agencies to waive processing fees, under certain
unusual circumstances, where the agency's response was delayed.\5\ The
Commission is revising its regulations on FOIA processing fees, section
388.109, to provide for fee waivers in the unusual circumstances
described in the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Prohibition on Assessing Certain Fees When the FOIA's
Time Limits Are Not Met, OIP Guidance (Oct. 19, 2016), https://www.justice.gov/oip/oip-guidance/prohibition_on_assessing_certain_fees_when_foia_time_limits_not_met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Revisions to Section 388.110

    9. The FOIA Improvement Act also provides changes to administrative
appeals and provides mandatory language that must go in initial
response letters. The Act requires that all determination letters must
notify the requester that they can seek assistance from the FOIA Public
Liaison. Each adverse FOIA determination letter must notify the
requester of the option to seek dispute resolution services from Office
of Government Information Services (OGIS).
    10. The Act also directs Agencies to extend the timeframe to file
an administrative appeal from 45 days to at least 90 days.
Additionally, the Act mandates that agencies advise requesters that
they may seek the assistance of OGIS when the agency extends the
response time by ten or more days for unusual circumstances. The
Commission will take these steps and revises section 388.110 of its
regulations to codify this practice.

III. Information Collection Statement

    11. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require OMB
to approve certain information collection requirements imposed by
agency rule.\6\ However, this instant Final Rule does not contain any
information collection requirements. Therefore, compliance with OMB
regulations is not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 5 CFR 1320.12 (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Environmental Analysis

    12. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\7\ Issuance
of this Final Rule does not represent a major federal action having a
significant adverse effect on the human environment under the
Commission's regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969. Part 380 of the Commission's regulations lists exemptions
to the requirement to draft an Environmental Analysis or Environmental
Impact Statement. Included is an exemption for procedural, ministerial,
or internal administrative actions.\8\ This rulemaking is exempt under
that provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
30,783 (1987).
    \8\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(1) (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    13. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \9\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This Final Rule makes procedural modifications as directed by statute.
The Commission certifies that it will not have a significant economic
impact upon participants in Commission proceedings. An analysis under
the RFA is not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Document Availability

    14. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426.
    15. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in
the docket number field.
    16. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202)
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
VII. Effective Date

    17. The Commission is issuing this rule as a Final Rule without a
period for public comment. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A), notice and
comment procedures are unnecessary for ``interpretative rules, general
statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or
practice . . .'' This rule merely makes modification to existing
procedures as directed by statute. The rule will not significantly
affect regulated entities or the general public.
    18. These regulations are effective January 3, 2017.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 375

    Authority delegations (Government agencies), Seals and insignia,
Sunshine Act.

18 CFR Part 388

    Confidential business information, Freedom of information.
    By the Commission.

    Issued: November 17, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 375
and 388, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 375--THE COMMISSION

0
1. The authority citation for part 375 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551-557; 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 16
U.S.C. 791-825r, 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
2. In Sec.  375.309, paragraph (h) is added and reserved, and paragraph
(i) is added to read as follows

Sec.  375.309  Delegations to the General Counsel.

* * * * *
    (h) [Reserved]
    (i) Deny or grant, in whole or in part, an appeal of a Freedom of
Information Act determination by the Director of the Office of External
Affairs.

PART 388--INFORMATION AND REQUESTS

0
3. The authority citation for part 388 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301-305, 551, 552 (as amended), 553-557; 42
U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
4. Amend Sec.  388.106 by adding paragraph (b)(24) to read as follows

Sec.  388.106  Requests for Commission records available in the Public
Reference Room and from the Commission's Web site, http://www.ferc.gov.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (24) Records that have been requested three or more times and
determined eligible for public disclosure will be made publicly
available on the Commission's Web site or through other electronic
means.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  388.107 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows

Sec.  388.107  Commission records exempt from public disclosure.

