[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 201 (Friday, October 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65891-65893]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22739]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90138; File No. SR-ICC-2020-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice Relating to the ICC Clearing Rules

October 8, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,\1\ and Rule 19b-4,\2\ notice is hereby given that on September
30, 2020, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission the proposed rule change, security-based swap
submission, or advance notice as described in Items I, II and III
below, which Items have been prepared by ICC. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
security-based swap submission, or advance notice from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice

    The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to revise
ICC's Clearing Rules (the ``Rules'') \3\ to incorporate credit default
index swaptions (``Index Swaptions'') into its summary assessment
approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

    In its filing with the Commission, ICC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change,
security-based swap submission, or advance notice and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed rule change, security-based swap
submission, or advance notice. 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) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

(a) Purpose
    ICC proposes revisions to the Rules to incorporate Index Swaptions
into the summary assessment approach described in Rule 702(e) and
Schedule 702 of the Rules. ICC proposes to make such changes to the
Rules effective following Commission approval of the proposed rule
change and completion of the ICC governance process surrounding the
Index Swaptions product expansion. ICC has previously filed with the
Commission changes to certain other policies and procedures related to
clearing Index Swaptions (the ``Swaption Rule Filings'').\4\ As
discussed in the Swaption Rule Filings, pursuant to an Index Swaption,
one party (the ``Swaption Buyer'') has the right (but not the
obligation) to cause the other party (the ``Swaption Seller'') to enter
into an index credit default swap transaction at a pre-determined
strike price on a specified expiration date on specified terms. In the
case of Index Swaptions that would be cleared by ICC, the underlying
index credit default swap would be limited to certain CDX and iTraxx
Europe index credit default swaps that are accepted for clearing by
ICC, and which would be automatically cleared by ICC upon exercise of
the Index Swaption by the Swaption Buyer in accordance with its terms.
The proposed amendments to incorporate Index Swaptions into the summary
assessment approach in Rule 702(e) and Schedule 702 of the Rules are
described in detail as follows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As set out in the Swaption Rule Filings, ICC intends to
implement the changes described in the Swaption Rule Filings
following completion of the ICC governance process surrounding the
Index Swaptions product expansion. SEC Release No. 34-87297 (October
15, 2019) (approval), 84 FR 56270 (October 21, 2019) (SR-ICC-2019-
007); SEC Release No. 34-89142 (June 24, 2020) (approval), 85 FR
39226 (June 30, 2020) (SR-ICC-2020-002); SEC Release No. 34-89436
(July 31, 2020) (approval), 85 FR 47827 (August 6, 2020) (SR-ICC-
2020-008); SEC Release No. 34-89948 (September 22, 2020) (approval),
85 FR 60845 (September 28, 2020) (SR-ICC-2020-010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of ICC's end-of-day price discovery process, ICC Clearing
Participants (``CPs'') are required to submit end-of-day prices in
accordance with the ICC Procedures, and the failure of a CP to provide
submissions in accordance with the ICC Procedures constitutes a Missed
Submission pursuant to Rules 404(b) and 702(b) and (e). In order to
provide incentive against

Missed Submissions, ICC has adopted a summary assessment approach
described in Rule 702(e) and Schedule 702 of the Rules.
    The proposed amendments incorporate Index Swaptions in Rule 702(e).
Under current Rule 702(e)(i)(2), CPs are required to submit end-of-day
prices for each Contract in which they hold a cleared interest in
accordance with the ICC Procedures and each price not submitted as
required is a Missed Submission. The proposed changes to Rule
702(e)(i)(2) would specify that CPs that hold a cleared interest in one
or more Index Swaption Contracts sharing the same underlying index and
expiration date are required to provide prices for all Index Swaption
Contracts sharing the same underlying index and expiration date.
Additionally, under current Rule 702(e)(ii)(2), a CP is eligible for
one waiver per calendar year for single name Missed Submissions and one
waiver per calendar year for index Missed Submissions caused by
technical failures. Under amended Rule 702(e)(ii)(2), a CP would also
be eligible for one waiver per calendar year for Index Swaption Missed
Submissions caused by technical failures. The process for requesting
and reviewing waivers for Missed Submissions remains unchanged.
Moreover, amended Rule 702(e)(ii)(4) includes Index Swaption, along
with single name and index, as a type of Missed Submission that may
satisfy the requirements of Rule 702(e)(ii)(2).
    Additionally, ICC proposes updates to Schedule 702 to the Rules,
which sets forth an assessment schedule, to include an assessment
amount for Index Swaption Missed Submissions and correct a
typographical error. Current Schedule 702 sets out assessment amounts
(per missed price) in respect of index and single names. With respect
to Index Swaptions, the proposed revisions would establish an
assessment amount for each Missed Submission ($250) as well as a
maximum assessment per day for Missed Submissions on Index Swaption
instruments sharing the same underlying index ($10,000) and for all
Index Swaption instruments during one day ($50,000). ICC also proposes
to correct a typographical error with respect to single names in the
assessment schedule and replace ``Submissions'' with ``Submission'' in
the phrase ``For each Missed Submissions.''
(b) Statutory Basis
    ICC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act \5\ and the regulations
thereunder applicable to it, including the applicable standards under
Rule 17Ad-22.\6\ Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \7\ requires 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, to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds in the
custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible, in general, to protect investors and the public interest,
and to comply with the provisions of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder. The proposed rule change would amend ICC's
summary assessment approach described in Rule 702(e) and Schedule 702
of the Rules to incorporate Index Swaptions as an incentive against
Index Swaption Missed Submissions. The amendments also provide one
waiver per calendar year for Index Swaption Missed Submissions caused
by technical failures, which is analogous to the current provision in
Rule 702(e) for single name and index Missed Submissions and is
appropriately designed to maintain the integrity and effectiveness of
ICC's price discovery process. Moreover, the clean-up change to
Schedule 702 of the Rules to correct a typographical error ensures that
the assessment schedule and the Rules remain effective, clear, and
transparent to serve their intended purpose. Accordingly, in ICC's
view, the proposed rule change would promote ICC's price discovery
process by ensuring a clear, fair, and equitable assessment structure
and is thus consistent with the prompt and accurate clearing and
settlement of the contracts cleared by ICC, including Index Swaptions,
the safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody or control of
ICC or for which it is responsible, and the protection of investors and
the public interest, within the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Further, Section 17A(b)(3)(G) of the Act \9\ requires that the
rules of the clearing agency provide that its participants shall be
appropriately disciplined for violation of any provision of the rules
of the clearing agency, including by fine or other fitting sanction.
The proposed changes are designed to ensure that CPs are appropriately
disciplined for violations of the Rules, namely Missed Submissions, and
set out an appropriate fining structure in Schedule 702 to the Rules
that includes an assessment amount for each Index Swaption Missed
Submission as well as a maximum assessment per day for Missed
Submissions on Index Swaption instruments sharing the same underlying
index and for all Index Swaption instruments during one day. Similar to
ICC's approach for single name and index Missed Submissions, ICC
proposes one waiver per calendar year for Index Missed Submissions
caused by technical failures. In ICC's view, the amendments to Rule 702
and Schedule 702 to the Rules provide an appropriate assessment
approach given the role of submissions in ICC's price discovery process
and are thus consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(G)
of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(G).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, Section 17A(b)(3)(H) of the Act \11\ requires, among
other things, that the rules of the clearing agency, in general,
provide a fair procedure with respect to the disciplining of
participants. The process for requesting and reviewing waivers for
Missed Submissions remains unchanged in Rule 702(e) and continues to
provide a fair procedure with respect to disciplining CPs for Missed
Submissions, consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(H) of the Act.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(H).
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments would also satisfy relevant requirements of Rule
17Ad-22.\13\ Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v) \14\ requires each covered
clearing agency to establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for governance
arrangements that are clear and transparent and specify clear and
direct lines of responsibility. The ICC Procedures and the Rules
clearly assign and document responsibility and accountability for risk,
default management, and other key clearing house decisions and require
consultation or approval from relevant parties. ICC determined to make
the proposed changes in accordance with its governance process, which
included review by the Risk Committee and review and approval by the
Board of the proposed changes. ICC thus continues to maintain policies
and procedures that are reasonably designed to provide for clear and
transparent governance

