Appendix F Changes in Source Water Quality Significant Excursions Identified Using the " Difference Approach" This page intentionally left blank. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 1 The first part of this appendix includes general system information and a summary of TTHM and HAA5 data that resulted in Elm City having to perform a significant excursion evaluation. This information is not required as part of the documentation of a significant excursion. Only the Significant Excursion Report is required to be completed by systems that experience a significant excursion.

This appendix is provided as an example of a system in which changes in source water quality led to a DBP Significant Excursion. Possible strategies to reduce excursions are presented in Chapter 4, but they are not to be included in the identification and documentation process. Appendices C through E provide similar examples for systems in which changes in treatment plant operations, changes in distribution system, and multiple causes resulted in a significant excursion.

This example assumes the state has chosen to use the " difference approach" ( see Chapter 1.1) for determining that a significant excursion has occurred and that a significant excursion evaluation is required.

Background Information for this Example System Description:

General system characteristics: Service area: Elm City plus surrounding suburban areas Production: Annual average daily demand 15 MGD Source Water Information: Hardwood Lake ( surface water) pH: from 6.9 to 7.5 Alkalinity: from 82 to 98 mg/ L as CaCO 3 TOC: from 2.1 to 4.0 mg/ L as C Bromide: from 0.04 to 0.1 mg/ L Turbidity: 1 to 100 ntu Softwood River ( surface water) pH: from 6.8 to 7.9 Alkalinity: from 77 to 94 mg/ L as CaCO 3 TOC: from 1.6 to 9.4 mg/ L as C Bromide: from 0.03 to 0.1 mg/ L Turbidity: 2 to 115 ntu Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 2 Treatment Provided: Hardwood, conventional ( 15 MGD design, 7.5 MGD average) Softwood River, conventional with GAC ( 20 MGD design, 7.5 MGD average) Primary and residual disinfection: Chlorine/ chlorine at both plants Summary of Stage 2 DBPR Monitoring Locations: Table F. 1 summarizes the Stage 2 DBPR monitoring locations used by Elm City. Sample locations are marked in the distribution system schematic presented in Figure F. 1.

Table F. 1 Stage 2 DBPR Monitoring Locations Location Description Location # 1 Hardwood Plant  average residence time Location # 2 Hardwood Plant  high TTHM Location # 3 Hardwood Plant  high HAA5 Location # 4 Hardwood/ Softwood Mix Zone  high TTHM Location # 5 Hardwood/ Softwood Mix Zone  high TTHM Location # 6 Hardwood/ Softwood Mix Zone  high TTHM Location # 7 Softwood Plant  average residence time Location # 8 Softwood Plant  high HAA5 Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 3 Pineville MIXING ZONE Softwood River WTP Hardwood WTP Elevated Storage Tank Ground storage tank Pump station 2 Oakville 1 3 Elmville 5 Downtown Appleville Weeping Willow Poplarville Cedarville Cypressville 6 7 4 8 Peak DBP location Figure F. 1 Schematic of Elm City Distribution System and Stage 2 DBPR Monitoring Locations Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 4 DBP Excursion Investigation:

During the last sampling period which took place in September 2004, Elm City experienced unusually high TTHM and HAA5 levels ( relative to the LRAA). DBP data from the previous year and most recent sampling period ( five quarters total) are presented in Table F. 2.

Table F. 2 TTHM and HAA5 Monitoring Data Loc atio n TTHM ( ug/ L) HAA5 ( ug/ L)

Quarterly Pre Sept. 2004 Data1 LRAA Pre Sept. 2004 Avg. Sept. 2004 Data LRAA Sept. 2004 Avg. Quarterly Pre Sept. 2004 Data1 LRAA Pre Sept. 2004 Avg. Sept. 2004 Data LRAA Sept. 2004 Avg.

# 1 54, 67, 58, 75 65 63 67 52, 37, 30, 41 40 52 40 # 2 68, 68, 55, 69 63 72 64 38, 45, 28, 19 33 39 33 # 3 66, 52, 71, 72 64 81 68 41, 46, 45, 39 43 51 46 # 4 50, 55, 51, 61 55 78 62 42, 43, 38, 34 39 66 45 # 5 34, 48, 55, 50 44 79 55 32, 43, 55, 38 42 58 49 # 6 44, 62, 58, 60 49 121 66 45, 33, 41, 40 40 72 47 # 7 40, 41, 37, 46 41 77 50 31, 38, 28, 19 27 59 37 # 8 49, 39, 50, 76 52 146 76 43, 39, 41, 45 42 98 56 1Data for sampling conducted on September 2003, December 2003, March 2004 and June 2004. Data relevant to peak excursions are bold and underlined.

Unusually high TTHM samples were collected at locations # 5, # 6, # 7 and # 8, and unusually high HAA5 samples were collected at locations # 6, # 7 and # 8. The results are significantly higher than both the LRAA at those locations for the previous 12 month period and the historic TTHM and HAA5 values at those locations for the years 1999 2003 ( see Significant Excursions Evaluation Report). Significant excursions ( see Chapter 1.1) were identified if:

° the difference between quarterly location measurement and quarterly LRAA is > 30

g/ L and the LRAA is  40

g/ L for TTHM. and/ or ° the difference between quarterly location measurement and quarterly LRAA is > 25

g/ L and LRAA is  30

g/ L for HAA5. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 5 All of the monitoring locations affected by high DBP are located in the area served by the Softwood plant or in the mixing zone. The city staff has reason to believe that a water quality change that has occurred in Softwood River caused the increase in DBPs. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 6 Significant Excursion Report date: October 16th, 2004 Evaluation Report Report prepared by: Robert Doe, P. E.

Page 1 System name: Elm City 1) When was the significant excursion sample( s) collected? What were the TTHM and HAA5 concentrations?

Location No. # 5 # 6 # 7 # 8 Location description Hardwood/ Softwood Mix Zone   High TTHM Hardwood/ Softwood Mix Zone   High TTHM Softwood plant   average residence time Softwood plant   High HAA5 Sample collection date Sept. 4th, 2004 Sept. 4th, 2004 Sept. 4th, 2004 Sept. 4th, 2004 Sample collection time 10 a. m. 2 p. m. 11 a. m. 3 p. m.

TTHM LRAA Concentration ( ug/ L) 55 66 50 76 TTHM Concentration ( ug/ L) 79 121 77 146 HAA5 LRAA Concentration ( ug/ L) 47 27 56 HAA5 Concentration ( ug/ L) 72 59 98 Note: Attach additional sheets if you observed more than four significant excursions during this round of sampling.

2) Where did the excursion( s) occur? Attach a schematic of your system, sketch your system in the space below, or have a schematic of your system available to review with your state at the time of your next sanitary survey. Indicate the location( s) of the significant excursion( s) on your schematic.

Location # 5 B This site is in the downtown area and is located in the Hardwood/ Softwood plants mixing zone.

Location # 6 B This sample location is a faucet at a connection located in Weeping Willow  a zone of the distribution system that has been recently developed. This connection is located downstream from a chlorine booster station. Water in this area is generally a mix of water from the Hardwood and Softwood River Plants.

Location # 7 B Represents average residence time of water leaving the Softwood Plant.

Location # 8 B This sampling location is in an area that receives water from the Softwood Plant. Samples are collected at a hose bib near the first house on the cul de sac ( which has 12 homes total).

For this example, these sample locations are illustrated in Figure F. 1 Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 7 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 2 Report date: October 16th, 2004 3) Attach ( or provide in the Supplemental Data Form) all available water quality data for the round of sampling in which the significant excursion occurred. At a minimum, include all TTHM and HAA5 results from the sampling period. You should also consider including pH, temperature, alkalinity, TOC, disinfectant residual, and any other data that you think would be useful.

a) Were there any unusual circumstances associated with this round of sampling?

Yes No X If yes, please explain.

b) Were all analytical QA/ QC measures met?

Sample preservation Yes X No____

Sample holding time Yes X No____

Other If no, please explain.

4) Attach ( or provide in the Supplemental Data Form) historical TTHM and HAA5 data for the location( s) at which the significant excursion( s) occurred. Provide at least three years of data, if available. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 8 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 3 Report date: October 16th, 2004 5) What caused your excursion( s) to occur?

