[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13534-13537]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06299]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82941; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2018-003]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Paragraph (c)(5) of Exchange Rule 11.9 Describing the Operation of
Minimum Quantity Orders

March 23, 2018.
    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 March 16, 2018, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend paragraph (c)(5) of Exchange
Rule 11.9 describing the operation of Minimum Quantity Orders.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Rule 11.9(c)(5) for a complete description of
the operation of Minimum Quantity Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.markets.cboe.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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend paragraph (c)(5) of Exchange Rule
11.9 describing the operation of Minimum Quantity Orders by removing
language that provided for the re-pricing of incoming Minimum Quantity
Orders to avoid an internally crossed book. As a result of this change,
the Exchange proposes to specify within the rule when a Minimum
Quantity Order would not be eligible to trade to prevent executions
from occurring that may be inconsistent with intra-market price
priority or that would cause a non-displayed order to trade ahead of a
displayed order.
    In sum, a Minimum Quantity Order is a non-displayed order that
enables a User \6\ to specify a minimum share amount at which the order
will execute.\7\ A Minimum Quantity Order will not execute unless the
volume of contra-side liquidity available to execute against the order
meets or exceeds the designated minimum size. By default, a Minimum
Quantity Order will execute upon entry against a single order or
multiple aggregated orders simultaneously. The Exchange recently
amended the operation of Minimum Quantity Orders to permit a User to
alternatively specify the order not execute against multiple aggregated
orders simultaneously and that the minimum quantity condition be
satisfied by each individual order resting on the BYX Book.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The term ``User'' is defined as ``any Member or Sponsored
Participant who is authorized to obtain access to the System
pursuant to Rule 11.3.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(cc).
    \7\ The Exchange will only honor a specified minimum quantity on
BYX Only Orders that are non-displayed or Immediate-Or-Cancel and
will disregard a minimum quantity on any other order. See Exchange
Rule 11.9(c)(5).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81806 (October 3,
2017), 82 FR 47047 (October 10, 2017) (SR-BatsBYX-2017-24). This
functionality is pending deployment and the implementation date will
be announced via a trading notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also recently amended the operation of Minimum
Quantity Orders to re-price incoming Minimum Quantity Orders where that
order may cross an order posted on the BYX Book.\9\ Specifically, where
there is insufficient size to satisfy an incoming order's minimum
quantity condition and that incoming order, if posted at its limit
price, would cross an order(s), whether displayed or non-displayed,
resting on the BYX Book, the order with the minimum quantity condition
would be re-priced to and ranked at the locking price. This
functionality has not yet been implemented \10\ and the Exchange now
proposes to amend paragraph (c)(5) of Rule 11.9 to remove this re-
pricing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.
    \10\ See supra note 8. Exchange Rule 11.9(c)(5) does not require
re-pricing where the Minimum Quantity Order is resting on the BYX
Book. As such, an internally crossed book may occur where the
incoming order is of insufficient size to satisfy the resting
order's minimum quantity condition and that incoming order, if
posted at its limit price, would cross that order with a minimum
quantity condition resting on the BYX Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the above change, the Exchange proposes to amend
paragraph (c)(5) of Rule 11.9 to describe when a Minimum Quantity Order
will not be eligible to trade to prevent executions from occurring that
may be inconsistent with intra-market price priority or would result in
a non-displayed order trading ahead of a same-priced, same-side
displayed order.\11\ The Exchange would not permit a Minimum Quantity
Order that crosses other displayed or non-displayed orders on the BYX
Book to trade at prices that are worse than the price of such contra-
side orders. The Exchange would also not permit a resting Minimum
Quantity Order to trade at a price equal to a contra-side displayed
order. This proposal is based on recently adopted NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca'') Rule 7.31-E(i)(3)(C).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Exchange Rule 11.12(a) states that orders on the BYX Book
are ranked and maintained by the Exchange according to price-time
priority. Exchange Rule 11.12(a) further prohibits a non-displayed
order from trading ahead of a same-side, same-priced displayed
order. This proposed rule change adds language to Exchange Rule
11.9(c)(5) to clarify this priority scheme during an internally
crossed market.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82504 (January 16,
2018), 83 FR 3038 (January 22, 2018) (SR-NYSEArca-2018-01) (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 7.31-E Relating to Mid-Point Liquidity Orders and the
Minimum Trade Size Modifier and Rule 7.36-E To Add a Definition of
``Aggressing Order'').

