[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1466-1468]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00126]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73980; File No. SR-ICC-2014-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Revise the ICC Risk Management
Framework

January 5, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 22, 2014, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') 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 primarily by ICC. 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 principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to revise the
ICC Risk Management Framework to incorporate certain risk model
enhancements. These revisions do not require any changes to the ICC
Clearing Rules (``Rules'').

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

    In its filing with the Commission, ICC 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. ICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B
and C below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.

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

    ICC proposes revising the ICC Risk Management Framework to
incorporate risk model enhancements related to Recovery Rate
Sensitivity Requirements (``RRSR''), anti-procyclicality, and ICC's
Guaranty Fund (``GF'') allocation methodology. ICC also proposes
revisions which are intended to remove obsolete references and ensure

consistency. ICC believes such revisions will facilitate the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and
derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions for which it is
responsible. The proposed revisions are described in detail as follows.
    ICC proposes revising its Risk Management Framework to incorporate
risk model parameter estimation enhancements related to the RRSR
computations. Under the current ICC Risk Management Framework, recovery
rate stress scenarios are explicitly incorporated in the RRSR
computations and for Jump-to-Default (``JTD'') considerations. The
quantity RRSR is designed to capture fluctuations due to potential
changes of the market expected recovery rates. In calculating the RRSR,
all instruments belonging to a Risk Factor (``RF'') or Risk Sub-Factor
(``RSF'') are subjected to Recovery Rate (``RR'') stress scenarios to
obtain resulting Profit/Loss (``P/L'') responses, and the worst
scenario response is chosen for the estimation of the RF/RSF RRSR. The
JTD analysis is designed to capture the unexpected potential losses
associated with credit events for assumed SN-specific set of RR stress
values. The JTD responses are determined by using minimum and maximum
RR levels. Currently, the RRSR and JTD computations use the same RR
stress levels.
    ICC proposes separating the RR stress levels for these two
computations in order to introduce more dynamic and appropriate
estimations of the RR stress levels for RRSR purposes. The RR levels
for RRSR purposes will reflect a 5-day 99% Expected Shortfall (``ES'')
equivalent risk measure associated with RR fluctuations. The proposal
will also eliminate index RRSR, as index RRs are not subject to market
uncertainty, but rather driven by market conventions. The dynamic
feature of the RR stress level estimations is achieved by analyzing
historical time series of RRs in order to calibrate a statistical model
with a time varying volatility. Under this approach, the RRSR will
capture the exposure to RR fluctuations over a 5-day risk horizon
described by 99% ES equivalent risk measure. The proposed enhancements
provide a robust and quantitative driven approach for establishing the
RR stress scenarios.
    Additionally, ICC proposes revising its Risk Management Framework
to incorporate a portfolio level anti-procyclicality analysis that
features price changes observed during and immediately after the Lehman
Brothers (``LB'') default. In order to achieve an anti-procyclicality
of Spread Response requirements, ICC proposes considerations of
explicit price scenarios derived from the greatest price decrease and
increase during and immediately after the LB default. These scenarios
capture the default of a major participant in the credit market and the
market response to the event. The introduced scenarios are defined in
price space to maintain the stress severity during periods of low
credit spread levels (high price) when the Spread Response
requirements, computed under the current framework, are expected to be
lower.
    Further, the price scenarios, derived from the greatest price
decrease and increase during and immediately after the LB default, are
explicitly incorporated into the GF sizing to ensure an anti-
procyclical GF size behavior. This enhancement also addresses a
regulatory requirement as described in Article 30 of the Regulatory
Technical Standards,\3\ European Market Infrastructure Regulations
(``EMIR'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No. 153/2013 of 19
December 2012 Supplementing Regulation (EU) No. 648/2012 of the
European Parliament and of the Council with regard to Regulatory
Technical Standards on Requirements for Central Counterparties (the
``Regulatory Technical Standards'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, ICC proposes enhancements to its GF allocation
methodology. Currently, the GF allocations reflect a risk ``silo''
approach, i.e. separate GF ``silo'' components reflecting the Clearing
Participants' (``CPs'') own ``silo'' riskiness and to the GF ``silo''
size. Under the current approach, GF allocations can significantly
fluctuate in response to position changes in the portfolios of the CPs
that drive the GF size, and in response to distribution of the total GF
size across the GF ``silos.'' ICC proposes modifying its methodology,
so that the GF allocations reflect the CPs' total uncollateralized
losses. Under the proposed approach, the GF allocations are independent
of the distribution of the uncollateralized losses across the GF
``silos.'' The new GF allocation methodology reflects an improved and
more stable approach which allows for easier attributions of GF
contributions to individual CP/client portfolios. Additionally, ICC
added clarifying language regarding how the GF computations are
performed with explicit currency dependent expressions.
    ICC has also made some non-substantive changes to the Risk
Management Framework to address CFTC recommendations. Specifically, ICC
proposes amending the Risk Management Framework to reflect ICC's
current approach towards portfolio diversification. As such, ICC
proposes unifying diversification and hedge thresholds, and explicitly
setting both to be equal to the lowest estimated sector Kendall Tau
correlation coefficient. Additionally, ICC clarified language regarding
how ICC meets its liquidity requirements.
    Additionally, ICC has made non-substantive changes throughout the
framework to correct obsolete references. ICC removed language stating
that the Chief Risk Officer is a dual employee of both ICC and its
sister company, The Clearing Corporation. Similarly, ICC removed
language stating that The Clearing Corporation is the provider of risk
management services to ICC. ICC has removed references to the ``U.K.
Financial Services Authority'' and replaced with reference to the
``U.K. Prudential Regulatory Authority.'' ``The European Securities and
Markets Authority'' was added to the sample list of competent
authorities for capital adequacy regulation listed in the framework.
    ICC has also made non-substantive changes throughout the Risk
Management Framework to ensure consistency. ICC updated the mission
statement contained within the document to be consistent with ICC's
Board-approved mission statement. Also, ICC has modified the frequency
by which the Risk Department monitors various risk metrics from a
quarterly basis to a monthly basis to reflect actual business
practices.
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \4\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and
to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts and
transactions and to comply with the provisions of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder. ICC believes that the proposed rule change
is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to ICC, in particular, to Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F),\5\ because ICC believes that the proposed rule change
will promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and
transactions, as the proposed risk model revisions enhance risk
policies and are expected to impose more conservative initial margin
requirements, which would enhance the financial resources available to
ICC and thereby facilitate its ability to promptly