Sections A through F starting on page 4 can help you determine the possible cause( s) of your excursion. Please note there may be more than one factor which resulted in your excursion.

Section A: Source water quality change Section B: Process upset at treatment plant Section C: Planned change or maintenance activities at plant Section D: Planned distribution system operations or maintenance activities Section E: Unplanned events in distribution system If you already suspect a cause, go directly to that section. If you read Sections A through E and are unable to determine a cause of your excursion, then complete Section F.

Consecutive systems should also contact their wholesaler to identify the cause( s) of the significant excursion( s).

6) List steps taken or planned to reduce DBP peak levels.

We are considering adjustments of the coagulation processes to improve TOC removal including: increasing the coagulant dose, evaluation of alternative coagulants, evaluation of coagulant aids, lowering the pH of coagulation, use of a pre oxidant ( permanganate or chlorine dioxide), and use of PAC. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 9 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 4 Report date: October 16th, 2004 A. Source Water Quality Changes ° Did any of the events listed below take place before the DBP excursion to cause TOC levels to increase?   Heavy rain fall   Flooding   Spring snow melt/ runoff   Significant decrease in rainfall or source flow   Algae bloom ° Did any of the events listed below take place before the DBP excursion to cause bromide levels to increase?   Significant decrease in rainfall or source flow   Brackish or seawater intrusion ° Did pH and/ or alkalinity significantly change?

° If two or more supplies are used, was a greater portion of water drawn from the one with higher TOC?

° Was raw water stored for an unusually long period of time resulting in a significant increase in water temperature?

Conclusions:

Did source water quality changes cause or contribute to your significant excursion( s)?

Yes X No If yes, please explain:

The most probable cause of the DBP excursion noted during the September 2004 sampling even was a rapid increase of the organic matter concentration in the Softwood River. Following two days of heavy rainfall the TOC measured in the plant influent increased from 2.7 mg/ L to 8.4 mg/ L. At the same time, turbidity of the source water also increased from 5 ntu to a maximum of 98 ntu. The coagulant ( ferric chloride) dose was increased from 20 mg/ L to 75 mg/ L to match water quality changes. For the duration of this high turbidity/ high NOM event, the pH of coagulation was maintained between 61. and 6.3. The higher coagulant dose prevented any significant increases of turbidity in the settled water, but the concentration of TOC in the plant effluent increased from 1.8 mg/ L to 3.8 mg/ L. Jar testing conducted at the time of the event indicated that a further increase of the coagulant dose ( dosages up to 120 mg/ L were tested) would have not significantly improved TOC removal under the pH conditions presently used to conduct the coagulation process.

Attach all supporting operational or other data which led you to conclude this was the cause of your excursion( s) or make sure this data is available during your sanitary survey. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 10 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 5 Report date: October 16th, 2004 B. Process Upset at Treatment Plant ° Was raw water stored for an unusually long time, providing additional contact time for DBP formation after prechlorination?

° Were there changes in coagulation practices?

S Were there any changes or malfunctions of the coagulation process in the days leading to the excursion?

S Were the coagulant dose and pH properly adjusted for incoming source water conditions?

° Were there changes in chlorination practices?   Were there any changes in chlorine dose at any location in the plant?   Were there changes in plant flow that may have resulted in longer than normal residence time at any location in the plant?

S Did the pH change at the point of chlorine addition?

° Were there changes in settling practices?

S Was there excess sludge build up in the settling basin that may have carried over to the point of disinfectant addition?

S Was there any disruption in the sludge blanket that may have resulted in carryover to the point of disinfection?

° Were there changes in filtration practices?

S Have filter run times been changed to meet raw water quality changes?

S Were there any spikes in individual filter effluent turbidity ( which may indicate particulate or colloidal TOC breakthrough) in the days leading to the excursion?

S Did chlorinated water sit in the filter for an extended period of time?

S Were all filters run in a filter to waste mode during initial filter ripening?

S Were any filters operated beyond their normal filter run time?

S If GAC filters are used: Is it possible the adsorptive capacity of the GAC bed was reached before reactivation occurred?

S If biological filtration is used: Were there any process upsets that may have resulted in breakthrough of TOC ( particularly biodegradable TOC)?

° Were there changes in plant flow that may have resulted in an unusually high residence time in the clearwell on the days prior to the excursion?

S For example, a temporary plant shutdown.

Continued on next page Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 11 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 6 Report date: October 16th, 2004 Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 12 B. Process Upset at Treatment Plant ( Continued)

Conclusions:

Did a process upset in the treatment plant cause or contribute to your significant excursion( s)?

Yes No X If yes, please explain:

Attach all supporting operational or other data which led you to conclude this was the cause of your excursion( s) or make sure this data is available during your sanitary survey. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 13 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 7 Report date: October 16th, 2004 C. Planned Change or Maintenance Activities for the Treatment Plant ° Was there a recent change ( or addition) of pre oxidant?

° Was there any maintenance in the basin that may have stirred sludge from the bottom of the basin and caused it to carry over to the point of disinfectant addition?

° Did you change the type or manufacturer of the coagulant?

° Were there any changes in disinfection practices in the days prior to the excursion?

S For example, a switch from chloramines to free chlorine for burnout period.

S Discontinuation of ozone which forms very little TTHM.

° Was a filter( s) taken off line for an extended period of time that caused the other filters to operate near maximum design capacity and creating the conditions for possible breakthrough?

° Were any pumps shut down for maintenance, leading to changes in flow patterns or hydraulic surges?

Conclusions:

Did a planned maintenance or operational activity in the treatment plant cause or contribute to your significant excursion( s)?

Yes No X If yes, please explain:

Attach all supporting operational or other data which led you to conclude this was the cause of your excursion( s) or make sure this data is available during your sanitary survey. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 14 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 8 Report date: October 16th, 2004 D. Planned Distribution System Operations or Maintenance Activities ° Was a tank drained for cleaning or other maintenance?

S Was the tank drained to waste or to the distribution system?

S Was a larger volume than normal drained to the distribution system?

° If booster disinfection is used, was the booster disinfectant dose higher than the normal booster disinfectant dose for that season?

° Were there any system maintenance activities in the days prior to DBP excursion? Including:   Repairing mains or installing new mains   Closure of valves to isolate sections of pipes ° Were the pipes flushed properly or were the appropriate valves re opened after work was completed?

° Did any pump or pipeline maintenance occur that would have changed the flow pattern in the area the sample was drawn from?

S Change in flow can cause water in stagnant areas to be drawn into another area.

° Did any pipeline replacement occur?

S Disinfecting piping in contact with drinking water could result in a high concentration of chlorine entering the distribution system and thus increase DBPs.

Conclusions:

Did a planned distribution system maintenance or operational activity cause or contribute to your significant excursion( s)?

Yes No X If yes, please explain:

Attach all supporting operational or other data which led you to conclude this was the cause of your excursion( s) or make sure this data is available during your sanitary survey. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 15 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 9 Report date: October 16th, 2004 E. Unplanned Distribution System Events ° Were there increases in demand that caused older water in storage tanks to be drawn into the system?

S Were there any major fire events?

S Did one or more storage tank have greater than average drawdown preceding the time of DBP peak excursion?

° Were there decreases in demand that resulted in longer than normal system residence times?

S Were there any large customers off line?

° Did any main breaks occur causing changes in flow patterns in the influence area of the sample location?

° If you collect water temperature inside storage tanks, was the temperature inside the tank higher than normal for the season?

° Were any storage tanks hydraulically locked out of the system for an extended period and then used preceding the time of DBP peak excursion?

° Did changes in overall water demand cause a change in water demand patterns in the vicinity of dead ends and/ or stagnant zones in the system?

° Were there large variations in localized system pressures that were different from the normal pressure range that could have caused a change in water demand patterns in the vicinity of dead ends and/ or stagnant zones in the system?

Conclusions:

Did an unplanned distribution system maintenance or operational activity cause or contribute to your significant excursion( s)?

Yes No X If yes, please explain:

Attach all supporting operational or other data which led you to conclude this was the cause of your excursion( s) or make sure this data is available during your sanitary survey. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 16 Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Page 10 Report date: October 16th, 2004 F. If you were unable to identify the cause of your significant excursion( s) after reviewing Sections A through E, are you able to identify another potential cause of your increase in DBP concentrations? Explain.