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

    Paragraph (c)(5) of Rule 11.9 would state that a Minimum Quantity
Order to buy (sell) that is ranked in the BYX Book will not be eligible
to trade: (i) At a price equal to or above (below) any sell (buy)
orders that are displayed and that have a ranked price equal to or
below (above) the price of such Minimum Quantity Order; or (ii) at a
price above (below) any sell (buy) order that is non-displayed and has
a ranked price below (above) the price of such Minimum Quantity
Order.\13\ However, a Minimum Quantity Order that crosses an order on
BYX Book may execute at a price less aggressive than its ranked price
against an incoming order so long as such execution is consistent with
the above restrictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ A Minimum Quantity Order to buy (sell) may execute at a
price above (below) any sell (buy) order that is Non-Displayed and
has a ranked price below (above) the price of such Minimum Quantity
Order if that Non-Displayed order itself included a minimum quantity
condition that prevented it from executing. See infra note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples describe the proposed operation of a Minimum
Quantity Order during an internally crossed market. This first example
addresses intra-market priority amongst a Minimum Quantity Order and
other non-displayed orders in an internally crossed market as well as
when an execution may occur at prices less aggressive than the resting
order's ranked price. Assume the NBBO is $10.10 by $10.16. A non-
displayed order to sell 50 shares at $10.12 is resting on the BYX Book
(``Order A''). A non-displayed order to sell 25 shares at $10.11 is
also resting on the BYX Book (``Order B''). The Exchange receives a
Mid-Point Peg \14\ order to buy at $10.14 with a minimum quantity
condition to execute against a single order of 100 shares (``Order
C''). Because Order C's minimum quantity condition cannot be met, Order
C will not trade with Orders A or B and will be posted and ranked on
the BYX Book at $10.13, the midpoint of the NBBO. The Exchange now has
a non-displayed order crossing both non-displayed orders on the BYX
Book. If the Exchange then receives a non-displayed order to sell for
100 shares at $10.11 (``Order D''),\15\ although Order D would be
marketable against Order C at $10.13, it would not trade at $10.13
because it is above the price of all resting sell orders. Order D will
instead execute against Order C at $10.11, receiving price improvement
relative to the midpoint of the NBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Exchange Rule 11.9(c)(9).
    \15\ On NYSE Arca, Order D will be posted to the NYSE Arca book
at $10.11 and not execute against Order C at $10.13. See supra note
12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This second example addresses intra-market priority amongst
displayed orders, Minimum Quantity Orders and other non-displayed
orders. The Exchange notes that the below behavior is not unique to an
internally crossed market as the Exchange's priority rule, 11.12(a),
currently prohibits non-displayed orders, including Minimum Quantity
Orders, from trading ahead of same-priced, same-side displayed orders.
Assume the NBBO is $10.00 by $10.04. A non-displayed order to buy 500
shares at $10.00 is resting on the BYX Book (``Order A''). A displayed
order to buy 100 shares at $10.00 is then entered and posted to the BYX
Book (``Order B''). The Exchange receives a non-displayed order to sell
600 shares at $10.00 with a minimum quantity condition to execute
against a single order of 500 shares (``Order C''). Although Order A
satisfies Order C's minimum quantity condition and has time priority
ahead of Order B, no execution occurs because Order B is a displayed
order and has execution priority over Order A, a non-displayed order.
Order C does not execute against Order B because Order B does not
satisfy Order C's minimum quantity condition. Order C is then posted to
the BYX Book at $10.00, non-displayed.
    The Exchange also proposes two clarifying changes to paragraph
(c)(5) of Exchange Rule 11.9. The rule currently states that a Minimum
Quantity Order cedes execution priority when it would lock an order
against which it would otherwise execute if it were not for the minimum
execution size restriction.\16\ The Exchange now proposes to add
additional language to the rule to clarify when a resting non-displayed
order may cede execution priority to a subsequent arriving same-side
order. As amended, paragraph (h) of Rule 11.6 would state that if a
resting non-displayed sell (buy) order did not meet the minimum
quantity condition of a same-priced resting Minimum Quantity Order to
buy (sell), a subsequently arriving sell (buy) order that meets the
minimum quantity condition will trade ahead of such resting non-
displayed sell (buy) order at that price. For example, assume the NBBO
is $10.00 by $10.10 and no orders are resting on the BYX Book. A non-
displayed order to buy 700 shares at $10.10 with a minimum quantity
condition to execute against a single order of 500 shares is resting on
the BYX Book (Order A). A non-displayed order to sell 100 shares at
$10.10 is then entered and posted to the BYX Book (Order B). Order B
does not execute against Order A because Order B does not satisfy Order
A's single minimum quantity condition of 500 shares. As a result, Order
B is posted to the BYX Book at $10.10, creating an internally locked
book. An order to sell 500 shares at $10.10 is then entered and
executes against Order A at $10.10 for 500 shares because the incoming
order is of sufficient size to satisfy Order A's minimum quantity
condition of 500 shares. This clarification is also based on recently
adopted NYSE Arca Rule 7.31-E(i)(3)(E)(ii).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange proposes to amend this provision to clarify
that a Minimum Quantity Order would cede execution priority when it
would also cross an order against which it would otherwise execute
if it were not for the minimum execution size restriction.
    \17\ Supra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to clarify that an incoming Minimum
Quantity Order would be canceled where, if posted, it would cross the
displayed price of an order on the BYX Book.\18\ Conversely, an
incoming Minimum Quantity Order would be posted to the BYX Book where
it would not cross the displayed price of a resting contra-side order.
For example, an order to buy at $11.00 with a minimum quantity
condition of 500 shares is entered (Order A) and there is a displayed
order resting on the BYX Book to sell 200 shares at $10.99 (Order B).
Oder A would be cancelled because it crosses the displayed price of
Order B and Order B does not contain sufficient size to satisfy Order
A's minimum quantity condition of 500 shares. However, should Order A
be priced at $10.99, it would not be cancelled and would be posted to
the BYX Book, resulting in an internally locked market. Order A would
not be executable at that price because it is priced equal to a contra-
side displayed order. An internally crossed market may subsequently
occur should an order to sell priced more aggressively than Order A be
entered but not be of sufficient size to satisfy Order A's minimum
quantity condition of 500 shares (e.g., an order to sell 100 shares at
$10.98) and posted to the BYX Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ A Minimum Quantity Order will be repriced in accordance
with Exchange Rule 11.9(g)(4) where it would cross a protected quote
displayed on an away market center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \20\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the

mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed
rule change removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system because it would ensure
that Minimum Quantity Orders do not trade through displayed orders or
violate intra-market price priority. Specifically, the proposed rule
change would protect displayed orders by preventing a Minimum Quantity
Order from executing where it is locked by a contra-side Displayed
order. The proposed rule change protects intra-market price priority by
preventing a resting Minimum Quantity Order from executing where it is
crossed by either a displayed or non-displayed order on the BYX Book.
The proposed clarifications remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because they provide additional specificity regarding the operation of
a Minimum Quantity Order, thereby avoiding potential investor
confusion. In particular, the Exchange believes it is reasonable for a
resting non-displayed order to cede execution priority to a subsequent
arriving same-side order where that order is of sufficient size to
satisfy a resting contra-side order's minimum quantity condition
because doing so facilitates executions in accordance with the terms
and conditions of each order. The proposed rule change is also
substantially similar to a proposed rule change recently submitted by
NYSE Arca for immediate effectiveness and published by the
Commission.\21\ The only differences between the proposed rule change
and that of NYSE Arca is that: (i) NYSE Arca does not cancel a minimum
quantity order that would cross a displayed order on the NYSE Arca
book; and (ii) NYSE Arca will not execute resting orders at prices less
aggressive than their limit prices in crossed markets. The Exchange
believes that these differences are immaterial because they are
designed to reduce the occurrences of internally crossed markets and
facilitate executions that may not otherwise occur. These differences
will also continue to ensure that executions occur in accordance with
intra-market price priority on the Exchange while accounting for the
differences in functionality and order types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \21\ See supra notes 12 and 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. On
the contrary, the proposed rule change is not designed to address any
competitive issues because it is intended to provide clarity regarding
the operation of Minimum Quantity Orders and when such orders are
eligible to trade and not trade through displayed orders or violate
intra-market price priority.

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

    No comments were solicited or received on the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (A)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (B) impose any significant burden on competition; and (C) by
its terms, become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed or such shorter time as the Commission may designate it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \22\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\23\ the Exchange has
designated this rule filing as non-controversial. The Exchange has
given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.

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-CboeBYX-2018-003 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-CboeBYX-2018-003. 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-CboeBYX-2018-003, and should be
submitted on or before April 19, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-06299 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 141)]
[Notices]
[Page 36807-36809]
[DOCID:fr24jy09-158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2009-0001-N-17]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and its
implementing regulations, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
hereby announces that it is seeking renewal of the following currently
approved information collection activities. Before submitting these
information collection requirements for clearance by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), FRA is soliciting public comment on
specific aspects of the activities identified below.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than September 22, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on any or all of the following
proposed activities by mail to either: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of
Safety, Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC
20590, or Ms. Nakia Jackson, Office of Information Technology, RAD-20,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop
35, Washington, DC 20590. Commenters requesting FRA to acknowledge
receipt of their respective comments must include a self-addressed
stamped postcard stating, ``Comments on OMB control number 2130-0509.''
Alternatively, comments may be transmitted via facsimile to (202) 493-
6216 or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via e-mail to Mr. Brogan at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or to Ms. Jackson at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Please refer to the assigned OMB control number in any correspondence
submitted. FRA will summarize comments received in response to this
notice in a subsequent notice and include them in its information
collection submission to OMB for approval.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Safety,

Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC
20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) or Ms. Nakia Jackson, Office of
Information Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave., SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:
(202) 493-6470). (These telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law No. 104-13, Sec.  2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as
revised at 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5
CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to provide 60-days notice to
the public for comment on information collection activities before
seeking approval for reinstatement or renewal by OMB. 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A); 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), 1320.10(e)(1), 1320.12(a).
Specifically, FRA invites interested respondents to comment on the
following summary of proposed information collection activities
regarding (i) Whether the information collection activities are
necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions, including whether
the activities will have practical utility; (ii) the accuracy of FRA's
estimates of the burden of the information collection activities,
including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (iii) ways for FRA to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and (iv) ways
for FRA to minimize the burden of information collection activities on
the public by automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of responses). See 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)(i)-(iv); 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1)(i)-(iv). FRA believes that
soliciting public comment will promote its efforts to reduce the
administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the collection of
information mandated by Federal regulations. In summary, FRA reasons
that comments received will advance three objectives: (i) Reduce
reporting burdens; (ii) ensure that it organizes information collection
requirements in a ``user friendly'' format to improve the use of such
information; and (iii) accurately assess the resources expended to
retrieve and produce information requested. See 44 U.S.C. 3501.
    Below is a brief summary of the currently approved information
collection activities that FRA will submit for clearance by OMB as
required under the PRA:
    Title: State Safety Participation Regulations and Remedial Actions.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0509.
    Abstract: The collection of information is set forth under 49 CFR
part 212, and requires qualified State inspectors to provide various
reports to FRA for monitoring and enforcement purposes concerning State
investigative, inspection, and surveillance activities regarding
railroad compliance with Federal railroad safety laws and regulations.
Additionally, railroads are required to report to FRA actions taken to
remedy certain alleged violations of law.
    Form Number(s): FRA F 6180.33/61/67/96/96A/109/110/111/112.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Respondent Universe: States and Railroads.
    Reporting Burden:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Respondent         Total annual      Average time  per     Total annual
           CFR section                 universe            responses           response          burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application For Participation...  15 States.........  15 updates........  2.53 hours........  38
Training Funding Agreement......  30 States.........  30 agreements.....  1 hour............  30
State Inspector Travel Vouchers.  30 States.........  300 vouchers......  1 hour............  300
Annual Work Plan................  30 States.........  30 reports........  15 hours..........  450
Inspection Form (Form FRA F       30 States.........  18,000 forms......  15 minutes........  4,500
 6180.96).
Violation Report--Motive, Power,  19 States.........  600 reports.......  4 hours...........  2,400
 and Equipment Regulations (Form
 FRA F 6180.109).
Violation Report--Operating       16 States.........  50 reports........  4 hours...........  200
 Practices Regulations (Form FRA
 F 6180.67).
Violation Report--Hazardous       14 States.........  150 reports.......  4 hours...........  600
 Materials Regulations (Form FRA
 F 6180.110).
Violation Report--Hours of        16 States.........  21 reports........  4 hours...........  84
 Service Law (F 6180.33).
Violation Report--Accident/       16 States.........  10 reports........  4 hours...........  40
 Incident Reporting Rules (Form
 FRA F 6180.61).
Violation Report--Track Safety    24 States.........  300 reports.......  4 hours...........  1,200
 Regulations (Form FRA F
 6180.111).
Violation Report--Signal and      13 States.........  10 reports........  4 hours...........  40
 Train Control Regulations (Form
 FRA F 6180.112).
Remedial Actions Reports........  573 Railroads.....  3,933 reports.....  15 minutes........  983
Violation Report Challenge......  573 Railroads.....  813 challenges....  1 hour............  813
Delayed Reports.................  573 Railroads.....  393 reports.......  30 minutes........  197
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Responses: 24,655.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 11,875 hours.
    Status: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b),
1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs all interested parties that it may not
conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC on July 20, 2009.
Martin Eble,
Acting Director, Office of Financial Management, Federal Railroad
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-17612 Filed 7-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 64)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 17926-17929]
[DOCID:fr02ap08-15]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket No. FEMA-8017]

Suspension of Community Eligibility

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule identifies communities, where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP), that are scheduled for suspension on the effective
dates listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the
floodplain management requirements of the program. If the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the
community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior
to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension
will not occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in
the Federal Register on a subsequent date.

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

ADDRESSES: If you want to determine whether a particular community was
suspended on the suspension date, contact the appropriate FEMA Regional
Office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Stearrett, Mitigation
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP enables property owners to purchase
flood insurance which is generally not otherwise available. In return,

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

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

    Flood insurance, Floodplains.

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

PART 64--[AMENDED]

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

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

Sec.  64.6  [Amended]

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Effective date
                                                 authorization/
                                   Community    cancellation of    Current effective map   Date certain federal
       State and location             No.        sale of flood             date            assistance no longer
                                                  insurance in                              available in SFHAs
                                                   community
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Region III

Virginia: Bland County,                510017   July 29, 1975,     Apr. 2, 2008.........   Apr. 2, 2008.
 Unincorporated Areas.                          Emerg; January
                                                5, 1989, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.

           Region IV

Kentucky:
    Breathitt County,                  210023   April 20, 1977,    ......do*............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      Emerg; September
                                                27, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Jackson, City of, Breathitt        210024   July 21, 1975,     ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; September
                                                27, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.

            Region V

Wisconsin:
    Bangor, Village of, La             550218   January 20,        ......do.............   Do.
     Crosse County.                             1975, Emerg;
                                                January 2, 1981,
                                                Reg; April 02,
                                                2008, Susp.
    Cambria, Village of,               550057   June 11, 1975,     ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; September
                                                18, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Columbia County,                   550581   July 31, 1975,     ......do.............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      Emerg; April 15,
                                                1980, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Columbus, City of, Columbia        550058   October 7, 1974,   ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; December
                                                1, 1981, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.