and accurately clear and settle its cleared CDS contracts. In addition,
the proposed revisions are consistent with the relevant requirements of
Rule 17Ad-22.\6\ In particular, the amendments to the Risk Management
Framework will enhance the financial resources available to the
clearing house by imposing a more conservative initial margin
requirement, and are therefore reasonably designed to meet the margin
and financial resource requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(b)(2-3).\7\
Additionally, the amendments to the Risk Management Framework related
to ICC's GF allocation methodology further ensure ICC maintains
sufficient financial resources consistent with the requirements of Rule
17Ad-22(b)(3).\8\ As such, the proposed rule change is designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions
within the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) \9\ of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F)
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(b)(2-3).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(b)(3).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The risk model
enhancements apply uniformly across all market participants. Therefore,
ICC does not believe the proposed rule change imposes any burden on
competition that is inappropriate 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

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by ICC.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove 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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICC-2014-24 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-ICC-2014-24. 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 filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Credit
and on ICE Clear Credit's Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation.
    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-ICC-2014-24
and should be submitted on or before January 30, 2015.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00126 Filed 1-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58459-58462]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26685]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82223; File No. SR-NYSE-2017-62]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Exchange's Price List To Modify the Fees Related to Four
Bundles of Co-Location Services in Connection With the Exchange's Co-
Location Services