Note: If you are unable to determine the cause of your excursion you may wish to consider:

° More frequent raw water temperature monitoring. ° More frequent raw water TOC monitoring. ° Increased disinfectant residual monitoring in the distribution system. ° Tracer studies to characterize distribution system water age. ° Development of a hydraulic model to characterize the distribution system.

Attach all supporting operational or other data which led you to conclude this was the cause of your excursion( s) or make sure this data is available during your sanitary survey. Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 17 Supplemental Data Form for the Significant Excursion Evaluation Report Report date: October 16th, 2004 Report prepared by: Robert Doe, P. E.

System name: Elm City 1) Water quality data from significant excursion sampling period.

Location No. # 1 # 2 # 3 # 4 # 5 # 6 # 7 # 8 Location Name TTHM ( ug/ L) 63 72 81 78 79 121 77 146 HAA5 ( ug/ L) 52 39 51 66 58 72 59 98 Free Chlorine ( mg/ L) 1.8 1.3 NA NA NA 1.1 NA 0.8 Total Chlorine ( mg/ L) 2.1 1.8 NA NA NA 1.8 NA 1.2 pH 7.9 8.0 8.3 8.1 7.8 8.3 7.5 8.2 Significant Excursion Guidance Manual Proposal Draft July 2003 F 18 Data relevant to peak excursions are bold and underlined.

2) Supplemental data from each treatment facility: Plant # 1: Hardwood Plant Plant # 2: Softwood Plant Raw Water Temperature: NA Raw Water Temperature: NA Plant Effluent Water Temperature: 20

C Plant Effluent Water Temperature: 20

C Raw Water TOC: 2.2 mg/ L ( Avg. < 2.0mg/ L) Raw Water TOC: 3.8 mg/ L ( Avg.< 2.0mg/ L) Other Data: Other Data: Inf. turb. 98 ntu ( Avg. < 20 ntu)

3) Historical TTHM and HAA5 data at significant excursion sampling locations.

TTHM Data ( ug/ L) HAA5 Data ( ug/ L)

Monitoring # __ 5__ #_ 6__ #__ 7__ #__ 8__ Monitoring # __ 6__ #___ 7_ #__ 8__ #_____ Location Location Date  1999 43 58 45 49 Date  1999 57 52 56 Date  2000 51 49 56 64 Date  2000 48 39 47 Date  2001 46 69 41 69 Date  2001 45 48 33 Date  2002 48 61 73 66 Date  2002 51 56 34 Date  2003 34 44 53 79 Date  2003 45 31 43 Avg. 99 03 44 56 54 65 Avg. 99 03 49 45 43 Attach additional sheets if necessary


[Federal Register: December 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 75959-75960]
[DOCID:fr19de06-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No.CP06-433-001]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Application

December 12, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 6, 2006, Northern Natural Gas Company
(Northern), 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68124, filed in
Docket No. CP06-433-001, an application pursuant to sections 7 of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations, for
authorization to amend the authorization requested in Docket No. CP06-
433-000, filed August 29, 2006, in order to construct and operate two
new town border station (TBS) facilities, with appurtenances, to be
located in Clay and Sioux Counties in Iowa, in order to use the
compression and resulting capacity created on Northern's West Leg
pipeline segment of its Market Area facilities, all as more fully set
forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection. This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov
, using the ``eLibrary'' link and is available for review

in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is
an ``eSubscription'' link on the Web site that enables subscribers to
receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    In its application, Northern asserts that with the installation of
the proposed facilities, Northern will utilize an additional 12,100
Dth/day of capacity created by the Palmyra Northern Expansion
facilities and that this peak day entitlement has been subscribed to by
new customers. Northern is requesting approval for rolled-in rate
treatment of the expansion costs. The facilities constitute part of the
second discrete stand-alone project under the umbrella of the Northern
Lights expansion project.\1\ The estimated capital cost for the
facilities proposed herein is $885,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Northern Lights is a multi-year commitment to expand
Northern's Market Area capacity in response to its customer's future
requirements through 2026. On June 23, 2006, Northern filed an
application with the Commission under Docket No. CP06-403-000
requesting authorization to construct, modify and operate facilities
for the first discrete stand-alone Northern Lights project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Michael T. Loeffler, Director, Certificates and Government Affairs for
Northern, 1111 South 103rd Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68124, at (402) 398-
7103 or Donna Martens, Senior Regulatory Analyst, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone

will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The
Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition
to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or
parties directly involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing''
link at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission strongly encourages

intervenors to file electronically. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest
or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: January 2, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-21550 Filed 12-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 219 (Thursday, November 12, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71964-71971]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24986]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90363; File No. SR-NYSE-2020-89]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7.35C

November 5, 2020.
    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 October 23, 2020, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35C (Exchange-Facilitated
Auctions) to (1) provide the Exchange authority to facilitate a Trading
Halt Auction if a security has not reopened following a MWCB Halt by
3:30 p.m.; (2) widen the Auction Collar for an Exchange-facilitated
Trading Halt Auction following an MWCB Halt; (3) provide that certain
DMM Interest would not be cancelled following an Exchange-facilitated
Auction; and (4) change the Auction Reference Price for Exchange-
facilitated Core Open Auctions. The proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35C (Exchange-Facilitated
Auctions) to (1) provide the Exchange authority to facilitate a Trading
Halt Auction \3\ if a security has not reopened following a Level 1 or
Level 2 trading

