[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 50 (Friday, March 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14716-14719]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88345; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2020-18]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule

March 9, 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 March 2, 2020, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by 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 modify the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule''). The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective March 2, 2020. 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 purpose of this filing is to amend the Fee Schedule to modify
the Limit of Fees on Options Strategy Executions (``Strategy Cap''), as
set forth below.
    Currently, the Fee Schedule provides that transaction fees for OTP
Holders and OTP Firms (collectively, ``OTP Holders'') are limited or
capped at $700 for certain options strategy executions ``on the same
trading day in the same option class'' and such fees are further capped
at $25,000 per month per initiating firm.\3\ Strategy executions that
qualify for the Strategy Cap are (a) reversals and conversions, (b) box
spreads, (c) short stock interest spreads, (d) merger spreads, and (e)
jelly rolls, which are described in detail in the Fee Schedule (the
``Strategy Executions'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca OPTIONS: TRADE-RELATED CHARGES
FOR STANDARD OPTIONS, LIMIT OF FEES ON OPTIONS STRATEGY EXECUTIONS,
available here: https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/arca-options/NYSE_Arca_Options_Fee_Schedule.pdf.
    \4\ See id., at Endnote 10 (describing the Strategy Executions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to increase the daily Strategy Cap from $700
to $1,000 and to include in the Cap all Strategy Executions traded in
the same day (i.e., to eliminate the Cap requirement that strategies be
in the same option class). In connection with this change, the Exchange
proposes to eliminate the $25,000 monthly Strategy Cap. The Exchange
believes that the proposed Strategy Cap would encourage OTP Holders to
execute more Strategy Executions, particularly those that would not
individually qualify for inclusion in the Cap because of the current
per-symbol limitation, as such strategies would become more
economically feasible (and thus more attractive), when combined under
the proposed Cap with all of an OTP Holder's Strategy Executions on the
same trading day.
    The Exchange also proposes to exclude from the cap any qualifying
Strategy Execution executed as a QCC order, as QCC transactions for
Non-Customers are eligible for other Fee Cap programs, and eligible for
credits for a Floor Broker executing a QCC (see infra note 10).
    The Exchange proposes to implement the rule change on March 2,
2020.
Background
    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (``Reg NMS
Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\6\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power
in the execution of multiply-listed equity & ETF options order flow.
More specifically, in the fourth quarter of 2019, the Exchange had less
than 10% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options trades.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety of
formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange, available
here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
    \7\ Based on OCC data, see id., the Exchange's market share in
equity-based options was 9.57% for the month of January 2019 and
9.59% for the month of January 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction fees.
    In response to this competitive environment, the Exchange has
established incentives, such as the Strategy Cap, to encourage OTP
Holders to participate in certain large volume options strategies that
capture potentially small profits by capping the fees paid for such
transactions.
    As noted above, the current Strategy Cap limits or caps at $700
transaction fees for options Strategy Executions ``on