December 6, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on November 22, 2017, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule 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 the Exchange's Price List to modify
the fees related to four bundles of co-location services (``Partial
Cabinet Solution bundles'') in connection with the Exchange's co-
location services. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes
effective January 1, 2018. The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Price List to modify
the fees related to Partial Cabinet Solution bundles in connection with
the Exchange's co-location services.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
62960 (Sept. 21, 2010), 75 FR 59310 (Sept. 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-
56) (the ``Original Co-location Filing''). The Exchange operates a
data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the ``data center'') from which
it provides co-location services to Users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers the four Partial Cabinet Solution bundles in
order to attract smaller Users, including those with minimal power or
cabinet space demands or those for which the costs attendant with
having a dedicated cabinet or greater network connection bandwidth are
too burdensome.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77072 (Feb. 5,
2016), 81 FR 7394 (Feb. 11, 2016) (SR-NYSE-2015-53).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange offers Users \6\ that purchase a Partial
Cabinet Solution bundle on or before December 31, 2017, a 50% reduction
in the monthly recurring charges (``MRC'') for the first 12 months.\7\
The Exchange now proposes to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 76008 (Sept. 29, 2015), 80 FR 60190 (Oct.
5, 2015) (SR-NYSE-2015-40). As specified in the Price List, a User
that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-location service
pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-location fees for the
same co-location service charged by the Exchange's affiliates NYSE
MKT LLC and NYSE Arca, Inc. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
70206 (Aug. 15, 2013), 78 FR 51765 (Aug. 21, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-
59).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79715 (Dec. 30,
2016), 82 FR 1777 (Jan. 6, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2016-91).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Extend the 50% reduction to those Users that purchase a
Partial Cabinet Solution bundle on or before December 31, 2018; and
     increase the duration of the reduction from 12 months to
24 months.
    The Exchange also proposes that Users that already purchased a
Partial Cabinet Solution bundle have the duration of their 50%
reduction increased from 12 months to 24 months as well.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For each User that is currently benefitting from the 50%
reduction, the additional 12 month period with the reduced price
would begin when its current 12-month period ended. For each User
whose 12-month period with the reduced price has ended, the
additional 12-month period would begin upon the implementation of
the proposed fee changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective
January 1, 2018.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to modify its Price List so
that it reads as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Type of service              Description      Amount of charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Partial Cabinet Solution bundles  Option A:.........  $7,500 initial
Note: A User and its Affiliates   1 kW partial         charge per bundle
 are limited to one Partial        cabinet, 1 LCN      plus monthly
 Cabinet Solution bundle at a      connection (1       charge per bundle
 time. A User and its Affiliates   Gb), 1 IP network   as follows:
 must have an Aggregate Cabinet    connection (1       For Users
 Footprint of 2 kW or less to      Gb), 2 fiber        that order on or
 qualify for a Partial Cabinet     cross connections   before December
 Solution bundle. See Note 2       and either the      31, 2018: $3,000
 under ``General Notes.''.         Network Time        monthly for first
                                   Protocol Feed or    24 months of
                                   Precision Timing    service, and
                                   Protocol.           $6,000 monthly
                                                       thereafter
                                                       For Users
                                                       that order after
                                                       December 31,
                                                       2018: $6,000
                                                       monthly.

                                  Option B:.........  $7,500 initial
                                  2 kW partial         charge per bundle
                                   cabinet, 1 LCN      plus monthly
                                   connection (1       charge per bundle
                                   Gb), 1 IP network   as follows:
                                   connection (1       For Users
                                   Gb), 2 fiber        that order on or
                                   cross connections   before December
                                   and either the      31, 2018: $3,500
                                   Network Time        monthly for first
                                   Protocol Feed or    24 months of
                                   Precision Timing    service, and
                                   Protocol.           $7,000 monthly
                                                       thereafter
                                                       For Users
                                                       that order after
                                                       December 31,
                                                       2018: $7,000
                                                       monthly.
                                  Option C:.........  $10,000 initial
                                  1 kW partial         charge per bundle
                                   cabinet, 1 LCN      plus monthly
                                   connection (10      charge per bundle
                                   Gb), 1 IP network   as follows:
                                   connection (10      For Users
                                   Gb), 2 fiber        that order on or
                                   cross connections   before December
                                   and either the      31, 2018: $7,000
                                   Network Time        monthly for first
                                   Protocol Feed or    24 months of
                                   Precision Timing    service, and
                                   Protocol.           $14,000 monthly
                                                       thereafter
                                                       For Users
                                                       that order after
                                                       December 31,
                                                       2018: $14,000
                                                       monthly.
                                  Option D:.........  $10,000 initial
                                  2 kW partial         charge per bundle
                                   cabinet, 1 LCN      plus monthly
                                   connection (10      charge per bundle
                                   Gb), 1 IP network   as follows:
                                   connection (10      For Users
                                   Gb), 2 fiber        that order on or
                                   cross connections   before December
                                   and either the      31, 2018: $7,500
                                   Network Time        monthly for first
                                   Protocol Feed or    24 months of
                                   Precision Timing    service, and
                                   Protocol.           $15,000 monthly
                                                       thereafter
                                                       For Users
                                                       that order after
                                                       December 31,
                                                       2018: $15,000
                                                       monthly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not proposing any other changes to the Partial
Cabinet Solution bundles.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Commission notes that previous filings stated that Users
that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle would be subject to
a 90-day minimum commitment, after which period they are subject to
a 60-day rolling time period. The Exchange has represented to
Commission staff that these provisions have not changed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i)
neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to
submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is
a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof
(e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of
the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary
and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; \10\ and
(iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location
service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only
to the Exchange or to the Exchange and one or both of its
affiliates.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is
co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users
do not receive any market data or data service product that is not
available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location
services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders
to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.
    \11\ See SR-NYSE-2013-59, supra note 6, at 51766. The Exchange's
affiliates have also submitted substantially the same proposed rule
change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSEAMER-
2017-35 and SR-NYSEArca-2017-134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities, and
are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers, because the Exchange proposes to offer
the 50% reduction in the MRC, and the increase in the duration of the
reduction from 12 months to 24 months, to all Users equally. As is
currently the case, the purchase of any colocation service (including
Partial Cabinet Solution bundles) is completely voluntary. All Users
that order a bundle on or before December 31, 2018 would have their MRC
reduced by 50% for the first 24 months.
    The Exchange believes that extending the 50% reduction in the MRC
for Partial Cabinet Solution bundles, and increasing the duration of
the reduction, is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because the Partial Cabinet
Solution bundles would continue to offer four different Partial Cabinet
Solution bundles with options with respect to cabinet footprint and
network connections. Users that require other sizes or combinations of
cabinets, network connections and cross connects could still request
them.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that its proposal would remove
impediments to, and perfects the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protects investors and
the public interest because the proposed extension of the 50% reduction
in MRC and the proposed increase in the duration of the reduction would
continue to make it more cost effective for Users to utilize co-
location by creating a convenient way to create a colocation
environment, through four Partial Cabinet Solution bundles with options
with respect to cabinet footprint and network connections. The Exchange
expects that such Users would include those with minimal power or
cabinet space demands and Users for which the costs attendant with
having a dedicated cabinet or greater network connection bandwidth are
too burdensome.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to have Users that
already purchased a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle have the duration
of their 50% reduction increased from 12 months to 24 months is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative

acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to,
and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers, because it would
ensure that all Users that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle
prior to December 31, 2018 benefit from the 50% reduction for a total
of 24 months.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\14\ in particular, because
it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable that Users that order a
Partial Cabinet Solution bundle on or before December 31, 2018 would
have their MRC reduced by 50% for the first 24 months because it is
reasonable to continue to offer such reduction as an incentive to Users
to utilize the service, including both new and past Users of bundles.
As noted above, the Exchange anticipates that Users of the Partial
Cabinet Solution bundles would include those with minimum power or
cabinet space demands and Users for which the costs attendant with
having a dedicated cabinet or greater network connection bandwidth are
too burdensome.
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\15\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule changes will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because, in addition to the proposed services being
completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis
(i.e. the same products and services are available to all Users, and
the extension of the 50% reduction for the MRC for the Partial Cabinet
Solution bundles, and the increased duration of the reduction, would
apply to all Users).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that extending the 50% reduction in the MRC
and increasing the duration of the reduction will not impose any burden
on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act because such access will continue to satisfy
User demand for cost effective options for smaller Users that choose to
utilize co-location. All Users that order a bundle on or before
December 31, 2018 would have their MRC reduced by 50% for the first 24
months. The Exchange believes that the proposed change to have Users
that already purchased a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle have the
duration of their 50% reduction increased from 12 months to 24 months
would ensure that all Users that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution
bundle prior to December 31, 2018 benefit from the 50% reduction for a
total of 24 months.
    The proposed changes will also enhance competition by making it
more cost effective for Users that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution
bundle to utilize co-location by creating a convenient way to create a
colocation environment, through Partial Cabinet Solution bundles with
options with respect to cabinet footprint and network connections at a
reduced MRC for the first 24 months. Such Users may choose to pass on
such cost savings to their customers.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges offer co-location services as a means to facilitate the
trading and other market activities of those market participants who
believe that co-location enhances the efficiency of their operations.
Accordingly, fees charged for co-location services are constrained by
the active competition for the order flow of, and other business from,
such market participants. If a particular exchange charges excessive
fees for co-location services, affected market participants will opt to
terminate their co-location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt
a possible range of alternative strategies, including placing their
servers in a physically proximate location outside the exchange's data
center (which could be a competing exchange), or pursuing strategies
less dependent upon the lower exchange-to-participant latency
associated with co-location. Accordingly, the exchange charging
excessive fees would stand to lose not only co-location revenues but
also the liquidity of the formerly co-located trading firms, which
could have additional follow-on effects on the market share and revenue
of the affected exchange. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its services and related
fees and credits to remain competitive with other exchanges.
    For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule changes reflect this competitive environment.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \16\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \17\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSE-2017-62 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-NYSE-2017-62. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2017-62 and should be submitted on
or before January 2, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-26685 Filed 12-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53396-53399]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23045]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 541

[Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0046]
RIN 2127-AL72

Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Final Listing of
2017 Light Duty Truck Lines Subject to the Requirements of This
Standard and Exempted Vehicle Lines for Model Year 2017

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S.
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule announces the annual update to the listings of
light duty truck lines subject to the requirements and vehicle lines
exempted from the requirements in the theft prevention standard.
Specifically, this final rule announces that there were no new light-
duty truck (LDT) lines added because none became subject to the theft
prevention standard for MY 2017. This final rule also identifies those
vehicle lines exempted from parts marking requirements and removes the
names of vehicle lines whose production has been discontinued more than
5 years.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 23, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hisham Mohamed, Consumer Standards
Division, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, NHTSA, West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, (NRM-310,
Room W43-437) Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Mohamed's telephone number is
202-366-0307. His fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The theft prevention standard (49 CFR part
541) applies to (1) all passenger car lines; (2) all multipurpose
passenger vehicle (MPV) lines with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR)
of 6,000 pounds or less; (3) low-theft light-duty truck (LDT) lines
with a GVWR of 6,000 pounds or less that have major parts that are
interchangeable with a majority of the covered major parts of passenger
car or MPV lines; and (4) high-theft LDT lines with a GVWR of 6,000
pounds or less.
    The purpose of the theft prevention standard is to reduce the
incidence of motor vehicle theft by facilitating the tracing and
recovery of parts from stolen vehicles. The standard seeks to
facilitate such tracing by requiring that vehicle identification
numbers (VINs), VIN derivative numbers, or other symbols be placed on
major component vehicle parts. The theft prevention standard requires
motor vehicle manufacturers to inscribe or affix VINs onto covered
original equipment major component parts, and to inscribe or affix a
symbol identifying the manufacturer and a common symbol identifying the
replacement component parts for those original equipment parts, on all
vehicle lines subject to the requirements of the standard.
    Section 33104(d) provides that once a line has become subject to
the theft prevention standard, the line remains subject to the
requirements of the standard unless it is exempted under section 33106.
Section 33106 provides that a manufacturer may petition annually to
have one vehicle line exempted from the requirements of section 33104,
if the line is equipped with an antitheft device meeting certain
conditions as standard equipment. The exemption is granted if NHTSA

determines that the antitheft device is likely to be as effective as
compliance with the theft prevention standard in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle thefts.
    The agency annually publishes the names of those LDT lines that
have been determined to be high theft pursuant to 49 CFR part 541, LDT
lines that have been determined to have major parts that are
interchangeable with a majority of the covered major parts of passenger
car or MPV lines, and vehicle lines that are exempted from the theft
prevention standard under section 33104. Appendix A to part 541
identifies those LDT lines that are or will be subject to the theft
prevention standard beginning in a given model year. Appendix A-I to
part 541 lists those vehicle lines that are or have been exempted from
the theft prevention standard.
    For MY 2017, there are no new LDT lines that will be subject to the
theft prevention standard in accordance with the procedures published
in 49 CFR part 542. However, appendix A to part 541 is amended to
remove two vehicle lines that have been discontinued more than 5 years
ago: The Chevrolet S-10 and the GMC Sonoma.
    For MY 2017, appendix A-1 identifies those vehicle lines that have
been exempted by the agency from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 and is amended to include eleven vehicle lines newly exempted in
full. The eleven exempted vehicle lines are the BMW MINI Countryman
(MPV), Chevrolet Bolt, Fiat 124 Spyder, Honda Pilot, Hyundai IONIQ,
Jaguar XE, Jeep Compass, Lexus RX, Lincoln MKC, Maserati Levante (MPV)
and the Tesla Model 3.
    The agency is removing the Lincoln Town Car, Mercury Mariner,
Mercury Grand Marquis, Buick Lucerne, Pontiac G6, Saturn Aura, Mazda
Tribute and Nissan Versa (2008-2011), vehicle lines from the appendix
A-I listing because they have been discontinued more than 5 years ago.
The agency is also removing the Cadillac Eldorado, Cadillac Concours,
Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight, Pontiac Firebird, Chevrolet Camaro (1990-2002)
and Oldsmobile Eighty-Eight vehicle lines from the appendix A-II
listing because they have also been discontinued more than 5 years ago.
The agency will continue to maintain a comprehensive database of all
exemptions on our website. However, we believe that re-publishing a
list containing vehicle lines that have not been in production for a
considerable period of time is unnecessary.
    The vehicle lines listed as being exempt from the standard have
previously been exempted in accordance with the procedures of 49 CFR
part 543 and 49 U.S.C. 33106. Therefore, NHTSA finds good cause under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) that notice and opportunity for comment on these
listings are unnecessary. Further, public comment on the listing of
selections and exemptions is not contemplated by 49 U.S.C. chapter 331.
For the same reasons, since this revised listing only informs the
public of previous agency actions and does not impose additional
obligations on any party, NHTSA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3) that the amendment made by this document should be effective
as soon as it is published in the Federal Register.