halt due to extraordinary market volatility under Rule 7.12 (``MWCB
Halt'') by 3:30 p.m.; (2) widen the Auction Collar for an Exchange-
facilitated Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt; (3) provide
that certain DMM Interest \4\ would not be cancelled following an
Exchange-facilitated Auction; and (4) change the Auction Reference
Price for Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As defined in Rule 7.35(a)(1), an ``Auction'' refers to the
process for opening, reopening, or closing of trading of Auction-
Eligible Securities on the Exchange, which can result in either a
trade or a quote.
    \4\ For purposes of Auctions, the term ``DMM Interest'' is
defined in Rule 7.35(a)(8) to mean all buy and sell interest entered
by a DMM unit in its assigned securities and includes: ``DMM Auction
Liquidity,'' which is non-displayed buy and sell interest that is
designated for an Auction only (see Rule 7.35(a)(8)(A)); ``DMM
Orders'' which are orders, as defined under Rule 7.31, entered by a
DMM unit (see Rule 7.35(a)(8)(B)); and ``DMM After-Auction Orders,''
which are orders entered by a DMM unit before either the Core Open
Auction or Trading Halt Auction that do not participate in an
Auction and are intended instead to maintain price continuity with
reasonable depth following an Auction (see Rule 7.35(a)(8)(C)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The first three of these proposed changes are currently in place on
a temporary basis, as described in Commentaries .01-.03 to Rule 7.35C.
The fourth of these proposed changes would be new and would replace the
temporary rule set forth in Commentary .04 to Rule 7.35C.
Background
    To slow the spread of COVID-19 through social-distancing measures,
on March 18, 2020, the CEO of the Exchange made a determination under
Rule 7.1(c)(3) that, beginning March 23, 2020, the Trading Floor
facilities located at 11 Wall Street in New York City would close and
the Exchange would move, on a temporary basis, to fully electronic
trading.\5\ On May 14, 2020, the CEO of the Exchange made a
determination under Rule 7.1(c)(3) to reopen the Trading Floor on a
limited basis on May 26, 2020 to a subset of Floor brokers, subject to
safety measures designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19.\6\ On June
15, 2020, the CEO of the Exchange made a determination under Rule
7.1(c)(3) to begin the second phase of the Trading Floor reopening by
allowing DMMs to return on June 17, 2020, subject to safety measures
designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Pursuant to Rule 7.1(e), the CEO notified the Board of
Directors of the Exchange of this determination. The Exchange's
current rules establish how the Exchange will function fully-
electronically. The CEO also closed the NYSE American Options
Trading Floor, which is located at the same 11 Wall Street
facilities, and the NYSE Arca Options Trading Floor, which is
located in San Francisco, CA. See Press Release, dated March 18,
2020, available here: https://ir.theice.com/press/press-releases/all-categories/2020/03-18-2020-204202110.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88933 (May 22,
2020), 85 FR 32059 (May 28, 2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-47) (Notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89086 (June 17,
2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-52) (Notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of proposed rule change).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 7.35C sets forth the procedures for Exchange-facilitated
Auctions. The first time the Exchange facilitated any Auctions pursuant
to Rule 7.35C was on March 19, 2020, when two DMM firms temporarily
left the Trading Floor in connection with implementing their business
continuity plans related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Beginning on March
23, 2020, when the Exchange temporarily closed the Trading Floor, the
Exchange began facilitating Auctions on behalf of all DMM firms. Since
June 17, 2020, when DMM firms were permitted to return staff to the
Trading Floor, the Exchange has not facilitated any Auctions for DMM
firms that have had staff return to the Trading Floor. During the
period of March 23, 2020 through June 16, 2020, among the DMM firms,
the percentage of Auctions that were facilitated by the Exchange ranged
from 1% to 3.2% of the securities assigned to each DMM. During this
period, the vast majority of Auctions were facilitated electronically
by DMMs pursuant to Rules 7.35A and 7.35B.
    In connection with both the market-wide volatility associated with
the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 and the full and partial closing of
the Trading Floor facilities, the Exchange added Commentaries .01, .02,
.03, and .04 to Rule 7.35C \8\ that are in effect until the earlier of
a full reopening of the Trading Floor facilities to DMMs or after the
Exchange closes on December 31, 2020.\9\ These Commentaries set forth
how the Exchange has been functioning during this temporary period when
the Trading Floor facilities have been closed either in full or in part
in connection with COVID-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 88413 (March 18,
2020), 85 FR 16713 (March 24, 2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-19) (amending Rule
7.35C to add Commentary .01) (``First Rule 7.35C Filing''); 88444
(March 20, 2020), 85 FR 17141 (March 26, 2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-22)
(amending Rules 7.35A to add Commentary .01, 7.35B to add Commentary
.01, and 7.35C to add Commentary .02) (``Second Rule 7.35C
Filing''); 88562 (April 3, 2020), 85 FR 20002 (April 9, 2020) (SR-
NYSE-2020-29) (amending Rule 7.35C to add Commentary .03) (``DMM
Interest Filing''); and 89059 (June 12, 2020), 85 FR 36911 (June 18,
2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-50) (amending Rule 7.35C to add Commentary .04)
(``Fourth Rule 7.35C Filing'').
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90005 (September 25,
2020), 85 FR 61999 (October 1, 2020) (SR-NYSE-2020-78) (Notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change to extend
the temporary period for Commentaries to Rules 7.35, 7.35A, 7.35B,
and 7.35C; and temporary rule relief in Rule 36.30 to end on the
earlier of a full reopening of the Trading Floor facilities to DMMs
or after the Exchange closes on December 31, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the rules that it has added on a
temporary basis to Rule 7.35C have supported the fair and orderly
operation of the Exchange during both the market volatility associated
with COVID-19 and the temporary period that the Trading Floor
facilities have been closed either in full or in part due to COVID-19.
The Exchange further believes the functionality that has been operating
on a temporary basis would continue to support the fair and orderly
operation of the Exchange under any circumstances where there may be
either market-wide volatility or the need for the Exchange to
facilitate one or more Auctions. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes
that the following changes be made permanent in Exchange rules:
     Provide the Exchange with authority to facilitate a
Trading Halt Auction if a security has not reopened following a MWCB
Halt by 3:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
     Widen the Auction Collars for an Exchange-facilitated
Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt to the greater of $0.15 or
10%.
     Allow DMM Interest to remain on the Exchange Book after an
Exchange-facilitated Auction.
    In addition, the Exchange proposes to change the Auction Reference
Price for Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions, which would be new.
Proposed Rule Changes
Exchange Authority To Facilitate a Trading Halt Auction Following a
MWCB Halt
    In the midst of the market-wide volatility relating to COVID-19 and
before the Exchange temporarily closed the Trading Floor, the Exchange
added Commentary .01 to Rule 7.35C, which provided, at the time of
filing, that: \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See First Rule 7.35C Filing, supra note 9.

    Until May 15, 2020, to facilitate the fair and orderly reopening
of securities following either a Level 1 or Level 2 trading halt due
to extraordinary market volatility under Rule 7.12 (``MWCB Halt''),
the CEO of the Exchange or his or her designee may determine that
the Exchange will facilitate a Trading Halt Auction in one or more
securities under this Rule if a security has not reopened by 3:30
p.m. If the Exchange facilitates a Trading Halt Auction following a
MWCB Halt pursuant to this Commentary, the Auction Collars will be
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the greater of $0.15 or 10% away from the Auction Reference Price.

    Following the temporary closure of the Trading Floor, the substance
of this Commentary was revised and moved to

Commentary .02 to Rule 7.35C, as follows: \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Second Rule 7.35C Filing, supra note 9.

    If the Trading Floor facilities reopen, through trading on
December 31, 2020, to facilitate the fair and orderly reopening of
securities following a MWCB Halt, the CEO of the Exchange or his or
her designee may determine that the Exchange will facilitate a
Trading Halt Auction in one or more securities under this Rule if a
security has not reopened by 3:30 p.m. Eastern Time. If the Exchange
facilitates a Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt pursuant to
this Commentary, the Auction Collars will be the greater of $0.15 or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10% away from the Auction Reference Price.

    As described in more detail in the First Rule 7.35C Filing, under
Rule 7.35C, the Exchange will facilitate an Auction only if a DMM
cannot facilitate an Auction for one or more securities. In support of
the proposed rule change, the Exchange explained:

    The Exchange continues to believe that DMM-facilitated Trading
Halt Auctions following a MWCB Halt provide the greatest opportunity
for fair and orderly reopenings of securities, and would therefore
continue to provide DMMs an opportunity to reopen securities before
effectuating an Exchange-facilitated Trading Halt Auction. The
proposal would provide the Exchange with another tool during
volatile markets to reopen securities before 3:50 p.m., for
continuous trading to resume leading into the close . . . . . The
Exchange believes that specifying a time in the Rule at which the
Exchange could exercise such discretion would put DMMs on notice of
the time that the Exchange could begin facilitating such auctions.
The Exchange further believes that it is not appropriate to provide
that the Exchange would automatically facilitate reopening auctions
at 3:30 p.m. There may be facts and circumstances where DMMs would
be able to reopen all securities before 3:50 p.m., but that the DMM-
facilitated process may not have completed by 3:30 p.m. The Exchange
would take those facts and circumstances into account before
invoking the proposed relief. Exchange staff would communicate with
the impacted DMMs verbally on the Floor during such times, and
therefore the DMMs would be on notice of whether the Exchange would
invoke this relief, and for which securities.

    The Exchange continues to believe that the ability for the Exchange
to facilitate a Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt if a
security has not reopened by 3:30 p.m. would promote the fair and
orderly reopening of one or more securities so that continuous trading
may resume leading into the close. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes
that the relief described above should be made a permanent part of Rule
7.35C. To effect this change, the Exchange proposes to amend 7.35C to
add new subparagraph (a)(4) as follows, which is based on current
Commentary .02 to Rule 7.35C without any substantive differences:

    The CEO of the Exchange, or his or her designee, may determine
that the Exchange will facilitate a Trading Halt Auction in one or
more securities under this Rule if a security is subject to either a
Level 1 or Level 2 trading halt due to extraordinary market
volatility under Rule 7.12 (``MWCB Halt'') and has not reopened by
3:30 p.m. Eastern Time.