* * * * *
    (e) Interagency or intraagency memoranda or letters which would not
be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with
the agency, except that the deliberative process privilege shall not
exempt any record 25 years or older.
* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  388.108 by revising paragraph (c)(4) and adding
paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  388.108   Requests for Commission records not available through
the Public

    Reference Room (FOIA requests).
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) The Director will consider whether partial disclosure of
information is possible whenever it is determined that a document is
exempt and will take reasonable steps to segregate and release
nonexempt information.
    (5) The Director will only withhold information where it is
reasonably foreseeable that disclosure would harm an interest protected
by an exemption or disclosure is prohibited by law or otherwise
exempted from disclosure under FOIA Exemption 3.
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  388.109 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows

Sec.  388.109  Fees for record requests.

* * * * *
    (f) The Commission will not charge search fees (or duplication fees
for requesters with preferred fee status) where, after extending the
time limit for unusual circumstances, as described in Sec.  388.110,
the Director does not provide a timely determination.
    (1) If there are unusual circumstances, as described in Sec.
388.110, and there are more than 5,000 responsive pages to the request,
the Commission may charge search fees (or, for requesters in preferred
fee status, may charge duplication fees) where the requester received
timely written notice and the Commission has discussed with the
requester via written mail, electronic mail, or telephone (or made not
less than 3 good-faith attempts to do so) how the requester could
effectively limit the scope of the request; or
    (2) If a court determines that exceptional circumstances exist, the
Commission's failure to comply with a time limit will be excused for
the length of time provided by the court order.

0
8. Amend Sec.  388.110 by revising paragraph (a) and adding paragraph
(b)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  388.110   Procedure for appeal of denial of requests for
Commission records not publicly available or not available through the
Public Reference Room, denial of . . . fee waiver or reduction, and
denial of requests for expedited processing.

* * * * *
    (a)(1) Determination letters shall indicate that a requester may
seek assistance from the FOIA Public Liaison. A person whose request
for records, request for fee waiver, or request for expedited
processing is denied in whole or in part may seek dispute resolution
services from the Office of Government Information Services, or may
appeal the determination to the General Counsel or General Counsel's
designee within 90 days of the determination.
    (2) Appeals filed pursuant to this section must be in writing,
addressed to the General Counsel of the Commission, and clearly marked
``Freedom of Information Act Appeal.'' Such an appeal received by the
Commission not addressed and marked as indicated in this paragraph will
be so addressed and marked by Commission personnel as soon as it is
properly identified and then will be forwarded to the General Counsel.
Appeals taken pursuant to this paragraph will be considered to be
received upon actual receipt by the General Counsel.
    (3) The General Counsel or the General Counsel's designee will make
a determination with respect to any appeal within 20 working days after
the receipt of such appeal. An appeal of the denial of expedited
processing will be considered as expeditiously as possible within the
20 working day period. If, on appeal, the denial of the request for
records, fee reduction, or expedited processing is upheld in whole or
in part, the General Counsel or the General Counsel's designee will
notify the person making the appeal of the provisions for judicial
review of that determination.
    (b) * * *
    (5) Whenever the Commission extends the time limit, pursuant to
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, by more than ten additional working
days, the written notice will notify the requester of the right to seek
dispute resolution services from the Office of Government Information
Services.

[FR Doc. 2016-28811 Filed 11-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 72805]
[DOCID:fr07de05-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP98-151-003]

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation; Notice of Petition to
Amend