Regulatory Impacts

    A. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563 and the Department
of Transportation's regulatory policies provide for making
determinations on whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
to the requirements of the Executive Orders. The Order defines a
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    This final rule was not reviewed under Executive Order 12866. It is
not significant within the meaning of the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures. It will not impose any new burdens on vehicle
manufacturers. This document informs the public of previously granted
exemptions. Since the only purpose of this final rule is to inform the
public of previous actions taken by the agency no new costs or burdens
will result.
    B. Executive Order 13771
    Executive Order 13771 titled ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,'' directs that, unless prohibited by law, whenever an
executive department or agency publicly proposes for notice and comment
or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least
two existing regulations to be repealed. In addition, any new
incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent
permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs. Only
those rules deemed significant under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' are subject to these
requirements. As discussed above, this rule is not a significant rule
under Executive Order 12866 and, accordingly, is not subject to the
offset requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    C. National Environmental Policy Act
    NHTSA has analyzed this final rule for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that implementation
of this action will not have any significant impact on the quality of
the human environment as it merely informs the public about previous
agency actions. Accordingly, no environmental assessment is required.
    D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    The agency has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has
determined that it does not have sufficient Federal implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. As discussed above, this
final rule only provides better information to the public about
previous agency actions.
    E. Unfunded Mandates Act
    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually
($120.7 million as adjusted annually for inflation with base year of
1995). The assessment may be combined with other assessments, as it is
here.
    This final rule will not result in expenditures by State, local or
tribal governments or automobile manufacturers and/or their suppliers
of more than $120.7 million annually. This document informs the public
of previously granted exemptions. Since the only purpose of this final
rule is to inform the public of previous actions taken by the agency,
no new costs or burdens will result.
    F. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' \1\
the agency has considered whether this final rule has any retroactive
effect. We conclude that it would not have such an effect as it only
informs the public of previous agency actions. In accordance with
section 33118 when the Theft Prevention Standard is in effect, a State
or political subdivision of a State may not have a different motor
vehicle theft prevention standard for a motor vehicle or major
replacement part. Title 49 U.S.C. 33117 provides that judicial review
of this rule may be obtained pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 32909. Section 32909
does not require submission of a petition for reconsideration or other
administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    The Department of Transportation has not submitted an information
collection request to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). This rule
does not impose any new information collection requirements on
manufacturers.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 541

    Administrative practice and procedure, Labeling, Motor vehicles,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 541 is amended as
follows:

PART 541--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 541 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 33101, 33102, 33103, 33104, 33105 and
33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

Appendix A to Part 541--[Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Appendix A to part 541 is removed and reserved.

0
3. Appendix A-I to part 541 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix A-I to Part 541--Lines With Antitheft Devices Which Are
Exempted From the Parts-Marking Requirements of This Standard Pursuant
to 49 CFR Part 543