arrangements and specify clear and direct lines of responsibility,
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(2)(i) and (v).
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv) \16\ requires each covered clearing agency
to establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures reasonably designed to cover its credit exposures to its
participants by establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a
minimum, uses reliable sources of timely price data and uses procedures
and sound valuation models for addressing circumstances in which
pricing data are not readily available or reliable. As discussed above,
the proposed changes provide incentive against Index Swaption Missed
Submissions by incorporating Index Swaptions into ICC's summary
assessment approach in the Rules and also provide one waiver per
calendar year for Index Swaption Missed Submissions caused by technical
failures. In ICC's view, the proposed changes ensure a fair and
equitable assessment structure with respect to Index Swaptions and thus
are appropriately designed to support and maintain the integrity and
effectiveness of ICC's price discovery process that provides reliable
prices, consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(iv).
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The proposed rule
change amends Rule 702(e) and Schedule 702 of the Rules to incorporate
Index Swaptions and will apply uniformly across all market
participants.
    Accordingly, ICC does not believe the amendments would impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purpose of the Act.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule
Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice 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, Security-Based
Swap Submission, or Advance Notice 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, security-based swap submission, or advance notice 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-2020-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

    Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2020-011. 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, security-based
swap submission, or advance notice that are filed with the Commission,
and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change,
security-based swap submission, or advance notice 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
such filings will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of ICE Clear Credit and on ICE Clear Credit's website
at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation. 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-ICC-2020-011 and should be submitted on
or before November 6, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-22739 Filed 10-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 88 (Monday, May 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25014-25016]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09773]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91766; File No. SR-Phlx-2021-27]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the
Expiration Date of the Temporary Amendments Concerning Video Conference
Hearings