November 30, 2005.
    Take notice that on August 1, 2005, Columbia Gas Transmission
Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE., Charleston, West
Virginia 25314, filed in Docket No. CP98-151-003, a petition to amend
the authorization previously issued by the Commission as it relates to
the facilities approved for abandonment, the method of abandonment, and
the leasing of capacity from Millennium Pipeline Company, L.P. In
addition, Columbia requests approval of an interim operating agreement.
In addition, Columbia requests approval of a limited-term certificate
of public convenience and necessity with pre-granted abandonment
authorizing Columbia to operate certain facilities that Millennium has
requested authority to construct, pending the in-service date of
Millennium.
    This petition is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. This filing is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket

number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for
TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any initial questions regarding this petition should be directed to
counsel for Columbia, Fredric J. George, Columbia Gas Transmission
Corporation, P.O. Box 1273, Charleston, West Virginia 25325-1273; at
(304) 357-2359 (phone) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax).
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to
intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party
status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary
of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the
applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of
filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant
and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the
proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the
proceeding.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project, or in support of or in opposition to this project, should
submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of
the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the
Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the
environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental
commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on
all other parties. The Commission's rules require that persons filing
comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests
only to the applicant. However, the non-party commenters will not
receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the
Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by
the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the
Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link.

    Comment Date: January 17, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6955 Filed 12-6-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26674-26675]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12032]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9045-2]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

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

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 05/27/2019 Through 05/31/2019
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

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

EIS No. 20190123, Draft, BLM, NV, Gemini Solar Project Resource
Management Plan Amendment and Draft Environmental Impact Statement,
Comment Period Ends: 09/05/2019, Contact: Herman Pinales<PHONE_NUMBER>
EIS No. 20190124, Draft, USAF, CA, Draft Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Edwards AFB Solar
Project, Comment Period Ends: 07/26/2019, Contact: Andrea Brewer-
Anderson<PHONE_NUMBER>
EIS No. 20190125, Draft, APHIS, REG, Revisions to USDA-APHIS 7 CFR part
340 Regulations Governing the Importation, Interstate Movement, and
Environmental Release of Certain

Genetically Engineered Organisms: Draft Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement, Comment Period Ends: 08/06/2019, Contact: Alan
Pearson<PHONE_NUMBER>
EIS No. 20190126, Final, BR, CA, Yolo Bypass Salmonid Habitat
Restoration and Fish Passage, Review Period Ends: 07/08/2019, Contact:
Ben Nelson<PHONE_NUMBER>

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20190081, Draft, USACE, IL, Draft Chicago Area Waterway System
Dredged Material Management Plan, Comment Period Ends: 07/02/2019,
Contact: Mike Padilla<PHONE_NUMBER>, Revision to FR Notice Published 05/
03/2019; Extending the Comment Period from 06/17/2019 to 07/02/2019
EIS No. 20190092, Final Supplement, USACE, AL, Mobile Harbor, Mobile,
Alabama Integrated Final General Evaluation Report with Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement, Review Period Ends: 06/17/2019,
Contact: Jennifer L. Jacobson<PHONE_NUMBER>, Revision to FR Notice
Published 05/10/2019; Extending the Comment Period from 06/10/2019 to
06/17/2019
EIS No. 20190101, Draft, BLM, NV, Mackay Optimization Project, Comment
Period Ends: 07/05/2019, Contact: Jeanette Black, EIS Project Manager
775-623-1500, Revision to FR Notice Published 05/17/2019; Extending the
Comment Period from 07/01/2019 to 07/05/2019

    Dated: June 4, 2019.
Candi Schaedle,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2019-12032 Filed 6-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 4, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 150)]
[Notices]
[Page 45263-45265]
[DOCID:fr04au08-80]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58234; File No. SR-Phlx-2008-55]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to an Extension of Pilot Programs in Connection With Linkage
P/A Orders