    The Exchange further proposes to delete Commentary .02 to Rule
7.35C, which would be replaced by proposed Rule 7.35C(a)(4).
    There are no technology changes associated with this proposed rule
change and the Exchange would be able to implement it immediately upon
approval of this proposed rule change.
Wider Auction Collars for a Trading Halt Auction Following a MWCB Halt
    As noted above, as set forth in Commentary .01(a) to Rule
7.35C,\12\ the Exchange also widened the Auction Collars for an
Exchange-facilitated Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt to the
greater of $0.15 or 10% away from the Auction Reference Price. Absent
this temporary relief, the Auction Collars for all Exchange-facilitated
Trading Halt Auctions is the greater of $0.15 or 5% away from the
Auction Reference Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Commentary .01(a) to Rule 7.35C currently provides that:
``For a temporary period that begins March 23, 2020, when the
Trading Floor facilities have been closed pursuant to Rule
7.1(c)(3), and ends on the earlier of a full reopening of the
Trading Floor facilities to DMMs or after the Exchange closes on
December 31, 2020: (a) The Auction Collar for a Trading Halt Auction
following a either a Level 1 or Level 2 trading halt due to
extraordinary market volatility under Rule 7.12 (``MWCB Halt'') will
be the greater of $0.15 or 10% away from the Auction Reference
Price.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in the First Rule 7.35C Filing, the widening of the
Auction Collars was designed to provide the Exchange with more
flexibility to respond to the then unprecedented market-wide declines
that resulted from the ongoing spread of COVID-19 at that time if the
Exchange were to facilitate a Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB
Halt. The Exchange cannot predict if and when the U.S. equities market
will experience market-wide declines that would trigger a MWCB Halt
again. However, if such market-wide volatility were to occur, the
Exchange believes that the widened Auction Collars would promote fair
and orderly reopenings following a MWCB Halt by providing a wider price
range at which the Exchange could facilitate such a reopening.
    To effect this change, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
7.35C(b)(3)(A)(ii) to provide as follows (proposed new text
italicized), which is based on current Commentary .01 to Rule 7.35C
without any substantive differences:

    The Auction Collar for the Trading Halt Auction will be based on
a price that is the greater of $0.15 or 5% away from the Auction
Reference Price for the Trading Halt Auction, provided that, the
Auction Collar for a Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt will
be the greater of $0.15 or 10% away from the Auction Reference
Price.

    The Exchange further proposes to delete Commentary .01 to Rule
7.35C, which would be replaced by the proposed amendment to Rule
7.35C(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    There are no technology changes associated with this proposed rule
change and the Exchange would be able to implement it immediately upon
approval of this proposed rule change.
DMM Interest and Exchange-Facilitated Auctions
    As set forth in Rule 7.35C(a)(1), if the Exchange facilitates an
Auction, DMM Interest would not be eligible to participate in such
Auction and previously-entered DMM Interest would be cancelled. When a
DMM cannot facilitate an Auction because the DMM unit is experiencing a
system issue that prevents it from communicating with Exchange systems,
cancelling DMM Interest following an Exchange-facilitated Auction would
help ensure that DMM Interest that may be at stale prices does not
participate in trading on the Exchange. On the other hand, by
cancelling DMM Interest when the DMM units' systems are operating
normally, DMMs may be limited in their ability to maintain price
continuity with reasonable depth, i.e., provide passive liquidity at
the Exchange best bid and offer and at depth, immediately following an
Exchange-facilitated Auction.
    After a period of operating Exchange-facilitated Auctions, the
Exchange identified a way to provide DMMs with a greater opportunity to
provide passive liquidity immediately following an Auction, thereby
dampening volatility, while still limiting DMM risk. To effect this
change, the Exchange added Commentary .03 to Rule 7.35C, which provides
that for the temporary period that begins on April 6, 2020 and ends on
the earlier of a full reopening of the Trading Floor facilities to DMMs
or after the Exchange closes on December 31, 2020, if the Exchange
facilitates an Auction, DMM Interest (i) will not be eligible to
participate if such Auction

results in a trade, and will be eligible to participate if such Auction
results in a quote, and (ii) will not be cancelled unless the limit
price of such DMM Interest would be priced through the Auction Price or
Auction Collars, as applicable, or such DMM Interest would be
marketable against other unexecuted orders.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See DMM Interest Filing, supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to make permanent the changes to how
Exchange-facilitated Auctions function, as described in Commentary .03
to Rule 7.35C. By making this functionality permanent, such rules would
continue to apply both during the continuation of the current Trading
Floor closure and if the Exchange were to facilitate Auctions any time
after the Trading Floor fully reopens.
    To effect this change, the Exchange proposes to amend 7.35C(a)(1)
as follows (new text italicized, deleted text bracketed):

    If the Exchange facilitates an Auction, DMM Interest will not be
eligible to participate [in] if such Auction results in a trade, and
will be eligible to participate if such Auction results in a quote
[and previously-entered DMM Interest will be cancelled].

    This proposed rule change would make permanent the temporary
functionality set forth in paragraph (a)(1) to Commentary .03.
    With this change, DMM Interest would not participate in any
Exchange-facilitated Auctions that would result in a trade. This is how
DMM Interest currently functions when the Exchange facilitates an
Auction pursuant to either Rule 7.35C(a)(1) or Commentary .03 to Rule
7.35C. Based on experience operating pursuant to Commentary .03 to Rule
7.35C, the Exchange believes that this functionality should continue
permanently when the Exchange facilitates an Auction, including, for
example, when the Trading Floor is open but the DMM is unable to
facilitate an Auction because of a systems or technical issue.
    More specifically, when a DMM facilitates an Auction that results
in a trade, the DMM determines whether to participate on the buy or
sell side and, based on that direction from the DMM, DMM Orders that do
not participate in the Auction and that would lock or cross other
orders, which would include other DMM Orders, will be cancelled.\14\ If
the DMM has entered both buy and sell interest in advance of the
Auction and the Exchange facilitates the Auction, the DMM would not be
able to control whether the DMM's buy or sell interest would
participate in a trade and the Exchange would not have that instruction
from the DMM of which side of the market that the DMM would
participate. As a result, there may be crossing DMM Interest that could
result in a wash-sale trade that would not have occurred if the DMM had
facilitated the Auction. Excluding DMM Interest from participating in
an Exchange-facilitated Auction that results in a trade eliminates the
potential for a wash-sale trade. In addition, the Exchange believes it
promotes fair and orderly Exchange-facilitated Auctions that result in
a trade to exclude DMM Interest from participating in such Auctions,
because if a DMM's buy or sell interest does not reflect up-to-date
prices, it could impact pricing of the Auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Rule 7.35A(h)(3)(C) (providing that after a Core Open
or Trading Halt Auction, better at-priced DMM Orders that do not
receive an allocation and that lock or cross other unexecuted orders
and buy and sell better-priced DMM Orders will be cancelled after
the Auction Processing Period concludes).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By contrast, the Exchange believes that the proposed change for DMM
Interest to participate in an Exchange-facilitated Auction that results
in a quote would promote fair and orderly markets. This proposed change
is consistent with Commentary .03(a)(1) to Rule 7.35C, but differs from
current Rule 7.35C(a)(1). A security opens on a quote if there is no
buy interest willing to trade with sell interest at the same price. The
Exchange believes that under such circumstances, including DMM Interest
in the Exchange's quote would assist the DMMs in meeting their
obligation to maintain a two-sided quote as well as to maintain
continuity and depth in their assigned securities.\15\ Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that making this change permanent would promote fair
and orderly markets in connection with Exchange-facilitated Auctions
that result in a quote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Rule 104(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final element of the proposed change to Rule 7.35C(a)(1) is
that DMM Interest would no longer be automatically cancelled after an
Exchange-facilitated Auction. The Exchange believes that this proposed
change would assist DMMs in meeting their obligation, as required by
Rule 104(f)(2), to provide passive liquidity in order to maintain
continuity with reasonable depth in their assigned securities
immediately following a Core Open Auction or Trading Halt Auction that
was facilitated by the Exchange. In advance of an Auction, DMMs can
enter DMM Orders, which if not traded in an Auction, would be part of
the DMM Interest on the Exchange Book after the Auction. In addition,
DMMs can enter DMM After-Auction Orders, which do not participate in
Auctions and are specifically designed to assist the DMMs to maintain
passive liquidity on the Exchange immediately following an Auction,
which supports their ability to maintain continuity with reasonable
depth immediately following an Auction. If DMM Interest is not
automatically cancelled following an Exchange-facilitated Auction, the
DMM would be better able to timely meet these obligations by ensuring
that passive liquidity remains on the Exchange Book immediately
following an Auction.
    The Exchange believes that there remain circumstances when DMM
Interest should be cancelled following an Exchange-facilitated Auction.
As proposed, the Exchange would cancel unexecuted DMM Interest under
the same circumstances that unexecuted orders of other member
organizations would be cancelled following such Auctions.
    To effect this change, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
7.35C(g)(1), which currently describes which unexecuted orders would be
cancelled if a security opens or reopens on a trade via an Exchange-
facilitated Auction, and Rule 7.35C(g)(2), which currently describes
which unexecuted orders would be cancelled if a security opens or
reopens on a quote that is above (below) the upper (lower) Auction
Collar via an Exchange-facilitated Auction. The Exchange proposes that
these two subparagraphs would be replaced with the following text to
incorporate that under the same circumstances, DMM Interest would
similarly be cancelled (proposed new text italicized):

    (1) If a security opens or reopens on a trade, Market Orders
(including sell short Market Orders during a Short Sale Period) and
Limit Orders, including DMM Interest, with a limit price that is
better-priced than the Auction Price and were not executed in the
applicable Auction will be cancelled.
    (2) If a security opens or reopens on a quote that is above
(below) the upper (lower) Auction Collar, Market Orders (including
sell short Market Orders during a Short Sale Period) and Limit
Orders, including DMM Interest, with a limit price that is better-
priced than the upper (lower) Auction Collar will be cancelled
before such quote is published.