May 4, 2021.
    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 April 28, 2021, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which
Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under
the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this
filing by 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to extend the expiration date of the
temporary amendments in SR-Phlx-2020-53 from April 30, 2021, to August
31, 2021.\4\ The proposed rule change would not make any changes to the
text of the Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90758 (Dec. 21,
2020), 85 FR 85782 (Dec. 29, 2020) (SR-Phlx-2020-53). If the
Exchange seeks to provide additional temporary relief from the rule
requirements identified in this proposed rule change beyond August
31, 2021, the Exchange will submit a separate rule filing to further
extend the temporary extension of time. The amended Exchange rules
will revert to their original form at the conclusion of the
temporary relief period and any extension thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rules, 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 aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to continue to harmonize Exchange Rule
General 3, Section 16 with recent changes by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') to its Rule 1015 in response to
the COVID-19 global health crisis and the corresponding need to
restrict in-person activities.\5\ The Exchange originally filed
proposed rule change SR-Phlx-2020-53, which allows the Exchange Review
Council (``ERC'') to conduct hearings in connection with appeals of
Membership Application Program decisions, on a temporary basis, by
video conference, if warranted by the current COVID-19-related public
health risks posed by an in-person hearing. While there are signs of
improvement, the COVID-19 conditions necessitating the temporary
amendments persist and, based on its assessment of current COVID-19
conditions and the lack of certainty as to when COVID-19-related health
concerns and corresponding restrictions will meaningfully subside, the
Exchange has determined that there is a continued need for this
temporary relief for several months beyond April 30, 2021. Accordingly,
the Exchange proposes to extend the expiration date of the temporary
rule amendments in SR-Phlx-2020-53 from April 30, 2021, to August 31,
2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 91495 (April 7,
2021), 86 FR 19306 (April 13, 2021) (SR-FINRA-2021-006) (``FINRA
Filing''). The Exchange notes that the FINRA Filing also proposed to
temporarily amend FINRA Rules 9261, 9524, and 9830, which govern
hearings in connection with appeals of disciplinary actions,
eligibility proceedings, and temporary and permanent cease and
desist orders. The Exchange's Rules 9261, 9524, and 9830 incorporate
by reference The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC rules, which are the
subject of a separate filing. See SR-NASDAQ-2021-033 (April 28,
2021). Therefore, the Exchange is not proposing to adopt that aspect
of the FINRA Filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As set forth in SR-Phlx-2020-53, the Exchange also relies on COVID-
19 data and criteria to determine whether the current public health
risks presented by an in-person hearing may warrant a hearing by video
conference. Based on that data and criteria, the Exchange does not
believe the COVID-19- related health concerns necessitating this relief
will meaningfully subside by April 30, 2021, and has determined that
there will be a continued need for this temporary relief for several
months beyond that date. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to extend
the expiration date of the temporary rule amendments originally set
forth in SR-Phlx-2020-53 from April 30, 2021, to August 31, 2021. The
extension of the temporary amendments allowing for specified ERC
hearings to proceed by video conference will allow the Exchange's
critical adjudicatory functions to continue to operate effectively in
these extraordinary circumstances--enabling the Exchange to fulfill its
statutory obligations to protect investors and maintain fair and
orderly markets--while also protecting the health and safety of hearing
participants.
    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness and has requested that the SEC waive the requirement that
the proposed rule change not become operative for 30 days after the
date of the filing, so the Exchange can implement the proposed rule
change immediately.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, 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,
by providing greater harmonization between the Exchange rules and FINRA
rules of similar purpose, resulting in less burdensome and more
efficient regulatory compliance.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ See supra note 5.

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

    The proposed rule change, which extends the expiration date of the
temporary amendments to the Exchange rules set forth in SR-Phlx-2020-
53, will continue to aid the Exchange's efforts to timely conduct
hearings in connection with its core adjudicatory functions. Given
current COVID-19 conditions and the uncertainty around when those
conditions will meaningfully improve, without this relief allowing ERC
hearings to continue to proceed by video conference, such hearings may
need to be postponed indefinitely. The Exchange must be able to perform
its critical adjudicatory functions in order to fulfill its statutory
obligations to protect investors and maintain fair and orderly markets.
As such, this relief is essential to the Exchange's ability to fulfill
its statutory obligations and allows hearing participants to avoid the
serious COVID-19-related health and safety risks associated with in-
person hearings.
    Among other things, this relief will allow the ERC to timely
provide members, disqualified individuals and other applicants an
approval or denial of their applications. As set forth in detail in SR-
Phlx-2020-53, this temporary relief allowing ERC hearings to proceed by
video conference accounts for fair process considerations and will
continue to provide fair process while avoiding the COVID-19-related
public health risks for hearing participants. Accordingly, the proposed
rule change extending this temporary relief is in the public interest
and consistent with the Act's purpose.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the temporary proposed rule
change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As set forth in
SR-Phlx-2020-53, the proposed rule change is intended solely to extend
temporary relief necessitated by the continued impacts of the COVID-19
outbreak and the related health and safety risks of conducting in-
person activities. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
will prevent unnecessary impediments to its operations, including its
critical adjudicatory processes, and its ability to fulfill its
statutory obligations to protect investors and maintain fair and
orderly markets that would otherwise result if the temporary amendments
were to expire on April 30, 2021.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \9\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \11\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\12\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange has
indicated that the proposed rule change to extend the expiration date
will continue to prevent unnecessary impediments to its operations,
including its critical adjudicatory processes, and its ability to
fulfill its statutory obligations to protect investors and maintain
fair and orderly markets that would otherwise result if the temporary
amendments were to expire on April 30, 2021.\13\ Importantly, extending
the relief provided in Phlx-2020-53 immediately upon filing and without
a 30-day operative delay will allow the Exchange to continue critical
adjudicatory and review processes in a reasonable and fair manner and
meet its critical investor protection goals, while also following best
practices with respect to the health and safety of its employees.\14\
The Commission also notes that this proposal extends without change the
temporary relief previously provided by Phlx-2020-53,\15\ and only
during the period in which the Exchange's operations are impacted by
COVID-19. As proposed, the changes would be in place through August 31,
2021 and the amended rules will revert back to their original state at
the conclusion of the temporary relief period and, if applicable, any
extension thereof.\16\ For these reasons, the Commission believes that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay for this proposal is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. Accordingly,
the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay and designates
the proposal operative upon filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \13\ See supra Item II.
    \14\ See FINRA Filing, 86 FR at 19308 (noting the same in
granting FINRA's request to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
SR-FINRA-2021-006 would become operative immediately upon filing).
    \15\ See supra note 4.
    \16\ See id. As noted above, the Exchange states that if it
requires temporary relief from the rule requirements identified in
this proposal beyond August 31, 2021, it may submit a separate rule
filing to extend the effectiveness of the temporary relief under
these rules.
    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2021-27 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-Phlx-2021-27. 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; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2021-27 and should be
submitted on or before June 1, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-09773 Filed 5-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33438-33441]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11571]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2021-0572, FRL-9439-02-R2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New York;
Ozone and Particulate Matter Controls Strategies

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving several
revisions to the New York State Implementation Plan (SIP) meant to
result in emission reductions that will help attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter
(PM) and ozone. These SIP revisions consist of amendments to several
existing regulations outlined within New York's Codes, Rules, and
Regulations that implement control measures for sources of PM and
oxides of nitrogen (NOX). These actions are being taken in
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2021-0572. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fausto Taveras, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, New
York, New York 10007-1866, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:

I. What is the background for these actions?
II. What comments were received in response to the EPA's proposed
action?
III. What action is the EPA taking?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for these actions?