the same trading day in the same option class'' and further caps such
fees at $25,000 per month.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Fee Schedule, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change
    The Exchange proposes to modify the Strategy Cap by eliminating the
requirement that Strategy Executions on the same trading day all be in
the same symbol for inclusion in the Cap. Specifically, as proposed,
the daily Strategy Cap on transaction fees for options Strategy
Executions would be changed from $700 to $1,000 and would apply to all
Strategy Executions by an OTP Holder on the same trading day
(regardless of option class/symbol). In addition, given the proposal to
cap an OTP Holder's fee for all Strategy Executions in a given trading
day at $1,000, the Exchange proposed to eliminate the $25,000 per month
Strategy Cap as unnecessary.
    For example, per the current Fee Schedule, an OTP Holder that
executes the following Strategy Executions on the same trading day
would be charged as follows:
     A Jelly Roll in ABC for $800 in fees, capped at $700;
     A Reversal Conversion in DEF for $500 in fees; and
     A Merger Spread in XYZ for $600.
    The total fees for these Strategy Executions under the current Fee
Schedule would be $1,800. Under the proposed Strategy Cap, the same
trades would be billed as follows:
     A Jelly Roll in ABC for $800 in fees;
     A Reversal Conversion in DEF for $500 in fees; and
     A Merger Spread in XYZ for $600.
    The total fees for these Strategy Executions under the proposed Fee
Schedule would be $1,000. Thus, although the amount of the Cap would be
increased, the number of eligible Strategy Executions would also be
increased, making it easier to meet the Strategy Cap.
    The Exchange also proposes to clarify that, consistent with other
options exchanges that offer similar caps, a qualifying Strategy
Execution executed as a QCC order will not be eligible for this fee
cap.\9\ The Exchange notes that QCC transactions for Non-Customers are
eligible for other Fee Cap programs, and eligible for credits for a
Floor Broker executing a QCC.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See e.g., NYSE American Options fee schedule, Section I.J.,
Strategy Execution Fee Cap (providing that ``Any qualifying Strategy
Execution executed as a QCC order will not be eligible for this fee
cap'').
    \10\ See e.g., Fee Schedule, NYSE Arca OPTIONS: TRADE-RELATED
CHARGES FOR STANDARD OPTIONS, FIRM AND BROKER DEALER MONTHLY FEE CAP
(including in monthly cap any ``QCC transactions executed by a Floor
Broker from the Floor of the Exchange'') and QUALIFIED CONTINGENT
CROSS (``QCC'') TRANSACTION FEES AND CREDITS (providing a per
contract credit for QCCs executed by Floor Brokers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's fees are constrained by intermarket competition, as
OTP Holders may direct their order flow to any of the 16 options
exchanges, including those with similar Strategy Fee Caps.\11\ Thus,
OTP Holders have a choice of where they direct their order flow. This
proposed change is designed to incent OTP Holders to increase their
Strategy Execution volumes by executing (often smaller) strategies that
are not necessarily economically viable on a per symbol basis, but
which may be profitable when fees on Strategy Executions--regardless of
symbol--are capped for the trading day. The Exchange notes that all
market participants stand to benefit from increased volume, which
promotes market depth, facilitates tighter spreads and enhances price
discovery, and may lead to a corresponding increase in order flow from
other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The proposed change is substantially identical to a change
made by NYSE American Options in September 2019 wherein that
exchange increased its Strategy Execution Cap from $750 (not $700,
as here) to $1,000 and applied cap to all Strategy Executions by a
given ATP Holder on the same trading day and to eliminate the
$25,000 monthly Strategy Cap. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 86917 (September 10, 2019), 84 FR 48672 (September 16, 2019)
(SR-NYSEAMER-2019-36); NYSE American Options fee schedule, Section
I.J., Strategy Execution Fee Cap (excluding QCC transactions from
the cap). See also BOX Options Market LLC (``BOX'') fee schedule,
Section II.D (Strategy QOO Order Fee Cap and Rebate).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether any OTP Holders
would avail themselves of this proposed fee change. At present, whether
or when an OTP Holder qualifies for the current daily Strategy Cap (of
$700) varies day-to-day in a given month. Thus, the Exchange cannot
predict with any certainty the number of OTP Holders that may qualify
for the modified Strategy Cap, but believes that OTP Holders would be
encouraged to take advantage of the modified Cap. The Exchange believes
the proposed Strategy Cap, which applies to all qualifying strategies
executed on the same trading day, regardless of symbol, would provide
an incentive for OTP Holders to submit these types of strategy orders
to the Exchange Trading Floor, which brings increased liquidity and
order flow for the benefit of all market participants.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\13\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 6, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market
share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\15\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power
in the execution of multiply-listed equity & ETF options order flow.
More specifically, in the fourth quarter of 2019, the Exchange had less
than 10% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options trades.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 7.
    \16\ Based on OCC data, see supra note 8, in 2019, the
Exchange's market share in equity-based options was 9.57% for the
month of January 2019 and 9.59% for the month of January 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction fees. Stated otherwise, changes
to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of
an exchange to compete for order flow.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed modification to the
Strategy