    These proposed rule changes would make permanent the temporary
functionality set forth in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to Commentary .03.
    The Exchange further believes that if previously-entered DMM
Interest would be marketable against either other DMM Interest or
contra-side unexecuted

orders, such DMM Interest should be cancelled. For example, if for a
security, the Auction Reference Price is $10.00, the lower Auction
Collar is $9.00 and the upper Auction Collar is $11.00, and the orders
on the Exchange Book in advance of the Auction are as follows:

 Order 1--Buy DMM Order 1000 shares at $10.05
 Order 2--Sell DMM Order 1000 shares at $10.00
 Order 3--Buy DMM Order 1000 shares at $10.02
 Order 4--Sell Limit Order at $10.03,

the orders in this example would be processed as follows in an
Exchange-facilitated Auction:
     Order 1 would be cancelled (because DMM Interest would not
be eligible to participate in an Auction trade, and here, Order 1 is
marketable with Orders 2 and 4).
     Order 2 would be cancelled (because DMM Interest would not
be eligible to participate in an Auction trade, and here Order 2 is
marketable with Order 3), and
     Order 3 would not be cancelled because it is no longer
marketable with any other interest, i.e., it no longer locks or crosses
the price of any other contra-side interest in the Exchange Book. Order
3 would therefore be included in the opening quote.
    This Exchange-facilitated Auction would result in the following
quote: $10.02 (Order 3--DMM Order) x $10.03 (Order 4--Limit Order).
    To effect this change, the Exchange proposes new subparagraph
(g)(3) to Rule 7.35C to specify the additional circumstances when DMM
Interest would be cancelled, as follows:

    The Exchange will cancel DMM Interest that is marketable against
contra-side unexecuted orders. If the contra-side unexecuted order
against which such DMM Interest is marketable is DMM Interest, the
DMM Interest with the earlier working time will be canceled.

    This proposed rule change would make permanent the temporary
functionality set forth in paragraph (b)(3) to Commentary .03.
    The Exchange believes that these proposed rule changes would
promote fair and orderly markets whenever the Exchange facilitates an
Auction under Rule 7.35C--under any circumstance--by supporting DMMs in
maintaining continuity with reasonable depth in their assigned
securities immediately following an Exchange-facilitated Core Open
Auction or Trading Halt Auction that was facilitated by the Exchange.
    The Exchange proposes that, with these proposed changes to Rules
7.35C(a)(1) and (g), Commentary .03 to Rule 7.35C would be deleted in
its entirety.
    In further support of making the functionality set forth in
Commentary .03 to Rule 7.35C permanent, the Exchange notes that after
the Exchange implemented that Commentary, the Exchange observed
improved performance relating to Exchange-facilitated Auctions.
     For the period March 23, 2020 to April 3, 2020, 4.9% of
all Core Open Auctions were facilitated by the Exchange. For the period
April 6, 2020 through June 16, 2020, the Exchange facilitated only 2%
of all Core Open Auctions. In addition, the percentage of Exchange-
facilitated Core Open Auctions that were bound by an Auction Collar
decreased from 1.3% from the pre-April 6, 2020 period, to 0.58% in the
April 6, 2020-June 16, 2020 period.
     In addition, the Exchange observed that after April 6,
2020, Exchange-listed securities experienced reduced volatility in the
first half hour of trading. The Exchange uses a quote-based metric to
measure volatility in securities,\16\ and based on that metric,
volatility in Exchange-listed securities between the period of April 6,
2020 and June 16, 2020 was 28.4% lower than the same measure between
March 23, 2020 and April 3, 2020. In addition, the Exchange further
observed that between these two periods, the difference between the
Core Open Auction Price and the subsequent five-minute VWAP dropped by
31.3%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ As described in an Exchange blog post, this metric is
calculated using second-to-second ``quote returns,'' which is
calculated by averaging the midpoints of all NBBO updates for a
security within each second of the day from 9:35 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.,
and then calculating the percentage rate of return of these average
quote midpoints from one second to the next. The variance of returns
are then calculated in aggregated time periods (e.g., 5-minute
buckets) and annualized from seconds to 6.5 hour trading days to 252
trading days in the years. Finally, the Exchange takes the square
root of the annualized variance in the aggregated periods, which
creates the Exchange's quote volatility metric. See NYSE Data
Insights, Introducing Quote Volatility (QV)--a new metric to measure
price volatility, available here: https://www.nyse.com/data-insights/introducing-quote-volatility-qv-a-new-metric-to-measure-price-volatility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For DMM firms that have already returned staff to the Trading
Floor, this proposed change has limited application because the
Exchange has not facilitated any Auctions on behalf of those firms
since June 16, 2020. In addition, the Exchange anticipates that once
the Trading Floor facilities open in full to DMMs, and all DMM firms
have staffing on the Trading Floor, the need for Exchange-facilitated
Auctions would be obviated, and the Exchange will revert to pre-
pandemic rates of Exchange-facilitated Auctions, which were none.
Accordingly, the proposed changes to Rule 7.35C will likely have
limited application and would be available as a business continuity
functionality should DMMs be unable to facilitate an Auction in one or
more securities, for any reason.
    There are no technology changes associated with this proposed rule
change and the Exchange would be able to implement it immediately upon
approval of this proposed rule change.
Updated Auction Reference Price for Exchange-Facilitated Core Open
Auctions
    For Exchange-facilitated Auctions, the Exchange determines an
Auction Price based on the Indicative Match Price for a security, which
is bound by Auction Collars.\17\ Rule 7.35C(b)(1) specifies the Auction
Reference Price that is used for determining Auction Collars for
Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions, which is the Imbalance
Reference Price, as determined under Rule 7.35A(e)(3).\18\ Currently,
the Auction Collars for the Core Open Auction are at a price that is
the greater of $0.15 or 10% away from the Auction Reference Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Rule 7.35C(b)(2).
    \18\ See Rule 7.35C(b)(3)(A)(i). Pursuant to Rule 7.35A(e)(3),
the Imbalance Reference Price for a Core Open Auction is the
Consolidated Last Sale Price, unless a pre-opening indication has
been published. Pursuant to Rule 7.35(a)(11)(A), the term
``Consolidated Last Sale Price'' means the most recent consolidated
last-sale eligible trade in a security during Core Trading Hours on
that trading day, and if none, the Official Closing Price from the
prior trading day for that security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 4, 2020, the Exchange added Commentary .04 to Rule 7.35C to
provide that the Auction Collars for Exchange-facilitated Core Open
Auctions would be the greater of $1.00 or 10% away from the Auction
Reference Price.\19\ The Exchange added this Commentary to reduce the
number of securities subject to a collared Exchange-facilitated Core
Open Auction.\20\ The Exchange observed that