    Doylestown, Village of,            550059   April 30, 1976,    ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; September
                                                18, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Fall River, Village of,            550060   April 17, 1975,    ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; September
                                                4, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Holmen, Village of, La             550219   June 27, 1975,     ......do.............   Do.
     Crosse County.                             Emerg; April 20,
                                                1979, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    La Crosse, City of, La             555562   December 4,        ......do.............   Do.
     Crosse County.                             1970, Emerg;
                                                January 15,
                                                1971, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    La Crosse County,                  550217   March 26, 1971,    ......do.............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      Emerg; March 15,
                                                1984, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Lodi, City of, Columbia            550061   June 13, 1974,     ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; November
                                                15, 1984, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Onalaska, City of, La              550221   July 3, 1975,      ......do.............   Do.
     Crosse County.                             Emerg; September
                                                16, 1981, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Pardeeville, Village of,           550062   August 19, 1976,   ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; August
                                                15, 1983, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Portage, City of, Columbia         550063   June 11, 1974,     ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; August
                                                15, 1983, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Poynette, Village of,              550064   July 29, 1975,     ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; September
                                                18, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    West Salem, Village of, La         550560   April 17, 1986,    ......do.............   Do.
     Crosse County.                             Emerg; April 17,
                                                1986, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Wisconsin Dells, City of,          550065   July 17, 1975,     ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; December
                                                18, 1984, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Wyocena, Village of,               550066   May 22, 1975,      ......do.............   Do.
     Columbia County.                           Emerg; January
                                                18, 1984, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.

           Region VI

Oklahoma:
    Avant, Town of, Osage              400147   July 7, 1975,      ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 16,
                                                1980, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Barnsdall, City of, Osage          400148   July 3, 1975,      ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 16,
                                                1980, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Bartlesville, City of,             400220   October 18,        ......do.............   Do.
     Osage County.                              1973, Emerg;
                                                July 16, 1980,
                                                Reg; April 02,
                                                2008, Susp.
    Hominy, City of, Osage             400151   April 16, 1976,    ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; November
                                                19, 1980, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Pawhuska, City of, Osage           400152   May 6, 1975,       ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 16,
                                                1980, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Ponca City, City of, Osage         400080   March 6, 1974,     ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 2,
                                                1980, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Sand Springs, City of,             400211   August 5, 1974,    ......do.............   Do.
     Osage County.                              Emerg; June 15,
                                                1981, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Shidler, City of, Osage            400410   April 11, 1977,    ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; July 3,
                                                1985, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Tulsa, City of, Osage              405381   November 20,       ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    1970, Emerg;
                                                August 13, 1971,
                                                Reg; April 02,
                                                2008, Susp.
Texas:
    El Cenizo, City of, Webb           480070   ------------ ,     ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; June 21,
                                                2007, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Laredo, City of, Webb              480651   August 7, 1975,    ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; May 17,
                                                1982, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Rio Bravo, City of, Webb           481684   ------------ ,     ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; September
                                                15, 1998, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Webb County, Unincorporated        481059   ------------ ,     ......do.............   Do.
     Areas.                                     Emerg; September
                                                8, 1998, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.

           Region VII

Nebraska:
    Curtis, City of, Frontier          310086   September 11,      ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    2006,
                                                Emerg;----------
                                                -, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Eustis, Village of,                310276   October 24,        ......do.............   Do.
     Frontier County.                           1988, Emerg;
                                                March 1, 1990,
                                                Reg; April 02,
                                                2008, Susp.
    Maywood, Village of,               310085   January 4, 2005,   ......do.............   Do.
     Frontier County.                           Emerg;----------
                                                -, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.

          Region VIII

South Dakota:
    Canton, City of, Lincoln           460047   May 1, 1975,       ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; September
                                                4, 1985, Reg;
                                                April 02, 2008,
                                                Susp.
    Harrisburg, Town of,               460114   May 7, 1997,       ......do.............   Do.
     Lincoln County.                            Emerg; June 8,
                                                1998, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.

    Hudson, Town of, Lincoln           460049   September 3,       ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    1975, Emerg;
                                                December 18,
                                                1985, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
    Lennox, City of, Lincoln           460192   February 20,       ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    1997, Emerg;
                                                June 8, 1998,
                                                Reg; April 02,
                                                2008, Susp.
    Lincoln County,                    460277  September 27,       ......do.............   Do.
     Unincorporated Areas.                      1985, Emerg;
                                                October 1, 1986,
                                                Reg; April 02,
                                                2008, Susp.
    Tea, City of, Lincoln              460143  March 7, 1997,      ......do.............   Do.
     County.                                    Emerg; April 25,
                                                1997, Reg; April
                                                02, 2008, Susp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*do = Ditto.
Code for reading third column: Emerg.--Emergency; Reg.--Regular; Susp.--Suspension.