Cap is designed to incent OTP Holders to increase the number and type
of Strategy Executions sent to the Exchange. In addition, the proposal
caps fees on all similar transactions, regardless of size and
similarly-situated OTP Holders can opt to try to achieve the modified
Strategy Cap. The proposal is designed to encourage OTP Holders to send
all Strategy Executions to the Exchange regardless of size or type. To
the extent that the proposed change attracts more Strategy Executions
to the Exchange Trading Floor, this increased order flow would continue
to make the Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other things,
order execution, which, in turn, promotes just and equitable principles
of trade and removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system.
    Finally, to the extent the proposed change continues to attract
greater volume and liquidity (to the Floor or otherwise), the Exchange
believes the proposed change would improve the Exchange's overall
competitiveness and strengthen its market quality for all market
participants. In the backdrop of the competitive environment in which
the Exchange operates, the proposed rule change is a reasonable attempt
by the Exchange to increase the depth of its market and improve its
market share relative to its competitors. The Exchange's fees are
constrained by intermarket competition, as OTP Holders may direct their
order flow to any of the 16 options exchanges, including those with
similar Strategy Fee Caps.\17\ Thus, OTP Holders have a choice of where
they direct their order flow--including their Strategy Executions. The
proposed rule change is designed to incent OTP Holders to direct
liquidity to the Exchange--in particular Strategy Executions, thereby
promoting market depth, price discovery and improvement and enhancing
order execution opportunities for market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 12 (regarding the substantially identical
change to the NYSE American Fee Schedule, which also excludes QCC
transactions from the cap, and the $1,000 cap on strategy executions
in place on and BOX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether any OTP Holders
would avail themselves of this proposed fee change. At present, whether
or when an OTP Holder qualifies for the current daily Strategy Cap (of
$700) varies day-to-day in a given month. Thus, the Exchange cannot
predict with any certainty the number of OTP Holders that may qualify
for the modified Strategy Cap, but believes that OTP Holders would be
encouraged to take advantage of the modified Cap. The Exchange believes
the proposed Strategy Cap, which applies to all qualifying strategies
executed on the same trading day, regardless of symbol, would provide
an incentive for OTP Holders to submit these types of strategy orders
to the Exchange Trading Floor, which brings increased liquidity and
order flow for the benefit of all market participants.
The Proposed Rule Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Credits and Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable
allocation of its fees and credits. The proposal is based on the amount
and type of business transacted on the Exchange and OTP Holders can opt
to avail themselves of the Strategy Cap or not. Moreover, the proposal
is designed to encourage OTP Holders to aggregate all Strategy
Executions at the Exchange as a primary execution venue. To the extent
that the proposed change attracts more Strategy Executions to the
Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to make the Exchange
a more competitive venue for, among other things, order execution.
Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would improve
market quality for all market participants on the Exchange and, as a
consequence, attract more order flow to the Exchange thereby improving
market-wide quality and price discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to modify
the Strategy Cap because the proposed modification would be available
to all similarly-situated market participants on an equal and non-
discriminatory basis.
    The proposal is based on the amount and type of business transacted
on the Exchange and OTP Holders are not obligated to try to achieve the
Strategy Cap. Rather, the proposal is designed encourage OTP Holders to
utilize the Exchange as a primary trading venue for Strategy Executions
(if they have not done so previously) or increase volume sent to the
Exchange. To the extent that the proposed change attracts more Strategy
Executions to the Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to
make the Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other things,
order execution. Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
would improve market quality for all market participants on the
Exchange and, as a consequence, attract more order flow to the Exchange
thereby improving market-wide quality and price discovery. The
resulting increased volume and liquidity would provide more trading
opportunities and tighter spreads to all market participants and thus
would promote just and equitable principles of trade, 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.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, 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. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all market participants. As a result, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting
Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which
promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of
orders, large and small.'' \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 6, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is designed to attract
additional order flow (particularly Strategy Executions) to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed Strategy Cap would
incent market participants to direct their Strategy Execution volume to
the Exchange. Greater liquidity benefits all market participants on the
Exchange and increased Strategy Executions would increase opportunities
for execution of other trading interest. The proposed Strategy Cap
would be available to all similarly-situated market participants that
incur transaction fees on Strategy Executions, and, as such, the
proposed change would not impose a disparate burden on competition
among market participants on the Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market

participants can readily favor one of the 16 competing option exchanges
if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive. In such
an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and to attract order flow to the
Exchange. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding index-
based options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market share
of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options
trades.\19\ Therefore, no exchange possesses significant pricing power
in the execution of multiply-listed equity & ETF options order flow.
More specifically, in the fourth quarter of 2019, the Exchange had less
than 10% market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity &
ETF options trades.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 7.
    \20\ Based on OCC data, supra note 8, the Exchange's market
share in equity-based options was 9.57% for the month of January
2019 and 9.59% for the month of January, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees in a
manner designed to encourage OTP Holders to direct trading interest
(particularly Strategy Executions) to the Exchange, to provide
liquidity and to attract order flow. To the extent that this purpose is
achieved, all the Exchange's market participants should benefit from
the improved market quality and increased opportunities for price
improvement.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including
those that currently offer similar Strategy Caps, by encouraging
additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution. The
Exchange also believes that the proposed change is designed to provide
the public and investors with a Fee Schedule that is clear and
consistent, thereby reducing burdens on the marketplace and
facilitating investor protection.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \21\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \22\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \23\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2020-18 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-NYSEArca-2020-18. 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-NYSEArca-2020-18, and should be
submitted on or before April 3, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-05105 Filed 3-12-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 147)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38346-38348]
[DOCID:fr03au09-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0463; FRL-8938-8]