from June 4, 2020 up to June 17, 2020, when DMMs returned staff to the
Trading Floor,\21\ even with the widened Auction Collars, if there were
significant overnight market-wide volatility, Exchange-facilitated Core
Open Auctions had a greater likelihood of being subject to an Auction
Collar. For example, for that same June 4-June 16 period, when the
price of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (``SPY'') \22\ moved over 1% from
the prior day's close, 1.4% of the Exchange-facilitated Core Open
Auctions were subject to an Auction Collar, as compared to only .5% of
the Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions being subject to an Auction
Collar when SPY moved less than 1% from the prior day's close.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Fourth Rule 7.35C Filing, supra note 9. Commentary .04
is in effect for a temporary period that began on June 4, 2020 and
ends on the earlier of a full reopening of the Trading Floor
facilities to DMMs or after the Exchange closes on December 31,
2020.
    \20\ In the Fourth Rule 7.35C Filing, id., the Exchange
explained that for the period while the Trading Floor had been
temporarily closed preceding that filing, the Exchange had
facilitated 2.35% of the Core Open Auctions and that approximately
30% of the Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions had an Indicative
Match Price that was subject to an Auction Collar, and approximately
50% of these collared Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions were
in securities trading at prices under $10.00. The Exchange further
noted that if Auction Collars had not been applied to these
securities priced under $10.00, they would have opened at a price
between $0.15 and $1.00 away from the Auction Reference Price.
    \21\ As noted above, the Exchange has not facilitated any
Auctions for any of the DMM firms that have returned staff to the
Trading Floor.
    \22\ Because SPY is priced based on the securities included in
the S&P 500 Index, the Exchange believes that SPY's price as
compared to its prior day's closing price is indicative of the scope
of market-wide volatility leading into the open of the Core Trading
Session.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that adjusting the Auction Reference Price to
align more closely with the anticipated price of the Core Open Auction,
rather than widening the Auction Collars, would reduce the potential
for an Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auction to be subject to an
Auction Collar on all trading days, including when there is significant
overnight market-wide volatility. Accordingly, rather than providing
for a wider Auction Collar, as set forth in Commentary .04 to Rule
7.35C, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35C to update how the
Auction Reference Price for Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions
would be determined. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to determine
Auction Reference Prices for Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions in
the same manner that the Exchange's affiliates, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca'') and NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American''), determine the
Auction Reference Price for their electronic Core Open Auctions.
    NYSE Arca Rule 7.35-E(a)(8)(A) and NYSE American Rule
7.35E(a)(8)(A) both provide that the Auction Reference Price for Core
Open Auctions on those exchanges is, ``[t]he midpoint of the Auction
NBBO or, if the Auction NBBO is locked, the locked price. If there is
no Auction NBBO, the prior day's Official Closing Price.'' The NYSE
Arca and NYSE American rules define the term ``Auction NBBO'' to mean:
    An NBBO that is used for purposes of pricing an auction. An NBBO
is an Auction NBBO when (i) there is an NBB above zero and NBO for
the security and (ii) the NBBO is not crossed. In addition, for the
Core Open Auction, an NBBO is an Auction NBBO when the midpoint of
the NBBO when multiplied by a designated percentage, is greater than
or equal to the spread of that NBBO. The designated percentage will
be determined by the Exchange from time to time upon prior notice to
ETP Holders.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See NYSE Arca Rule 7.35-E(a)(5) and NYSE American Rule
7.35E(a)(5).

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.35C(b)(1) to provide that the
Auction Reference Price for an Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auction
would be: ``The midpoint of the Auction NBBO or, if the Auction NBBO is
locked, the locked price. If there is no Auction NBBO, the Official
Closing Price from the prior trading day.'' This rule text is based on
NYSE Arca Rule 7.35-E(a)(8)(A) and NYSE American Rule 7.35E(a)(8)(A)
without any differences.
    The Exchange further proposes to amend Rule 7.35(a) to add a
definition for the term ``Auction NBBO,'' which would similarly be
based on the definition of that term in the NYSE Arca and NYSE American
rules without any substantive differences, as follows:

    ``Auction NBBO'' means an NBBO that is used for purposes of
pricing an auction. An NBBO is an Auction NBBO when (i) there is an
NBB above zero and NBO for the security and (ii) the NBBO is not
crossed. In addition, for the Core Open Auction, an NBBO is an
Auction NBBO when the midpoint of the NBBO when multiplied by a
designated percentage, is greater than or equal to the spread of
that NBBO. The designated percentage will be determined by the
Exchange from time to time upon prior notice to member
organizations.

    The Exchange proposes to add the term ``Auction NBBO'' as Rule
7.35(a)(5) and make non-substantive changes to renumber the definitions
currently set forth in Rules 7.35(a)(5)-(12) as Rules 7.35(a)(6)-(13).
    Because there are technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange proposes to announce the implementation date
of this change by Trader Update. The Exchange anticipates that the
Exchange will implement this technology change in the first quarter of
2021.
    To provide continuity, the Exchange further proposes to amend
Commentary .04 to Rule 7.35C to provide that such Commentary would end
on the earlier of when the Exchange implements its technology change to
use the midpoint of the Auction NBBO as the Auction Reference Price for
the Core Open Auction or after the Exchange closes on December 31,
2020. With this proposed rule change, the widened Auction Collars
specified in that Commentary would continue to be operative until such
time that the proposed changes to the Auction Reference Price for
Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions have been approved and
implemented.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\24\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act,\25\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the rules that it added on a temporary
basis to Rule 7.35C have supported the fair and orderly operation of
the Exchange during both the market volatility associated with COVID-19
and the temporary period that the Trading Floor facilities have been
closed either in full or in part due to COVID-19. The Exchange further
believes the functionality that has been operating on a temporary basis
would continue to support the fair and orderly operation of the
Exchange under any circumstances where there may be either market-wide
volatility or the need for the Exchange to facilitate one or more
Auctions.
Exchange Authority To Facilitate a Trading Halt Auction Following a
MWCB Halt
    The Exchange believes that it would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system to provide the Exchange with authority to facilitate a Trading
Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt. The Exchange continues to believe
that DMM-facilitated Trading Halt Auctions following a MWCB Halt
provide the greatest opportunity for fair and orderly reopenings of
securities, and would therefore continue to provide DMMs an opportunity
to reopen securities before effectuating an Exchange-facilitated
Trading Halt Auction. The proposal would provide the Exchange with
another tool during volatile markets to reopen securities before 3:50
p.m. so that continuous