    Dated: March 7, 2008.
David I. Maurstad,
Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
 [FR Doc. E8-6777 Filed 4-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77830-77831]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27534]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0081; FRL-10512-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Off-Site Waste and Recovery
Operations (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for Off-Site Waste and
Recovery Operations (EPA ICR Number 1717.13, OMB Control Number 2060-
0313), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
January 31, 2023. Public comments were previously requested, via the
Federal Register, on April 8, 2022 during a 60-day comment period. This
notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 19,
2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2022-0081, to: (1) EPA online using https://www.regulations.gov/
(our preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB's Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs using the interface at: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this specific information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by using the search function.
    The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Muntasir Ali, Sector Policies and
Program Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
https://www.regulations.gov, or in person, at the EPA Docket Center,
WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington,
DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations (40 CFR
part 63, subpart DD) apply to existing facilities and new facilities
with organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions that are involved
in waste management and recovery operations, and that are not subject
to Federal air standards under other subparts in Part 63. In addition,
Subpart DD cross-references control requirements to be applied to
specific types of affected sources: tanks level-1; containers; surface

impoundments; individual drain systems; oil-water separators; organic
water separators; and loading, transfer, and storage systems. In
general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of
all affected facilities subject to the NESHAP.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of off-site
waste and recovery operations.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart DD).
    Estimated number of respondents: 50 (total).
    Frequency of response: Semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 47,800 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $6,650,000 (per year), which includes
$908,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in burden from the
most-recently approved ICR as currently identified in the OMB Inventory
of Approved Burdens. This is due to two considerations: (1) the
regulations have not changed over the past three years and are not
anticipated to change over the next three years; and (2) the growth
rate for this industry is very low or non-existent, so there is no
significant change in the overall burden. The burden for one-time
activities found in the previous ICR renewal were removed; however the
overall burden did not change. The capital vs. O&M costs have
increased. Previous O&M costs were based on 2013 dollars and have been
inflated to 2021 dollars (most-recent annual CEPCI value). The burden
for photocopying and postage was removed, as these costs are already
included in the ``O&M'' line item, thus this cost is duplicative.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-27534 Filed 12-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2735-2737]
[FR Doc No: 2011-680]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63680; File No. SR-C2-2011-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
To Amend the C2 Fees Schedule and C2 Rule 3.1

January 7, 2011.
    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 January 3, 2011, C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``C2'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the

proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    C2 proposes to amend proposes [sic] to [sic] amend [sic] its Fees
Schedule and C2 Rule 3.1(e) regarding the assessment of Trading Permit
fees and bandwidth packet fees. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.c2exchange.com/Legal/
), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission.

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
    C2 proposes to amend its Rules and Fees Schedule to assess access
fees and bandwidth packet fees during the first week of the following
month rather than the first day of the effective month. Specifically,
C2 proposes to incorporate language regarding the manner in which these
fees will be assessed into its Fees Schedule and to amend C2 Rule
3.1(e) to provide that that [sic] the entire fee for a Trading Permit
shall be due and payable in accordance with the Exchange Fee Schedule
in place of the current language of the Rule under which fees for a
Trading Permit shall be due and payable in full on or before the first
day on which the Trading Permit is effective. The proposed assessment
of the referenced fees is identical to the process in place at the
Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE''). C2 also
proposes to make a technical change to the Section 3 of the C2 Fees
Schedule to remove language referencing that access fees would not be
assessed for October 2010.
    C2 imposes access fees for the two types of Trading Permits
available for use on C2, the Market-Maker Permit and the Electronic
Access Permit. C2 is proposing to add language to the Fees Schedule to
describe the assessment of the access fees and modify the way in which
access fees are currently assessed. Specifically, C2 is proposing to
include language reflecting that access fees are non-refundable and
will be assessed through the integrated billing system during the first
week of the following month.\3\ If a Trading Permit is issued during a
calendar month after the first trading day of the month, the access fee
for the Trading Permit for that calendar month is prorated based on the
remaining trading days in the calendar month. Trading Permits will be
renewed automatically for the next month unless the Trading Permit
Holder submits by the 25th day of the prior month (or the preceding
business day if the 25th is not a business day) a written
notification\4\ to cancel the Trading Permit effective at or prior to
the end of the applicable month.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Thus, Trading Permit Fees for access during January 2011
will be assessed through the integrated billing system during the
first week of February 2011.
    \4\ Written notification may be submitted to the Registration
Services Department by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by other
means of written notification, including, but not limited to, a
hand-delivered letter or facsimile to the Registration Services
Department.
    \5\ Thus, if a Trading Permit Holder has a Trading Permit in
January 2011, notice must be provided by January 25, 2011 if the
Trading Permit Holder would like to terminate the Trading Permit by
the end of January 2011 and not be assessed the applicable Trading
Permit Fee for February 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    C2 offers two kinds of bandwidth packets for use to supplement the
standard bandwidth allocation provided with each access permit, the
Quoting and Order Entry Bandwidth Packet and the Order Entry Bandwidth
Packet. Similar to the access fees, C2 currently assesses fees for
supplemental bandwidth packets on the first day of each month. C2 is
proposing to add language to the Fees Schedule to describe the
assessment of bandwidth packet fees and modify the way in which the
bandwidth packet fees are assessed. Specifically, C2 is proposing to
include language reflecting that bandwidth packet fees are non-
refundable and will be assessed through the integrated billing system
during the first week of the following month. If a bandwidth packet is
issued during a calendar month after the first trading day of the
month, the bandwidth packet fee for that calendar month is prorated
based on the remaining trading days in the calendar month. Bandwidth
packets will be renewed automatically for the next month unless the
Trading Permit Holder submits by the last business day of the prior
month written notification to cancel the bandwidth packet effective at
or prior to the end of the applicable month.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\6\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \7\ of the Act in particular, in that
by increasing the efficiency of the billing process and putting in
place a process that is consistent with the process in place at CBOE
and that is familiar to common trading permit holders, it is designed
to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among C2 Trading Permit Holders and other persons using
Exchange facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    C2 does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition 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 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 proposed rule change is designated by the Exchange as
establishing or changing a due, fee, or other charge, thereby
qualifying for effectiveness on filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) \8\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 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-C2-2011-002 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-C2-2011-002. 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 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
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-C2-2011-002 and should be
submitted on or before February 4, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-680 Filed 1-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 241 (Monday, December 16, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68444-68446]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27065]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10002-94-Region 3]