    On January 28, 2022, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking that proposed to approve revisions to the New York SIP
submitted by the State of New York on February 3, 2021 and October 15,
2020. See 87 FR 4530. The SIP revisions include adopted revisions to
three regulations, Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and
Regulations (NYCRR), Part 219, ``Incinerators'', and Part 222,
``Distributed Generation Sources'', with state effective dates of March
14, 2020, and March 25, 2020, respectively. New York also submitted
attendant revisions to Part 200, Section 200.9, ``General Provisions,
Referenced material''. These revisions are applicable statewide, with
the exception of Part 222 which will only be applicable to sources
located within the New York Metropolitan Nonattainment Area (NYMA).\1\
These revisions include additional control strategies that will reduce
NOX and PMX emissions from major sources
throughout the State. The EPA is approving New York's SIP submittals
listed within this action as a SIP-strengthening measure for New York's
ozone and PM SIP. The EPA is also approving New York's SIP submittal
since it incorporates additional RACT/RACM rules for NOX at
Municipal and Private Solid Waste Incineration Units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The New York portion of the NYMA, is composed of the five
boroughs of New York City and the surrounding counties of Nassau,
Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland and the Shinnecock Indian Nation. See
40 CFR 81.333.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The specific details of New York's SIP submittals and the rationale
for the EPA's approval action are explained in the EPA's proposed
rulemaking and are not restated in this final action. For this detailed
information, the reader is referred to the EPA's January 28, 2022,
proposed rulemaking. See id.

II. What comments were received in response to the EPA's proposed
action?

    In response to EPA's January 28, 2022 proposed rulemaking on New
York's SIP revisions, the EPA received three comments during the 30-day
public comment period. The specific comments may be viewed under Docket
ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2021-0572 on the https://regulations.gov website.

Comment 1 & 2

    Two public comments received on February 14, 2022, were submitted
by one anonymous commenter. Both comments are substantially similar and
support the EPA's proposed approval of New York's SIP revisions. Both
comments state that the revisions to 6 NYCRR Part 219 and Part 222 are
necessary to, ``. . . make sure that an increase in PM and
NOX emissions are avoided.'' However, both comments also
urge the EPA to reevaluate the Ozone levels outlined in the 2008 and
2015 Ozone NAAQS due to the ever-changing environment and the growing
population in the NYMA.

Response 1 & 2

    The EPA acknowledges the commenter's support of the EPA's proposed
rule. The EPA also recognizes the commenter's request for the EPA to
reevaluate and revisit the Ozone levels outline within the 2008 and
2015 Ozone NAAQS. While this issue is outside the scope of the present
action, we note that on December 23, 2020, the EPA announced a decision
to retain, without changes, the 2015 Ozone NAAQS (December 23, 2020
Decision). See 85 FR 87256. However, on October 29, 2021, the EPA
announced that it will reconsider the December 23, 2020 Decision.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/epa-reconsider-previous-administrations-decision-retain-2015-ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 3

    The Midwest Ozone Group (MOG) submitted comments on February 28,
2022, that urged the EPA to require New York to impose all emission
controls for Distributed Generation Sources (DG Sources) units by 2023,
instead of the adopted 2025 final phase year. MOG stated that a 2023
implementation timeframe will be consistent with the nonattainment
obligations of the NYMA. MOG also provided details on how
NOX emissions from New York's DG Sources adversely impact
upwind states like Connecticut and argued that the EPA's proposed
approval fails to recognize the impact on those upwind states and the
Good Neighbor Provisions

of the Clean Air Act. In addition, MOG provided the following comments,
and extensive details for each, as follows:
    1. EPA has recognized the critical need to regulate NOX
emissions from DG Sources units.
    2. In 2023, the only remaining ozone NAAQS nonattainment monitors
in the Northeast are located in the Connecticut portion of the NYMA.
    3. It has been well-established that residual nonattainment in
Connecticut and the NYMA is being caused by sources that include DG
Sources units in New York.
    4. EPA should not allow New York to delay the implementation of
those controls beyond the moderate nonattainment date for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
    MOG's comment letter also included: (1) Presentation slides
distributed by the EPA on the analysis of ozone trends in the east in
relation to interstate transport, (2) and a data analysis presentation
conducted by the Stationary and Area Source Committee on high emitting
Electric Generating Units during High Electric Demand Days throughout
states within the Ozone Transport Region. MOG referred to these
attachments in its comments on EPA's proposed action.