trading may resume before leading into the close. The Exchange further
believes that it is not appropriate to provide that the Exchange would
automatically facilitate reopening auctions at 3:30 p.m. There may be
facts and circumstances where DMMs would be able to reopen all
securities before 3:50 p.m., but that the DMM-facilitated process may
not have completed by 3:30 p.m. The Exchange would take those facts and
circumstances into account before invoking the proposed relief.
Wider Auction Collars for a Trading Halt Auction Following a MWCB Halt
    The Exchange believes that it would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system to widen the Auction Collars for an Exchange-facilitated Trading
Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt. Such widened Auction Collars would
provide the Exchange with more flexibility to respond to any market-
wide declines that may continue following a MWCB Halt if the Exchange
were to facilitate a Trading Halt Auction following such halt. The
Exchange cannot predict if and when the U.S. equities market will
experience market-wide declines that would trigger a MWCB Halt again.
However, if such market-wide volatility were to occur, the Exchange
believes that the widened Auction Collars would promote fair and
orderly reopenings following a MWCB Halt by providing a wider price
range at which the Exchange could facilitate such a reopening, thereby
allowing more buy and sell interest to participate in such Auction.
DMM Interest and Exchange-Facilitated Auctions
    As noted above, beginning March 19, 2020, the Exchange began
facilitating auctions as provided for under Rule 7.35C for the first
time, and then, beginning March 23, 2020, when the Trading Floor was
temporarily closed to reduce the spread of COVID-19, began facilitating
Auctions on behalf of all DMM firms. Based on that experience, the
Exchange added Commentary .03 to Rule 7.35C, which is in effect only
for a temporary period while the Trading Floor is closed. The Exchange
believes that it would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system to make the
changes described in Commentary .03 to Rule 7.35C permanent because it
would allow DMMs to maintain continuity with reasonable depth in their
assigned securities immediately following an Exchange-facilitated
Auction.
    As described above, the Exchange is proposing that DMM Interest
would continue to not participate in an Exchange-facilitated Auction
that results in a trade. As noted above, under both the current Rule
and temporary Commentary .03, DMM Interest does not participate in an
Exchange-facilitated Auction that results in a trade in part to prevent
wash-trade sales of previously-entered DMM buy and sell interest and
therefore reduces DMM units' risk. It also protects the fair and
orderly operation of such Auctions because such DMM Interest may be at
stale prices, and therefore could impact pricing of the Auction in a
manner that does not reflect up-to-date trading interest. For this
reason, the Exchange believes it would continue to promote fair and
orderly Auctions for DMM Interest not to participate in an Exchange-
facilitated Auction that results in a trade.
    By contrast, the Exchange believes that the proposed change that
DMM Interest would be included in an Exchange-facilitated Auction that
results in a quote would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because it would promote fair and orderly resumption of trading by
allowing DMM Interest to be considered as part of the opening quote. A
security only opens on a quote when there are no buy and sell orders
that can be crossed at a single price. Accordingly, when a security
opens on a quote, the DMM has an immediate obligation to maintain a
two-sided quote and to provide continuity and depth. Including DMM
interest in an Exchange-facilitated Auction that results in a quote
would assist DMMs in meeting those obligations.
    The Exchange believes it would remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
not to automatically cancel DMM Interest following an Exchange-
facilitated Auction because it would provide DMMs with the opportunity
to provide passive liquidity immediately following an Exchange-
facilitated Auction, thereby reducing volatility while still limiting
DMM risk. Similarly, the Exchange believes that because DMM Interest
would not be participating in an Exchange-facilitated Auction that
results in a trade, it would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system to
cancel DMM Interest that would be marketable against unexecuted orders
because, if not cancelled, such interest could trade at a price that
would not be consistent with the Auction Price or opening or reopening
quote determined in the Exchange-facilitated Auction. The proposed
changes would also remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market because DMM Interest that, following an Exchange-
facilitated Auction, would be priced through the Auction Price or
Auction Collars, as applicable, would be cancelled in the same manner
that other unexecuted orders would be cancelled.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed changes to Rules
7.35C(a) and (g) would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system because the
Exchange observed improved performance following Exchange-facilitated
Auctions after the Exchange implemented Commentary .03 to Rule 7.35C.
Accordingly, should circumstances ever arise again that would require
the Exchange to facilitate any Auctions, which, based on pre-pandemic
experience, would likely be rare, the Exchange believes that these
proposed changes would improve the performance of Exchange-facilitated
Auctions by enabling better engagement by the DMMs in both the Auction
and the immediate after-market while still limiting DMM risk.
Updated Auction Reference Price for Exchange-Facilitated Core Open
Auctions
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to change the Auction
Reference Price for Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auctions would
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system because it would reduce the
potential number of securities that would be subject to a collared
Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auction, including when there is
significant overnight market-wide volatility. Commentary .04 to Rule
7.35C sought to achieve this goal by widening the Auction Collars, but
as noted above, these temporary widened Auction Collars would not
prevent an Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auction from being subject to
an Auction Collar when there has been significant overnight market-wide
volatility. The Exchange believes that aligning the Auction Reference
Price more closely with the anticipated opening price by using the
midpoint of the Auction NBBO as the Auction Reference Price (or
Official Closing Price of the prior Trading Day if no Auction NBBO)
would reduce the potential for an Exchange-facilitated Core Open Action
to be subject to an Auction Collar on all trading days, including when
there is

significant overnight market-wide volatility. The Exchange further
believes that this proposed rule change would reduce the potential
number of securities that would open at a price that may not represent
the current value of the security due to unfilled marketable auction
interest, while still preserving investor protections by preventing
significantly dislocated openings. This proposed rule change would
therefore promote the fair and orderly operation of Exchange-
facilitated Core Open Auctions by allowing such securities to open at a
price that is consistent with the buy and sell interest in the
security, which would also allow more buy and sell interest to
participate in such Auction.
    The Exchange notes that this proposed change is not novel and is
based on how NYSE Arca and NYSE American determine the Auction
Reference Price for their respective electronic Core Open Auctions.
Accordingly, this proposed change would align how Auction Reference
Prices are determined for electronic Exchange-facilitated Auctions
across NYSE, NYSE Arca, and NYSE American.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issues but rather would make
permanent the Exchange's temporary Commentaries .01-.03 to Rule 7.35C,
which have been in effect for a temporary period while the Trading
Floor is temporarily closed due to COVID-19. This proposed rule change
is designed to provide the Exchange with additional tools for when it
facilitates an Auction, including by allowing for an Exchange-
facilitated Trading Halt Auction following a MWCB Halt so that a
security can be reopened before leading into the close, providing the
DMMs with additional functionality to allow them to maintain price
continuity with reasonable depth in their assigned securities following
an Exchange-facilitated Auction, and aligning the Auction Reference
Price for an Exchange-facilitated Core Open Auction with the Auction
Reference Price used for NYSE Arca and NYSE American electronic Core
Open Auctions. More specifically, the proposed rule change does not
implicate any intramarket competition concerns because the only market
participants on the Exchange with the obligation to facilitate Auctions
are DMMs, and all DMMs would be subject to this rule change. The
proposed rule change does not implicate any intermarket competition
concerns because it relates to how the Exchange would facilitate
Auctions in Exchange-listed securities.

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

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

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register, or 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 the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2020-89 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2020-89. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2020-89, and should be submitted on
or before December 3, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-24986 Filed 11-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Note: This file was prepared prior to signature of the final NESHAP amendments for secondary lead smelting, which were signed on December 16, 2011 and published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2012 (77 FR 556). However, the file was inadvertently not sent to the docket at that time.
MEMORANDUM:
To:  Secondary Lead RTR Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0344
From:  Nathan Topham, Project Lead
Date:  December 16, 2011
Re:  Potential Interface Between Enclosure Standards in section 63.544(c) and Standards for Containment Buildings

Some secondary lead smelters are classified as treatment, storage and disposal facilities under the regulations implementing subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).  Some of these facilities have enclosures which may be "containment buildings", which is a type of regulated unit under the subtitle C rules.  See 40 CFR section 264.1100.  These containment buildings must "take measures to control fugitive emissions such that any openings (doors, windows, vents, cracks, etc.) exhibit no visible emissions".  40 CFR section 264.1101 (c)(4).  EPA believes that this standard is compatible with the requirements for enclosures being promulgated in section 63.544.  Specifically, EPA sees no technical impediment to a source using the same measures to satisfy the enclosure standards and the no visible emissions standard.  Nor did any commenter suggest otherwise.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 78 (Thursday, April 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22777-22778]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09545]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2015-0022]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated March 2, 2015, the City of Fort Collins (City), Colorado, has
petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety
regulations contained at 49 CFR part 222, Use of Locomotive Horns at
Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. FRA assigned the petition Docket
Number FRA-2015-0022.
    The City intends to establish a quiet zone that is 1.6 miles in
length, consisting of 12 public highway-rail grade crossings on the
BNSF Railway in the downtown area. The City is seeking a waiver from
the requirements of 49 CFR 222.35(b) in order to permit the use of
automatic warning devices consisting of flashing lights at seven of the
public highway-rail grade crossings instead of the required automatic
warning devices consisting of flashing lights and gates.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the

petition, is available for review online at www.regulations.gov and in
person at the U.S. Department of Transportation's Docket Operations
Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
The Docket Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by June 8, 2015 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its processes. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
See also http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy
notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2015.
Ron Hynes,
Director, Office of Technical Oversight.
[FR Doc. 2015-09545 Filed 4-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment: Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing to you regarding the time period which you have given to present our thoughts and questions regarding The proposed deeming regulations. I personally feel that it is too short and am aware that you have the ability to change it. I feel that there are many things that need to be discussed by the vaping community and many questions to be asked. The written regulations are quite extensive and confusing to an average citizen and will take time to analyze. I feel that the FDA is offering a fair process by allowing comments but as with the written regs. process, it will take time. I personally have had a dramatic change in my life by switching to electronic cigarettes and have even helped many others do the same. With 500,000 people per year dying from smoking related illnesses and the "proven" low sucess rate of quitting tools we must be very smart about how we regulate  a smoking alternative. I very much favor "common sence regulations" but what is proposed will only benifit those with deep pockets. I am very certain that you have the intentions of making things fair for all And this is where I am asking you to start. Thank you and have a good day.-Nathan Wells   KANSAS