July 25, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that on
July 18, 2008, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by Phlx. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Phlx, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4 thereunder,\4\ proposes to extend for a one-year period until July
31, 2009, its current pilot programs relating to: (1) An option
transaction charge credit of $0.21 per contract for Exchange options
specialist units \5\ that incur Phlx option transaction charges when a
customer order is delivered electronically via Phlx XL \6\ or via the
Exchange's Options Floor Broker Management Systems (``FBMS''),\7\ and
is then executed via the Intermarket Option Linkage (``Linkage'') \8\
as a Principal Acting as Agent Order (``P/A Order''); and (2) the Floor
Broker Linkage P/A fee and Options Specialist Unit Credit, which
charges floor brokers an amount equal to the transaction fee(s)
assessed on options specialist units by another exchange in connection
with customer orders that are delivered to the limit order book via
FBMS and executed via Linkage as P/A Orders. The Exchange then provides
to options specialist units a credit in an amount equal to the
transaction fee(s) assessed on them by another exchange in connection
with executing customer orders that are delivered to the limit order
book via FBMS and executed via Linkage as P/A Orders. There are no
substantive changes to the pilot programs as they currently operate,
other than to extend their operation through July 31, 2009.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \4\ 7 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \5\ The Exchange uses the terms ``specialists'' and ``specialist
units'' interchangeably herein.
    \6\ See Exchange Rule 1080.
    \7\ FBMS is designed to enable Floor Brokers and/or their
employees to enter, route and report transactions stemming from
options orders received on the Exchange. FBMS also is designed to
establish an electronic audit trail for options orders represented
and executed by Floor Brokers on the Exchange, such that the audit
trail provides an accurate, time-sequenced record of electronic and
other orders, quotations and transactions on the Exchange, beginning
with the receipt of an order by the Exchange, and further
documenting the life of the order through the process of execution,
partial execution, or cancellation of that order. See Exchange Rule
1080, Commentary .06.
    \8\ Linkage is governed by the Options Linkage Authority under
the conditions set forth under the Plan for the Purpose of Creating
and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (the ``Plan'') approved
by the Commission. The registered U.S. options markets are linked
together on a real-time basis through a network capable of
transporting orders and messages to and from each market.
    \9\ See e-mail dated July 24, 2008 to the Commission from
Cynthia Hoekstra, Vice President, Phlx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated the changes to be in
effect for transactions settling on or after July 31, 2008.\10\ The
text of the proposed rule change is available at www.phlx.com, the
Exchange, and the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ This proposal is scheduled to be in effect for the same
time period as a pilot program relating to fees for Linkage
Principal Orders and P/A Orders. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 58144 (July 11, 2008), 73 FR 41394 (July 18, 2008) (SR-Phlx-
2008-49).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Phlx 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 Phlx has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange currently provides for an option transaction charge
credit of $0.21 per contract for Exchange options specialist units that
incur Phlx option transaction charges when a customer order is
delivered electronically via Phlx XL or via FBMS and then is executed
via Linkage as a P/A Order. In addition, the Exchange charges floor
brokers an amount equal to the transaction fee(s) assessed on options
specialist units by another exchange in connection with customer orders
that are delivered to the limit order book via FBMS and executed via
Linkage as P/A Orders. Options specialist units are then credited an
amount equal to the transaction fee(s) assessed on them by another
exchange in connection with executing customer orders that are
delivered to the limit order book via FBMS and executed via Linkage as
a P/A Order.
    The purpose of extending the current pilot programs discussed above
is to encourage the use of Linkage, remain competitive with other
exchanges with respect to the assessment of Linkage-related fees and to
help alleviate the potential economic burden of multiple transaction
charges imposed on Exchange specialist units in connection with routing
these types of Linkage orders. Additionally, the purpose of assessing a
fee on floor brokers who send customer orders that are delivered to the
limit order book via FBMS and executed via Linkage as P/A Orders is to
more equitably assess the applicable transaction fee(s) on the member
originally entering the order to be executed. Floor brokers may choose
to route these orders through other systems and not place these orders
on the limit order book.
    The above-referenced pilot programs are currently scheduled to
expire on July 31, 2008.\11\ This proposal would extend the pilot
programs for another year, through July 31, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57608 (April 2,
2008), 73 FR 19128 (April 8, 2008) (SR-Phlx-2008-22); 57434 (March
5, 2008), 73 FR 13269 (March 12, 2008) (SR-Phlx-2008-19); and 56101
(July 19, 2007), 72 FR 40920 (July 25, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-50).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its schedule of
fees is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \13\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members. These pilot programs, in
part, help alleviate the undue financial burden of multiple transaction
charges that are incurred by specialist units in connection with P/A
orders executed via Linkage. Assessing a fee on floor brokers and
giving a corresponding credit to specialist units allows for the
transaction fee(s) to be assessed on the member who submits the order
and for the credit to be given to the specialist unit that routed the
order to another exchange in order to obtain the National Best Bid or
Offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \14\ and

subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\15\ At any time within 60
days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may
summarily abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2008-55 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2008-55. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of Phlx. 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-Phlx-2008-55, and should be
submitted on or before August 25, 2008.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-17760 Filed 8-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 207 (Friday, October 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49771-49773]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23404]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 395

[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0298]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Application for Exemption; Motion
Picture Association of America

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that the Motion Picture Association of America
(MPAA) has requested an exemption from the electronic logging device
(ELD) requirements for all commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers
providing transportation to or from a theatrical or television motion
picture production site. MPAA request this exemption to allow these
drivers to complete paper records of duty status (RODS) instead of
using an ELD device. MPAA believes that the exemption would not have
any adverse impacts on operational safety because drivers would remain
subject to the hours-of-service (HOS) regulations as well as the
requirements to maintain paper RODS. FMCSA requests public comment on
MPAA's application for exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 27, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Number FMCSA-2017-0298 by any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. See the
Public Participation and Request for Comments section below for further
information.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line FDMS is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this
notice, contact Mr. Tom Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver and Carrier
Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety
Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email: [email protected]. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact
Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2017-0298), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comments online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2017-0298'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period and may grant or not grant this application
based on your comments.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must
provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant
to the application, including any safety analyses that have been
conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).

III. Request for Exemption

    MPAA is requesting an exemption from the ELD requirements in 49 CFR
part 395 published in the Federal Register on December 16, 2015 (80 FR
78292). If granted, the exemption would allow all drivers of CMVs
providing transportation of property to and from a theatrical or
television motion picture production site to complete paper RODS
instead of using an ELD device on or after the December 18, 2017
compliance date. The term of the requested exemption is for five years,
subject to renewal.
    MPAA reports that approximately 6,500 CMV drivers operate CMVs on a
full or part-time basis for the motion picture industry. According to
HOS data developed by third party compliance services, these drivers
spend on average less than four hours each day driving and drive about
40 miles per day. Their resulting RODs are often very complex, as are
the driver HOS records that employing motor carriers must keep. Through
close cooperation, the industry has been able to manage the extensive
interchange of paper RODs that this work pattern requires. MPAA asserts
that industry's success in HOS management is based on a system that is
driver-based rather than vehicle-based.
    According to MPAA, few production drivers qualify for the short-
haul driver exception in 49 CFR 395.1(e)(1) and