Response 3

    In this action, EPA is approving New York's rules into the state's
SIP as a SIP strengthening measure. This action is not intended to
satisfy specific nonattainment planning obligations under the Clean Air
Act. Rather, EPA is approving these New York regulations into the SIP
pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(3), which states that EPA ``shall
approve [a SIP] submittal as a whole if it meets all the applicable
requirements of this chapter.'' Because this SIP revision relates to
criteria pollutants and strengthens the preexisting requirements in the
New York SIP, EPA has determined it is appropriate to approve the SIP
revision.
    EPA finds no basis, and the commenter has not provided one, to
disapprove New York's submittal solely on grounds related to the timing
of the regulations at issue in relation to the attainment dates. There
are multiple separate nonattainment obligations that apply to New York
pursuant to subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA, including
requirements related to ensuring nonattainment areas attain the NAAQS
by the applicable attainment date. EPA acknowledges that the State of
New York has unmet attainment planning obligations for the NYMA
nonattainment area. The EPA makes no finding in this action that New
York has satisfied those obligations and does not make any finding as
to whether the regulations approved through this action would be
sufficient to meet separate nonattainment planning obligations. EPA
action on any SIP revision submitted by New York to meet nonattainment
planning requirements would be a separate rulemaking with an
opportunity for public comment.
    The EPA considers comments related to interstate transport
obligations under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to be beyond the scope
of this action. The EPA's actions addressing interstate transport under
the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS are separate rulemakings with their own
comment periods and the separate availability of judicial review. The
EPA will not address comments in this action that are unrelated to this
action.
    The EPA also reviewed NYSDEC's SIP revision to examine if similar
comments were presented during the department's assessment of public
comments for the proposal of Part 222. Representatives from energy
management and sustainable energy organizations each submitted comments
that requested NYSDEC to provide additional justification for why DG
Sources need to be considered an economic dispatch source to be subject
to the control requirements in Part 222. The commentors questioned why
the adopted rule would not apply to distributed generation sources that
provide electricity to power equipment or structures not served by
distribution utilities and stated that these DG Sources not connected
to the electrical grid could run fossil fuel-fired generators without
any restrictions under Part 222. NYSDEC responded to the comments by
stating that the purpose of Part 222 is to address and reduce emissions
from emergency engines used in non-emergency applications, which
include DG Sources classified as economic dispatch sources. Within
NYSDEC's SIP revision of Part 222, the department also stated that
sources that are not connected to the grid, which are not subject to
Part 222, will be subject to 6 NYCRR Part 201, ``Permits and
Registrations''.
    NYSDEC also stated that it consulted with stakeholders including
the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO), to develop a rule
that improves air quality while maintaining a reliable electric grid.
Therefore, NYSDEC chose the 2021 and 2025 timeframes to strike a
balance in improving air quality and maintaining electric grid
reliability. NYSDEC also factored in the time for owners or operators
applicable to Part 222 to replace their DG Sources with sources that
are at least model year 2000 or retrofit their sources with the
required control technology. NYSDEC also factored in the time demands
for permitting requirements and emission testing and believes that the
compliance schedule in the regulation is appropriate.\3\ The 2025
timeframe builds upon and parallels existing protections in other New
York regulations applicable to DG Sources. NYSDEC also chose the 2025
timeframe since most sources subject to Part 222 will also have to
comply with the emission provisions outlined in Section 24-149.6 of the
New York City Air Pollution Code.\4\ Starting on January 1, 2025,
stationary engines applicable to Section 24-149.6 must also demonstrate
compliance with the EPA's Tier IV emissions standards set forth in 40
CFR part 60, subpart III, ``Standards of Performance for Stationary
Combustion Ignition Internal Combustion Engines''. NYSDEC also stated
that sources that are not connected to the grid, and are not subject to
Part 222, will be subject to 6 NYCRR Part 201, ``Permits and
Registrations''. The revisions made to Part 222 impose emission limits
and control technology requirements onto emergency engines located
within the NYMA, which are sources not currently regulated under Title
6 NYCRR Subpart 227-2, ``Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
for Major Facilities of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX)''. The 2021
and 2025 timeframe provides time for owners or operators of applicable
DG Sources to retire older units and implement control technologies,
while maintaining the reliability of the electric grid. NYSDEC also
states within its SIP revision that a regulatory strategy to address
emissions from DG Sources not subject to Part 222 or Subpart 227-2 may
be addressed through a separate rulemaking effort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Under 6 NYCRR Part 222, applicable owners or operators of a
DG source that will operate as an economic dispatch source must
notify NYSDEC by March 15, 2021, or 30 days prior to operating the
source, whichever is later. In addition, emission test reports
demonstrating compliance with the 2025 emission limits of Part 222
must be submitted and approved by the Department before a
distributed generation source may be operated as an economic
dispatch source on or after May 1, 2025.
    \4\ Title 24, Chapter 1, Subchapter 6, Section 24-149.6 of New
York City's Administrative Code outlines emission control provisions
for certificated stationary combustion compression ignition internal
combustion engines operating within New York City. See, https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/dep/downloads/pdf/air/air-pollution-control-code.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSDEC has also revised Part 222 to add subdivision 222.4(c), which
establishes up to a two-year extension to the 2021 and 2025 compliance
dates in cases where owners or operators can

provide evidence, such as contracts, to demonstrate that they intend to
meet the emission limits set forth in section 222.4(b) (control
requirements) as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than April
30, 2027.
    This concludes our response to the comments received. No changes
have been made to the proposed rule as a result of the comments
received.

III. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is approving as SIP strengthening measures New York's SIP
revision submittals, dated February 3, 2021, and October 15, 2020, for
the purpose of incorporating the revisions made to 6 NYCRR Subpart 219,
``Incinerators'', and 6 NYCRR Part 222, ``Distributed Generation
Sources'', with a state effective date of March 14, 2020, and March 25,
2020, respectively. The EPA is also approving the attendant revisions
made to Part 200, Subpart 200.9, ``General Provisions, Referenced
material''. The EPA evaluated New York's submittals for consistency
with the Clean Air Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. The EPA finds
that these submissions strengthen New York's Ozone and PM SIPs.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of
1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of 6 NYCRR
Part 200, Subpart 200.9, ``General Provisions, Referenced material'',
Part 219, ``Incinerators'', and Part 222, ``Distributed Generation
Sources'', as described in Section I of this preamble and set forth
below in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52. The EPA has made and will
continue to make these materials generally available through https://regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 2 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have
been approved by EPA for inclusion in New York's SIP, have been
incorporated by reference by EPA into that SIP, and are fully federally
enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective
date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be
incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); see also 40 CFR
52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this final action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
any substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 1, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen Dioxide, Intergovernmental Relations, Incorporation
by Reference, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Lisa Garcia,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart HH--New York