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Manufacturer                         Subject lines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BMW.....................................  MINI, MINI Countryman
                                           (MPV),\1\ X1 (MPV), X1 Car
                                           Line (2012-2015), X3, X4, X5,
                                           Z4, 1 Car Line, 3 Car Line, 4
                                           Car Line, 5 Car Line, 6 Car
                                           Line, 7 Car Line.
CHRYSLER................................  200, 300C, Dodge Charger,
                                           Dodge Challenger, Dodge Dart,
                                           Dodge Journey, Fiat 500, Jeep
                                           Cherokee, Jeep Compass,\1\
                                           Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep
                                           Patriot, Jeep Wrangler, Town
                                           and Country MPV.
FORD MOTOR CO...........................  C-Max, Edge, Escape, Explorer,
                                           Fiesta, Focus, Fusion,
                                           Lincoln MKC,\1\ Lincoln MKX,
                                           Mustang, Taurus.
GENERAL MOTORS..........................  Buick LaCrosse/Regal, Buick
                                           Verano, Cadillac ATS,
                                           Cadillac CTS, Cadillac DTS,
                                           Cadillac SRX, Cadillac XTS,
                                           Chevrolet Bolt,\1\ Chevrolet
                                           Camaro, Chevrolet Corvette,
                                           Chevrolet Cruze, Chevrolet
                                           Equinox, Chevrolet Impala/
                                           Monte Carlo, Chevrolet
                                           Malibu, Chevrolet Sonic,
                                           Chevrolet Spark, GMC Terrain.
HONDA...................................  Accord, Acura TL, Civic, CRV,
                                           Pilot.\1\
HYUNDAI.................................  Azera, Equus, Genesis,
                                           IONIQ.\1\
JAGUAR..................................  F-Type, XE,\1\ XF, XJ, XK,
                                           Land Rover Discovery Sport,
                                           Land Rover LR2, Land Rover
                                           Range Rover Evoque.
MASERATI................................  Ghibli, Levante (SUV),\1\
                                           Quattroporte.
MAZDA...................................  2, 3, 5, 6, CX-3, CX-5, CX-7,
                                           CX-9, Fiat 124 Spyder,\1\ MX-
                                           5 Miata.
MERCEDES-BENZ...........................  smart USA fortwo, smart Line
                                           Chassis. SL-Line Chassis (SL-
                                           Class) (the models within
                                           this line are): SL400, SL550,
                                           SL 63/AMG, SL 65/AMG. SLK-
                                           Line Chassis (SLK-Class) (the
                                           models within this line are):
                                           SLK 250, SLK 300, SLK 350,
                                           SLK 55 AMG. S-Line Chassis (S/
                                           CL/S-Coupe Class) (the models
                                           within this line are): S450,
                                           S500, S550, S600, S55, S63
                                           AMG, S65 AMG, CL55, CL65,
                                           CL500, CL550, CL600. NGCC
                                           Chassis Line (CLA/GLA/B-
                                           Class) (the models within
                                           this line are): B250e,
                                           CLA250, CLA250 4MATIC, CLA45
                                           4MATIC AMG, GLA250, GLA45
                                           AMG. C-Line Chassis (C-Class/
                                           CLK/GLK-Class) (the models
                                           within this line are): C63
                                           AMG, C240, C250, C300, C350,
                                           CLK 350, CLK 550, CLK 63AMG,
                                           GLK250, GLK350. E-Line
                                           Chassis (E-Class/CLS Class)
                                           (the models within this line
                                           are): E55, E63 AMG, E320
                                           BLUETEC, E350 BLUETEC, E320/
                                           E320DT CDi, E350/E500/E550,
                                           E400 HYBRID, CLS400, CLS500,
                                           CLS55 AMG, CLS63 AMG.
MITSUBISHI..............................  Eclipse, Endeavor, Galant,
                                           iMiEV, Lancer, Outlander,
                                           Outlander Sport, Mirage.
NISSAN..................................  Altima, Cube, Juke, Leaf,
                                           Maxima, Murano, NV200 Taxi,
                                           Pathfinder, Quest, Rogue,
                                           Sentra, Versa Hatchback,
                                           Infiniti G (2003-2013),
                                           Infiniti M (2004-2013),
                                           Infiniti Q70, Infiniti Q50/
                                           60, Infiniti QX60.
PORSCHE.................................  911, Boxster/Cayman, Macan,
                                           Panamera.
SAAB....................................  9-3, 9-5.
SUBARU..................................  Forester, Impreza, Legacy, B9
                                           Tribeca, Outback, WRX, XV
                                           Crosstrek.
SUZUKI..................................  Kizashi.
TESLA...................................  Model 3,\1\ Model S, Model X.
TOYOTA..................................  Camry, Corolla, Highlander,
                                           Lexus ES, Lexus GS, Lexus LS,
                                           Lexus RX,\1\ Prius, RAV4,
                                           Sienna.
VOLKSWAGEN..............................  Audi A3, Audi A4, A4 Allroad
                                           MPV, Audi A6, Audi A8, Audi
                                           Q3, Audi Q5, Audi TT, Beetle,
                                           Eos, Golf/Rabbit/GTI/R32,
                                           Jetta, Beetle, Passat,
                                           Tiguan.
VOLVO...................................  S60.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Granted an exemption from the parts marking requirements beginning
  with MY 2017.