(e)(2) and will be subject to the ELD requirements when compliance
becomes mandatory. Each time a production driver operates a CMV for a
different studio or production company the motor carrier and the driver
must reconcile the driver's HOS record for the past week. At present,
cooperation between production companies, various Teamsters locals, and
drivers can reduce the burden of this detailed reconciliation. And
under the current rules, drivers themselves can manage the necessary
paper RODS, carry them to each new CMV, and transfer paper copies to
each new motor carrier as needed. When a roadside inspection occurs, a
driver can produce paper RODS for review by the enforcement official.
    MPAA contends that the lack of interoperability among ELD platforms
developed by various manufacturers means that motion picture company
drivers will not be able to transfer HOS data from one carrier or
vehicle to other carriers or vehicles. A driver who is required to use
an ELD may operate a CMV that has one operating system installed on the
truck. When the driver transfers to operating for another studio or
production company, that company may use a different ELD operating
system for its vehicles. The HOS data cannot automatically be
transferred from the first company's vehicle to the second company's
system unless both ELD devices are on the same platform.
    MPAA believes that requiring production company drivers to record
their HOS using incompatible ELD platforms would prevent them from
implementing more efficient or effective operations that would maintain
a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level achieved
without the requested exemption. Allowing production company drivers to
continue using paper RODS to record their HOS data will not jeopardize
operational safety or increase fatigue-related crashes.
    MPAA states that Congress and FMCSA already recognized the minimal
safety concerns presented by motion picture production drivers due to
the limited numbers of hours and miles they operate CMVs and the
availability of frequent and extended periods of off duty time
throughout the workday. As a result production drivers are already
exempted from the typical HOS driving and on duty time limits as long
as they operate within a 100 air-mile radius of the location where the
driver reports to and is released from work.
    Because production drivers operate CMVs so few miles and hours per
day, motion picture production companies have driver and vehicle out-
of-service rates that are substantially below the national averages for
carriers in general. Until such time as all ELD platforms are fully
interoperable, motion picture production drivers should be allowed to
continue recording their HOS data using paper RODS.
    A copy of MPAA's application for exemption is available for review
in the docket for this notice.

    Issued on: October 23, 2017.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-23404 Filed 10-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: May 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 100)]
[Notices]
[Page 29381-29383]
[DOCID:fr25my10-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62117; File No. SR-ISE-2010-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Fees for the
ISE Order Feed

May 18, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 11, 2010, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and
III below, which items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The ISE is proposing to amend its Schedule of Fees to adopt
subscription fees for the sale of a new market data offering called the
ISE Order Feed. The text of the proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange's Web site (http://www.ise.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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    ISE proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees to adopt subscription
fees for the sale of the ISE Order Feed. These proposed fee changes
will be operative on July 1, 2010, pending regulatory approval.
    The ISE Order Feed provides real-time updates every time a new
limit order that is not immediately executable at the best bid/offer
(BBO) is placed on the ISE order book. This feed does not include
market orders, immediate or cancel (IOC) orders, quotes or any non-
displayed interest.
    While the Options Price Reporting Authority (OPRA) feed provides
aggregated ISE BBO order information, the ISE Order Feed provides each
individual order. The information included on the ISE Order Feed
includes the order type (buy/sell), the order price, the order size,
and customer indicator (which reflects whether the order is a customer
order), as well as details for each instrument series, including the
symbols (series and underlying security), put or call indicator, the
expiration and the strike price of the series.
    The ISE BBO on the OPRA feed includes all quotes provided by ISE
market makers and all orders provided by members which are then
aggregated