Clean Water Act: Maryland--Chester River Vessel Sewage No-
Discharge Zone--Final Affirmative Determination

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final determination.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved the
establishment of a no-discharge zone in the Chester River, Kent and
Queen Anne's Counties, Maryland and its tributaries.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing to the EPA on or before
January 15, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Matthew A. Konfirst, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency--Mid-Atlantic Region, 1650 Arch Street,
Mail Code 3WD31, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, or emailed to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew A. Konfirst, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency--Mid-Atlantic Region. Telephone: (215)
814-5801; Fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On behalf of the State of Maryland, the
Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources requested
that the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 3 approve a no-discharge zone pursuant to section 312(f)(3) of
the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1322(f)(3). After review of Maryland's
application, the EPA determined that adequate facilities for the safe
and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are
reasonably available for the entirety of the Chester River and its
tributaries. The State's application is available upon request from the
EPA (please contact the person identified in the ADDRESSES section of
this document) or at http://dnr.maryland.gov/boating/Documents/FINAL_CRA_NDZ_APPLICATION.pdf.
    The delineation of the proposed no-discharge zone of the Chester
River and its tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay will begin at
39[deg]8'54.48'' N, 76[deg]16'37.11'' W and extend down to
39[deg]2'23.56'' N, 76[deg]18'8.89'' W. From there it will continue
east throughout any navigable waters including all tributaries and
bays. Included within this zone are Lankford Bay, Corsica River,
Southeast Creek, and many smaller tributaries.
    The application identifies 19 stationary and four mobile cart
pumpout stations located at 17 marinas or docks throughout the Chester
River. Sixteen of the nineteen stationary units also have a method to
empty portable toilets. The pumpout stations were funded through the
Clean Vessel Act and Maryland Waterway Improvement Fund with grants
administered by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Use of
the pumpout stations incurs a fee of no

more than $5.00 for the first 50 gallons of sewage pumped plus an
additional 10 cents per gallon for every gallon above 50. All pumpouts
comply with local and state sanitary permitting requirements. A list of
the facilities, phone numbers, locations, and hours of operation can be
found below.