Appendix A-II to Part 541--[Removed and Reserved]

0
4. Appendix A-II to part 541 is removed and reserved.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.5.
Heidi R. King,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-23045 Filed 10-22-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 224 (Monday, November 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71991-71993]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29939]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2011-0038; OMB No. 1660-0034]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request, Emergency Management Institute Course Evaluation Form

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a proposed revision of a currently approved information
collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
this notice seeks comments concerning the Emergency Management
Institute Course Evaluation Form, which is used

to evaluate the quality of course deliveries, facilities, and
instructors at the Emergency Management Institute (EMI).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 20, 2012.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov under
Docket ID FEMA-2011-0038. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Regulatory Affairs Division,
Office of Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Room 835,
Washington, DC 20472-3100.
    (3) Facsimile. Submit comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Email. Submit comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include Docket
ID FEMA-2011-0038 in the subject line.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline Martin, Training Support
Specialist, Emergency Management Institute, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for additional information. You may contact
the Records Management Division for copies of the proposed collection
of information at facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EMI develops courses and administers
resident and nonresident training programs in areas such as natural
hazards, technical hazards, instructional methodology, professional
development, leadership, exercise design and evaluation, information
technology, public information, integrated emergency management, and
train-the-trainer. In order to meet current information needs of EMI
staff and management, EMI uses course evaluation forms to identify
problems with course materials, delivery, facilities, and instructors.
Information received through the course evaluations is used to
recommend revisions to course materials, student selection criteria,
training experience, and classroom environment. Section 611 of the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 5196) authorizes training programs for emergency preparedness
for State, local, Tribal and territorial government personnel.

Collection of Information

    Title: Emergency Management Institute Course Evaluation Form.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0034.
    Form Titles and Numbers: FEMA Form 092-0-3, Emergency Management
Institute Course Evaluation Form.
    Abstract: Students attending the Emergency Management Institute
resident program courses at the Federal Emergency Management Agency's
National Emergency Training Center will be asked to complete a course
evaluation form upon completion of each course they attend. The
information will be used by EMI staff and management to identify
problems with course materials, and will evaluate the quality of the
course delivery facilities, and instructors.
    Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Government, Individuals or
households.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,746.

                                                       Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Number of                                              Total                     Total
                                Form name/form    Number of    responses      Total     Avg. burden per  response     annual    Avg. hourly     annual
     Type of  respondent              No.        respondents      per       number of           (in hours)          burden (in   wage rate    respondent
                                                               respondent   responses                                 hours)                     cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Local or Tribal         Emergency              17,500            1       17,500   .05 (3 minutes).........          875       $37.25   $32,593.75
 Government.                    Management
                                Institute
                                Residential
                                Course
                                Evaluation Form/
                                FEMA Form 092-0-
                                3 (electronic).
Individuals or Households....  Emergency               2,500            1        2,500   .05 (3 minutes).........          125        29.89     3,736.25
                                Management
                                Institute
                                Residential
                                Course
                                Evaluation Form/
                                FEMA Form 092-0-
                                3 (electronic).
State, Local or Tribal         Emergency              14,444            1       14,444   .1667 (10 minutes)......        2,408        37.25    89,698.00
 Government.                    Management
                                Institute
                                Residential
                                Course
                                Evaluation Form/
                                FEMA Form 092-0-
                                3 (paper).

Individuals or Households....  Emergency               2,000            1        2,000   .1667 (10 minutes)......          333        29.89     9,953.37
                                Management
                                Institute
                                Residential
                                Course
                                Evaluation Form/
                                FEMA Form 092-0-
                                3 (paper).
                                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................  ................       36,444  ...........       36,444  .........................        3,741  ...........   135,981.37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $135,981.37. There is no estimated annual cost to
respondents for operations and maintenance costs for technical
services. There are no annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to
the Federal government is $77,775.50.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) Evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Gary L. Anderson,
Acting Chief Administrative Officer, Mission Support Bureau, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2011-29939 Filed 11-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-72-P