at the BBO. The ISE Order Feed, on the other hand, includes each
individual limit order rather than only the aggregated volume of all
orders. The ISE Order Feed does not include quote traffic, which will
result in much less data for subscribers to process and less bandwidth
than feeds that provide aggregated quotes and orders.
    The Exchange currently does not charge fees for the ISE Order Feed.
This market data offering will be made available to both members and
non-members on a subscription basis. The Exchange proposes to charge
distributors \3\ of the ISE Order Feed (i) $2,000 per month and will
not charge distributors a monthly fee per controlled device \4\ as long
the ISE Order Feed is for internal use only, (ii) $2,000 per month and
$10 per external controlled device per month (a) if the ISE Order Feed
is redistributed externally by a subscriber, or (b) if the ISE Order
Feed is redistributed internally and externally. For subscribers who
redistribute the ISE Order Feed externally, or redistribute the ISE
Order Feed internally and externally, the Exchange proposes to limit
for any one month the combined maximum amount of fees payable to
$2,500. For example, a firm that subscribes to the ISE Order Feed and
then redistributes it to 40 clients will pay $2,400 per month ($2,000
for the feed and $400 for the controlled device ($10 x 40)). If that
same firm redistributes the data to 100 clients, the fee for that firm
will be capped at $2,500, resulting in a savings of $500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``distributor'' is any firm that receives the ISE Order
Feed directly from ISE or indirectly through a ``redistributor'' and
then distributes it either internally or externally. All
distributors will be required by the Exchange to execute an ISE
distributor agreement. ``Redistributors'' include market data
vendors and connectivity providers such as extranets and private
network providers.
    \4\ A ``controlled device'' is as any device that a distributor
of the ISE Order Feed permits to access the information in the ISE
Order Feed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange
Act'') for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section
6(b)(4), that an exchange have an equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees and other charges among its members and other persons using
its facilities. The Exchange believes introduction of the new product
will provide market participants with an opportunity to obtain
additional data in furtherance of their investment decisions.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) of the Act,\6\ in particular, in that it provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or
system which ISE operates or controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is also
consistent with the provisions of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in
that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest; and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers, or to regulate by virtue of
any authority conferred by the Act matters not related to the purposes
of the Act or the administration of the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is also
consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act \8\ in that it does not
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as set forth in more detail
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory
organizations and broker-dealers increased authority and flexibility to
offer new and unique market data to the public. It was believed that
this authority would expand the amount of data available to consumers,
and also spur innovation and competition for the provision of market
data.
    The Commission has recently issued an order firmly establishing
that in reviewing non-core data products such as the ISE Order Feed,
the Commission will utilize a market-based approach that relies
primarily on competitive forces to determine the terms on which non-
core data is made available to investors.\9\ The Commission adopted a
two-part test:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57917 (Dec. 2, 2008)
(``NetCoalition Order'' resolving File No. SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).

    The first is to ask whether the exchange was subject to
significant competitive forces in setting the terms of its proposal
for non-core data, including the level of any fees. If an exchange
was subject to significant competitive forces in setting the terms
of a proposal, the Commission will approve the proposal unless it
determines that there is a substantial countervailing basis to find
that the terms nevertheless fail to meet an applicable requirement
of the Exchange Act or the rules thereunder. If, however, the
exchange was not subject to significant competitive forces in
setting the terms of a proposal for non-core data, the Commission
will require the exchange to provide a substantial basis, other than
competitive forces, in its proposed rule change demonstrating that
the terms of the proposal are equitable, fair, reasonable, and not
unreasonably discriminatory.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id. at 48-49.

This standard begins from the premise that no Commission rule requires
exchanges or market participants either to distribute non-core data to
the public or to display non-core data to investors.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its NetCoalition Order the Commission concluded that ``at least
two broad types of significant competitive forces applied to NYSE Arca
in setting the terms of its proposal to distribute the ArcaBook data:
(1) NYSE Arca's compelling need to attract order flow from market
participants; and (2) the availability to market participants of
alternatives to purchasing the ArcaBook data. The Commission conducted
an exhaustive 14-page review of these two competitive forces before
concluding that the availability of alternatives, as well as the
compelling need to attract order flow, imposed significant competitive
pressure on that exchange's need to act equitably, fairly, and
reasonably in setting the terms of the fees for its non-core data
product.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id. at 51-65. The Commission then spent an additional 36
pages (65-101) analyzing and refuting comments challenging the
Commission's competition analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The market data provided in the ISE Order Feed is non-core data
that is governed by the same analysis the Commission set forth in the
NetCoalition Order. As with the NYSE Arca depth-of-book product, no
rules require ISE or any other exchange to offer this data; nor are
vendors required to purchase or display this data.
    Additionally, ISE is constrained by the same two competitive forces
in the options market as the Commission found was present in the
NetCoalition Order. First, ISE has a compelling need to attract order
flow from market participants in order to maintain its share of trading
volume. This compelling need to attract order flow imposes significant
pressure on ISE to act reasonably in setting the fees for its market
data offerings, particularly given that the market participants that
will pay such fees often will be the same