                                           List of Facilities With Pumpouts in the Proposed No-Discharge Zone
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Mean low
        Pumpout facility          Operating hours in season  water depth     Phone No.                                Address
                                                                 (ft)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bayside Landing Park...........  24-7......................            5<PHONE_NUMBER>  20927 Bayside Avenue, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Castle Harbor Marina...........  24-7......................            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  301 Tackle Cir, Chester, MD 21619.
Chestertown Marina.............  9:00-5:00 daily...........           10<PHONE_NUMBER>  207 S Water St, Chestertown, MD 21620.
Gratitude Marina...............  9:00-5:00 daily...........            7<PHONE_NUMBER>  5924 Lawton Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Haven Harbor Marina............  8:00-5:00 daily...........            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  20880 Rock Hall Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Kennersley Point Marina........  8:00-5:00 daily...........            3<PHONE_NUMBER>  223 Marina Ln, Church Hill, MD 21623.
Lankford Bay Marina............  24-7......................            7<PHONE_NUMBER>  23002 McKinleyville Rd, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Long Cove Marina...............  8:00-5:00 daily...........            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  22589 Hudson Rd, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Mears Point Marina.............  8:30-7:00 daily...........            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  428 Kent Narrow Way N, Grasonville, MD 21638.
North Point Marina.............  9:00-5:00 daily...........            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  5639 Walnut St, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Osprey Point Marina............  24-7......................            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  20786 Rock Hall Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Piney Narrows Yacht Haven......  8:30-6:30 daily...........            8<PHONE_NUMBER>  500 Piney Narrows Rd, Chester, MD 21619.
Queenstown Harbor Community      24-7......................            6<PHONE_NUMBER>  252 Harbor Lane, Queenstown, MD 21658.
 Pier.
Rock Hall Landing Marina.......  9:00-5:00 daily...........            5<PHONE_NUMBER>  5657 S Hawthorne Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Sailing Emporium...............  8:00-5:00 daily...........            8<PHONE_NUMBER>  21144 Green Lane, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Spring Cove Marina.............  24-7......................            5<PHONE_NUMBER>  21035 Spring Cove Rd, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
Swan Creek Marina..............  24-7......................            7<PHONE_NUMBER>  6043 Lawton Ave, Rock Hall, MD 21661.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of Maryland provided documentation demonstrating that the
total resident and transient vessel population using the proposed
waters is estimated to be between 2,705 and 4,700 boats. Using the
higher of those estimates, the State identified approximately 3,196 as
recreational vessels, 1,151 as commercial vessels, and 353 as
``Other.'' Commercial vessels in the Chester River include crabbing and
fishing boats, charter fishing boats, and passenger vessels. The
estimated vessel population is based on length: The most conservative
estimates provided by the State of Maryland suggest that there are no
vessels less than 16 feet in length, 15 vessels between 16 feet and 25
feet in length, 3,034 vessels between 25 feet and 40 feet in length,
and 1,651 vessels greater than 40 feet in length. Based on the number
and size of vessels and EPA guidance (Protecting Coastal Waters from
Vessel and Marina Discharges: A Guide for State and Local Officials,
August 1994), the estimated number of vessels requiring pumpout
facilities in the Chester River during peak occupancy is 1,207.
    In the application, Maryland certified that the Chester River and
its tributaries need greater environmental protection to improve water
quality and protect important resources. Both the Chester River and the
Chesapeake Bay into which it drains, are classified as impaired for not
meeting applicable State water quality standards. The entirety of the
Chester River is considered impaired by nutrients, sediment, bacteria
or a combination thereof. The two counties that surround the Chester
River, Kent County and Queen Anne's County, rank as the top two
Maryland waterfront counties in terms of beach closures by percentage
of beaches. All beach closures were the result of elevated bacteria as
evidenced by high levels of enterococci.
    The Chester River is an important economic driver for the region,
providing jobs and revenue through tourism, commercial and recreational
fishing for fish and shellfish, boating, and more. Many people use the
Chester River for hunting, cruising, nature observation, sightseeing,
waterskiing, tubing, racing, and swimming. Based on a study by the Sage
Policy Group in 2012, cited in the application, the Chester River
supports $86 million in annual local economic activity, 900 jobs, and
$26.7 million in annual labor income.
    The EPA determined that the costs associated with designating the
Chester River as a vessel sewage NDZ are reasonable. Sufficient pumpout
stations exist to service the resident vessel population and the fee is
capped at $5.00 per pumpout of 50 gallons or less. The commercial
vessels operating in Chester River include crabbing, fishing, and
charter vessels. These vessels have drafts less than 10 feet and can
therefore access the facilities described previously in this document.
Neither the recreational vessels, nor most of the commercial vessels,
are expected to require pumpouts in excess of 50 gallons. As identified
in the application, two larger passenger vessels that may generate
greater volumes of sewage are already operating holding tanks, and
therefore would not experience any incremental costs associated with
designation of a NDZ.
    Following publication of the Receipt of Petition in the Federal
Register at 82 FR 15357, March 28, 2017, a 30-day public comment period
was opened. The EPA received comments from 64 unique individuals
regarding establishment of a no-discharge zone (NDZ) in the Chester
River and its tributaries. Of those, 57 supported and 7 contested the
effort. Comments critical of establishing a NDZ focused on five primary
issues: Issue 1: The volume of discharge targeted by the establishment
of a NDZ in the Chester River is minimal. Response: These comments go
beyond the scope of the EPA's authority in this action. Because the
EPA's authority is limited to determining whether adequate pumpout
facilities exist, it is not appropriate to base its determination on
whether vessel sewage is comparable in quantity or impact to other
sources of pollution. Issue 2: Effective enforcement of the regulation
will be difficult. Response: Both the US Coast Guard and Maryland
Department of the Environment have the authority to enforce NDZ
requirements; however, initial efforts to achieve compliance are
expected to focus on boater education. Issue 3: The data used to
determine boat populations is outdated and the formula used to
calculate pumpout availability does not accurately represent on-the-
ground conditions. Response: Calculations indicate that a minimum of

10 pumpout facilities are required to service the Chester River boating
population. There are currently 23 facilities with the capacity to
support 6,900 boats; the upper estimate of boats is 4,700. Therefore,
even if there is an increase in the number of boats, there is adequate
capacity for pumpout service. Issue 4: Pumpout facilities are
concentrated in certain areas of the river and are not available on a
year-round basis. Response: There is a concentration of pumpout
facilities at Rock Hall near the northern end of the Chester River's
mouth, but facilities are distributed along the river as far upstream
as Chestertown. Ten of the 23 pumpout facilities are open year-round
and are distributed throughout the Chester River NDZ. Issue 5:
Establishing a NDZ would negate boaters' ability to operate certain
flow-through marine sanitation devices that are currently Coast Guard-
approved, thereby limiting boaters' options for handling sewage.
Response: The NDZ only applies to the Chester River and its
tributaries, not to the entirety of the Chesapeake Bay.
    Based on the information above, the EPA hereby makes a final
affirmative determination that adequate facilities for the safe and
sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are
reasonably available for the Chester River and its tributaries such
that the State of Maryland may establish a vessel sewage no-discharge
zone.

    Dated: November 18, 2019.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Mid-Atlantic Region.
[FR Doc. 2019-27065 Filed 12-13-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P