0
2. In Sec.  52.1670 paragraph (c) is amended in the table by revising
entries ``Title 6, Part 200, Subpart 200.9'', ``Title 6, Part 219'',
and ``Title 6, Part 222'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1670  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                EPA-Approved New York State Regulations and Laws
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State       EPA approval
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date       date               Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Title 6, Part 200, Subpart 200.9.  General Provisions,         3/25/20          6/2/22   EPA is
                                    Referenced                                           approving referenced
                                    material.                                            materials that
                                                                                previously were not
                                                                                Federally enforceable.
                                                                                EPA approval
                                                                                finalized at [insert
                                                                                Federal Register
                                                                                citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Title 6, Part 219................  Incinerators.......         3/14/20          6/2/22   EPA approval
                                                                                finalized at [insert
                                                                                Federal Register
                                                                                citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Title 6, Part 222................  Distributed                 3/25/20          6/2/22   EPA approval
                                    Generation Sources.                                  finalized at [insert
                                                                                Federal Register
                                                                                citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-11571 Filed 6-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 94 (Wednesday, May 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22697-22699]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09928]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80658; File No. SR-BatsEDGX-2017-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Fees
for Use on the Exchange's Equity Options Platform

May 11, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 8, 2017, Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``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 the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change 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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-members of the Exchange pursuant to EDGX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.bats.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 its fee schedule for its equity
options platform (``EDGX Options'') to: (i) Modify fees for Qualified
Contingent Cross Orders (``QCC''),\6\ including the adoption of a new
naming convention for certain rebates, ``QCC Initiator Rebates''; (ii)
update the descriptions for fee codes PM and NM; (iii) add new fee
codes PT and NT; and (iv) eliminate Tiers 4 and 6 under footnote 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79942 (February 1,
2017), 82 FR 9804 (February 8, 2017) (SR-BatsEDGX-2017-11) (``QCC
Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    QCC Order Pricing
    The Exchange proposes to amend QCC fees and rebates to reflect the
value of the execution opportunities provided by the QCC functionality.
Thus, the Exchange proposes to modify the fees and rebates
corresponding to the fee codes that were originally adopted in
connection with QCC, as described below.
    Fee Code QA. Currently, fee code QA is appended to Customer \7\ QCC
Agency Orders \8\, and provides a standard rebate of $0.05 per
contract. The Exchange proposes to alter the pricing for QCC Agency
Orders yielding fee code QA to instead provide such executions free of
charge. However, as proposed, the Exchange would continue to provide a
rebate of $0.05 per contract to QCC Agency orders in which at least one
side of the transaction is a Non-Customer \9\ order. This proposed
rebate of $0.05 per contract for such executions will be described in
footnote 7 more specifically and there will be no other charge or
rebate for executing orders appended with QA. Thus, the Exchange
proposes to append footnote 7 to fee code QA in addition to the
existing footnote appended to fee code QA, footnote 5. Current footnote
5 and proposed footnote 7 are described in additional detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Customer'' applies to any transaction identified by a
Member for clearing in the Customer range at the OCC, excluding any
transaction for a Broker Dealer or a ``Professional'' as defined in
Exchange Rule 16.1. See the Exchange's fee schedule available at
http://www.bats.com/us/options/membership/fee_schedule/edgx/.
    \8\ ``QCC Agency'' is a Qualified Contingent Cross Order
represented as agent by a Member on behalf of another party and
submitted for execution pursuant to Rule 21.1. Id.
    \9\ ``Non-Customer'' applies to any transaction that is not a
Customer order. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fee Code QC. Currently, fee code QC is appended to Customer QCC
Contra Orders, and provides a standard rebate of $0.05 per contract.
The Exchange proposes to alter the pricing for QCC Agency Orders
yielding fee code QC to instead provide such executions free of charge.
The Exchange proposes to remove footnote 5 from QC, as there is no
longer the potential to earn a rebate in connection with routing a
Customer QCC Contra Order to the Exchange and thus the footnote is
inapplicable. Footnote 5 is described in additional detail below.
    Fee Code QM. Currently, fee code QM is appended to Non-Customer QCC
Agency Orders, and assessed a fee of $0.19 per contract. The Exchange
proposes to lower the fee charged for Non-Customer QCC Agency Orders to
$0.08 per contract. In addition, as noted above, the Exchange proposes
to provide a rebate of $0.05 per contract to QCC Agency orders in which
at least one side of the transaction is a Non-Customer order. This
proposed rebate of $0.05 per contract for such executions will be
described in footnote 7. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to append
footnotes 5 and 7 to fee code QM, as there will now be the potential to
receive a rebate in connection with QCC Agency Orders.
    Fee Code QN. Currently, fee code QN is appended to Non-Customer QCC
Contra Orders, and assessed a fee of $0.19 per contract. The Exchange
proposes to lower the fee charged for Non-Customer QCC Contra Orders to
$0.08 per contract.
    As noted above, The Exchange proposes to modify the rebates
provided to QCC orders, to only apply to QCC Agency Orders in which one
side of the transaction includes a Non-Customer order. The Exchange
proposes that the rebate applicable to QCC orders be defined as the
``QCC Initiator Rebate'' and its scope be refined to only apply to QCC
Agency orders in which at least one side of the transaction is a Non-
Customer order.
    The Exchange proposes to adopt new footnote 7 to describe the
rebate paid by the Exchange to a Member that submits a QCC Agency Order
to the Exchange when at least one side of the transaction is of Non-
Customer capacity and to define this rebate as the QCC Initiator
Rebate. As proposed, and consistent with other pricing on the Exchange,
the Exchange would provide the QCC Initiator Rebate to all Members
submitting QCC Agency Orders to the Exchange, including a Member who