market participants from whom ISE must attract order flow. These market
participants include broker-dealers that control the handling of a
large volume of customer and proprietary order flow. Given the
portability of order flow from one exchange to another, any exchange
that sought to charge unreasonably high market data fees would risk
alienating many of the same customers on whose orders it depends for
competitive survival.
    Second, the Exchange is constrained in pricing the ISE Order Feed
by the availability to market participants of alternatives to
purchasing ISE's market data offerings. ISE must consider the extent to
which market participants would choose one or more alternatives instead
of purchasing the exchange's data. Other exchanges, including some who
may enjoy greater market share than ISE, are potential competitors as
they too sell similar market data offerings that market participants
may choose to purchase instead. For example, NASDAQ OMX PHLX (``PHLX'')
has filed a proposed rule change to adopt fees for a market data
product that includes a data feed that is similar to the ISE Order
Feed.\13\ The PHLX' Specialized Order Feed, which PHLX has proposed to
integrate into its TOPO Plus Orders market data offering, includes
``real-time information to keep track of single order book(s).'' \14\
Further, the NetCoalition Order notes that one of the principal market
data reforms adopted by the Commission was to authorize the independent
distribution of data by broker/dealers. If one or more broker/dealers
determine that the cost of subscribing to the ISE Order Feed is too
high, they are entitled to independently distribute their own order
data and may do so with or without charging a fee.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61878 (April 8,
2010), 75 FR 20023 (April 16, 2010) (SR-PHLX-2010-48).
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ NetCoalition Order at 63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the aftermath of the NetCoalition Order, the Exchange believes
that the competition among exchanges for order flow and the competition
among exchanges for market data products subject ISE's proposed market
data offerings to significant competitive forces. In addition, the
Exchange believes that no substantial countervailing basis exists to
support a finding that the proposed fees fail to meet the requirement
of the Act. In sum, the availability of alternative sources of
information impose significant competitive pressures on the ISE Order
Feed and ISE's compelling need to attract order flow impose significant
competitive pressure on the Exchange to act equitably, fairly, and
reasonably in setting its fees.

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (a) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (b) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2010-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2010-34. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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,\16\ 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, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m.
and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; 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-ISE-2010-34 and should be
submitted on or before June 15, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
    \17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12506 Filed 5-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 240 (Tuesday, December 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77623-77624]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31466]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

Docket Numbers: ER10-2633-022; ER10-2570-022; ER10-2717-022; ER10-3140-
021;ER13-55-012.

    Applicants: Birchwood Power Partners, L.P., Shady Hills Power
Company, L.L.C., EFS Parlin Holdings, LLC, Inland Empire Energy Center,
LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the GE
Companies.
    Filed Date: 12/8/15.
    Accession Number: 20151208-5217.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-192-002.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: Service Agreement Nos. 338, 339,
349,

350, 351 and 352 to be effective 11/9/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-483-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Bylaws Section 6.2 Revisions
to Expand the Strategic Planning Committee to be effective 2/7/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5031.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-484-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: TFO Tariff Interim Rate
Revision to Conform with PUCT-Approved ERCOT Rate to be effective 11/
23/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5041.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-485-000.
    Applicants: Golden Hills Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Golden Hills Interconnection
SFA with Golden Hills, and Golden Hills North to be effective 12/10/
2015.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5072.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-486-000.
    Applicants: Credit Suisse Energy, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Market-
Based Rate Tariff to be effective 12/31/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5101.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-487-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Transmission Access Charge
Balancing Account Adjustment (TACBAA) 2016 to be effective 3/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-488-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revise PJM-MISO JOA section
9.4 re: Interregional Market Eff. Project Criteria to be effective 2/8/
2016.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5107.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-489-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SA No. 4311, First Revised
SA No. 4218 and Cancellation of SA No. 4180 to be effective 11/9/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/9/15.
    Accession Number: 20151209-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.  385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to
the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 9, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-31466 Filed 12-14-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P