routed an order to the Exchange with a Designated Give Up, as discussed
below.
    In connection with the proposed change and the adoption of footnote
7, footnote 5 would be appended to fee code QM \10\ and removed from
fee code QC. Currently, footnote 5 of the fee schedule specifies that
when order is submitted with a Designated Give Up, as defined in Rule
21.12(b)(1), the applicable rebates for such orders when executed on
the Exchange (yielding fee code BC,\11\ NC,\12\ PC,\13\ QA and QC) are
provided to the Member who routed the order to the Exchange. Pursuant
to Rule 21.12, which specifies the process to submit an order with a
Designated Give Up, a Member acting as an options routing firm on
behalf of one or more other Exchange Members (a ``Routing Firm'') is
able to route orders to the Exchange and to immediately give up the
party (a party other than the Routing Firm itself or the Routing Firm's
own clearing firm) who will accept and clear any resulting transaction.
Because the Routing Firm is responsible for the decision to route the
order to the Exchange, the Exchange currently provides such Member with
the rebate when orders that yield fee code BC, NC, PC, QA and QC are
executed. As amended, the Exchange would provide rebates to a Routing
Firm when orders that yield fee code BC, NC, PC, QA and QM are
executed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Fee code QM is appended to QCC Non-Customer orders
represented as agent by a Member on behalf of another party for
execution pursuant to Rule 21.1. Id.
    \11\ Fee code BC is appended Customer orders represented as
agent by a Member on behalf of another party and submitted to BAM
for potential price improvement pursuant to Rule 21.19, and provided
a standard rebate of $0.14 per order. Id.
    \12\ Fee code NC is appended to Customer orders which add
liquidity in Non-Penny Pilot securities and is provided a standard
rebate of $0.05 per order. Id.
    \13\ Fee code PC is appended to Customer orders which add
liquidity in Penny Pilot securities and is provided a standard
rebate of $0.05 per order. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Codes PM and NM
    Currently fee codes PM and NM apply to orders in Market Maker \14\
Penny Pilot \15\ and Non-Penny Pilot contracts, respectively. To
further specify which orders add and remove liquidity, the Exchange
proposes to modify the definitions for PM and NM. As proposed, fee code
PM would be appended to Market Maker Penny Pilot orders which add
liquidity. Fee code NM would be appended to Market Maker Non-Penny
Pilot orders which add liquidity. The Exchange does not propose to
alter the standard fee of $0.19 per contract assessed on orders
appended with fee codes PM and NM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ ``Market Maker'' applies to any transaction identified by a
Member for clearing in the Market Maker range at the OCC, where such
Member is registered with the Exchange as a Market Maker as defined
in Rule 16.1(a)(37). Id.
    \15\ ``Penny Pilot Securities'' are those issues quoted pursuant
to Exchange Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy .01. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Codes PT and NT
    Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to add fee codes PT and
NT, which would apply to orders which remove liquidity in Market Maker
Penny Pilot and Non-Penny Pilot orders, respectively. Similar to the
current fee codes PM and NM, orders appended with fee codes PT and NT
would be assessed a fee of $0.19 per contract.
Eliminate Customer Volume Tiers 4 and 6
    Footnote 1 of the fee schedule sets forth six tiers, each providing
enhanced rebates ranging from $0.10 to $0.25 per contract to a Member's
order that yields fee code PC or NC upon satisfying monthly volume
criteria. The Exchange proposes to eliminate Tiers 4 and 6 as they did
not result in incentivizing additional order flow as designed. In
connection with the change the Exchange proposes to update the standard
rates table to reflect the removal of the $0.25 rebate applicable to
Tiers 4 and 6.
Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement this amendment to its fee
schedule on May 1, 2017.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange initially submitted the proposed fee change on
May 1, 2017. (SR-BatsEDGX-2017-18). On May 8, 2017, the Exchange
withdrew SR-BatsEDGX-2017-18 and submitted this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\17\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\18\ in that it provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among Members and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

QCC Pricing
    The Exchange believes that its proposed fees and rebates related to
QCC Orders are reasonable and fair and equitable as the fees will allow
the Exchange to continue to offer QCC Order functionality, which is
functionality offered on other options exchanges, with pricing that is
comparable to that offered by other options exchanges. The Exchange
further believes that this pricing structure is non-discriminatory, as
it applies equally to all Members. In addition, the Exchange believes
this proposal is reasonable because, while orders for other market
participants (Non-Customers) will be assessed a fee, the Exchange is
reducing this fee; further, orders for Customers will receive free
executions and Members submitting QCC Agency Orders will receive a
rebate where one side of the transaction is a Non-Customer order. The
Exchange believes the proposed QCC Initiator Rebate is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory as the Exchange and other options exchanges
have generally established pricing structures that are intended to
encourage additional QCC order flow.
Fee Codes Addition and Modification
    The Exchange believes that its proposals to add fee codes PT and NT
related specifically to orders which remove liquidity and modify the
definition of PM and NM related specifically to orders which add
liquidity are fair and equitable and reasonable because the proposed
fees for orders appended with fee codes PT, NT, PM and NM are identical
and consistent with pricing previously offered by the Exchange as well
as competitors of the Exchange and do not represent a significant
departure from the Exchange's general pricing structure. Instead, the
changes and additions will simply allow the Exchange to further
differentiate between different types of executions for purposes of
transparency to Members as well as potential future pricing changes.
Also, the proposed changes to fee codes are not unfairly discriminatory
because they will apply equally to all Members.
Eliminating Customer Volume Tiers 4 and 6
    Lastly, the Exchange believes that eliminating the Customer Volume
Tiers 4 and 6 under footnote 1 is reasonable, fair, and equitable
because the these tiers were not providing the desired result of
incentivizing Members to increase their participation in Customer
orders on the Exchange. As such, the Exchange also believes that the
proposed elimination of these tiers would be non-discriminatory in that
they currently apply equally to all Members and, upon elimination,
would

no longer be available to any Members. Further, their elimination will
allow the Exchange to explore other pricing mechanisms in which it may
enhance market quality for all Members.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change to fees
related to QCC Orders will impose any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The
Exchange's proposed functionality is open to all market participants.
The proposals to provide a rebate for certain QCC Agency Orders through
the QCC Initiator Rebate and to reduce fees for QCC Contra Orders are
competitive proposals intended to incentivize the entry of additional
orders into QCC. Further, the pricing is designed to be competitive
with pricing on other options exchanges and QCC functionality is a
competitive offering by the Exchange. Further, the Exchange does not
believe that the changes to eliminate pricing incentives that have been
ineffective, to modify fee code descriptions or add fee codes will
impose any burden on competition. For these reasons, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed fee schedule changes will impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act, and believes the proposed change will enhance
competition.

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

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

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2017-21 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-BatsEDGX-2017-21. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing 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-BatsEDGX-2017-21, and
should be submitted on or before June 7, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-09928 Filed 5-16-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 9 (Monday, January 14, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2650-2653]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00513]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2012-1082]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Wrightsville Beach,
NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to extend the temporary safety zone
established on the waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at
Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina. The safety zone is necessary to
provide for the safety of mariners on navigable waters during
maintenance on the US 74/76 Bascule Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 283.1, at Wrightsville Beach, North
Carolina. The safety zone extension will temporarily restrict vessel
movement within the designated area starting on May 1, 2013 through
July 27, 2013.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before February 13, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email CWO4 Joseph M. Edge, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North
Carolina; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202)
366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2012-1082) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] by 11 inches, suitable
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and
would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period and may change
the rule based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2012-1082) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is proposing to extend a safety zone originally
established by a final rule published July 17, 2002, entitled ``Safety
Zones: Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Wrightsville Beach, NC'' (77 FR
41911, docket number USCG-2012-0368).

C. Basis and Purpose

    North Carolina Department of Transportation has awarded a contract
to American Bridge Company of Coraopolis, PA to perform bridge
maintenance on the U.S. 74/76 Bascule Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 283.1, at Wrightsville Beach, North
Carolina. The contract provides for cleaning, painting, steel repair,
and grid floor replacement to commence on September 1, 2012. The
original completion date was May 1, 2013, however, the contractor was
granted an extension on the completion date by North Carolina
Department of Transportation to July 27, 2013.
    The contractor will utilize a 40 foot deck barge with a 40 foot
beam as a work platform and for equipment staging. This safety zone
will provide a safety buffer to transiting vessels as bridge repairs
present potential hazards to mariners and property due to reduction
horizontal clearance.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed temporary safety zone would encompass the waters
directly under the U.S. 74/76 Bascule Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 283.1, at Wrightsville Beach, North
Carolina (34[deg]13'07'' N, 077[deg]48'46'' W). All vessels transiting
the this section of the waterway requiring a horizontal clearance of
greater than 50 feet would be required to make a one hour advanced
notification to the U.S. 74/76 Bascule Bridge tender while the safety
zone is in effect. The initial safety zone, which began on 8 a.m.
September 1, 2012, is scheduled to be in effect through 8 p.m. May 1,
2013. The proposed extension would be in effect from 8 p.m. May 1,
2013, through 8 p.m. July 27, 2013.

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This rule does not
restrict traffic from transiting through the noted portion of the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; it only imposes a one hour notification
to ensure the waterway is clear of impediment to allow passage to
vessels requiring a horizontal clearance of greater than 50 feet.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following entities,
some of which may be small entities: the owners or operators of
commercial tug and barge companies, recreational and commercial fishing
vessels intending to transit the specified portion of Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway from 8 p.m. May 1, 2013 through 8 p.m. July 27,
2013.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone will apply to the entire width of this section
of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, vessel traffic will be able to
request passage by providing a one hour advanced notification. Before
the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories
widely available to the users of the waterway. If you think that your
business,

organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically
affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``For Further
Information Contact'' section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the establishment of a temporary safety zone. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-
295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-1082 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-1082  Safety Zone; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
Wrightsville Beach, NC.

    (a) Regulated area. The following area is a safety zone: This zone
includes the waters directly under and 100 yards either side of the
U.S. 74/76 Bascule Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
mile 283.1, at Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina (34[deg]13'07'' N/
077[deg]48'46'' W).
    (b) Regulations. The general safety zone regulations found in 33
CFR 165.23 apply to the safety zone created by this temporary section,
Sec.  165.T05-1082. In addition the following regulations apply:
    (1) All vessels and persons are prohibited from entering this zone,
except as authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port North
Carolina.
    (2) All vessels requiring greater than 50 feet horizontal clearance
to safely transit through the U.S. 74/76 Bascule Bridge crossing the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 283.1, at Wrightsville

Beach, North Carolina must contact the bridge tender on VHF-FM marine
band radio channels 13 and 16 one hour in advance of intended transit.
    (3) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage within the
zone must request authorization from the Captain of the Port North
Carolina or his designated representative by telephone at (910) 343-
3882 or on VHF-FM marine band radio channel 16.
    (4) All Coast Guard assets enforcing this safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channels 13 and 16.
    (5) The operator of any vessel within or in the immediate vicinity
of this safety zone shall: (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being
directed to do so by any commissioned, warrant or petty officer on
board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign, and
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign.
    (c) Definitions. (1) Captain of the Port North Carolina means the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina or any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.
    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port North Carolina to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal,
State and local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the zone. (e)
Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 p.m. May 1,
2013 through 8 p.m. July 27, 2013 unless cancelled earlier by the
Captain of the Port.

    Dated: December 21, 2012.
A. Popiel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2013-00513 Filed 1-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P