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants, West Virginia; Control of
Emissions From Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator Units,
Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
West Virginia (WV) hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerator
(HMIWI) 111(d)/129 plan (the ``plan''). The revision contains a
modified WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air
Quality (DAQ) rule that streamlines the State's regulatory structure
(WV45CSR6, 18, and 24) for incinerator units and incorporates
applicable Clean Air Act (CAA), section 129, requirements into one
rule, WV45CSR18. This approval action relates only to HMIWI units. The
streamlining of the State's regulatory structure of its incinerator
rules is not an EPA requirement.

DATES: This rule is effective October 2, 2009 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by September 2, 2009. If
EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2009-0463 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail: E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0463, Walter Wilkie, Chief, Air Quality
Analysis Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and

special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2009-0463. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the West Virginia Division of Air
Quality, 601 57th Street, SE., Charleston, West Virginia 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James B. Topsale, P.E., at (215) 814-
2190, or by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The initial West Virginia HMIWI plan was approved by EPA in the
June 13, 2000 edition of the Federal Register. (65 FR 37046). The plan
approval is codified in 40 CFR Part 62, subpart XX. On May 11, 2009,
the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection submitted to
EPA a formal 111(d)/129 plan revision for HMIWI units. The submitted
plan revision is part of an effort to streamline and consolidate DAQ's
Clean Air Act, section 129, requirements for commercial industrial
solid waste incinerator (CISWI) and HMIWI units. All applicable section
129 incinerator regulatory requirements are now in one State rule,
WV45CSR18. However, this approval action relates only to HMIWI units. A
related plan revision for CISWI units will be addressed in a separate
Federal Register notice and rulemaking action. The consolidation of the
DAQ incinerator rules into one is not an EPA requirement.
    Section 129 of the CAA regulates a mixture of air pollutants. These
pollutants include organics (dioxins/furans), carbon monoxide, metals
(cadmium, lead, mercury), acid gases (hydrogen chloride, sulfur
dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) and particulate matter (including
opacity).

II. Review of West Virginia's HMIWI Plan Revision

    EPA has reviewed the West Virginia HMIWI plan revision submittal in
the context of the requirements of 40 CFR Part 60, subparts B and Ce;
and Part 62, subpart A. The submitted plan revision meets all the cited
requirements and those as described in EPA's original approval of West
Virginia's plan approval on June 13, 2000. (65 FR 37046).

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the West Virginia HMIWI plan revision that
streamlines and consolidates its section 111(d)/129 existing
incinerator regulations into one rule, WV45CSR18. Therefore, EPA is
amending 40 CFR Part 62, subpart XX, to reflect this action. This
approval is based on the rationale discussed above and in further
detail in the technical support document (TSD) associated with this
action. This plan revision approval does not negate or void any of the
initial plan approval requirements (65 FR 37046), including compliance
dates for any affected facility. The scope of this plan revision
approval is limited to the provisions of 40 CFR Parts 60 and 62 for
existing HMIWI units, as referenced in the emission guidelines, subpart
Ce, and the related new source performance standard, subpart Ec. CISWI
and other types of section 129 incinerator rule requirements are not
included in the scope of this approval action.
    The EPA Administrator continues to retain authority for several
tasks, as cited in State rule WV45CSR18, Sec.  45-18-9. This retention
of Federal authority also includes the granting of waivers for initial
and annual compliance testing requirements.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. This action simply reflects already existing Federal
requirement for State air pollution control agencies and existing HMIWI
units that are subject to the provisions of 40 CFR Part 60, subparts B
and Ce, respectively. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the 111(d)/129 plan revision
should relevant adverse or critical comments be filed. This rule will
be effective October 2, 2009 without further notice unless the Agency
receives relevant adverse comments by September 2, 2009. If EPA
receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the public that the rule did not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-
existing requirements under State law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it 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). This rule also does not have Tribal implications
because it will 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, as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also
does not have Federalism implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This
action merely approves a State rule implementing a Federal requirement,
and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because
it approves a State rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing
section 111(d)/129 plan submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a 111(d)/129 plan submission for failure to use VCS. It
would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews
a 111(d)/129 plan submission, to use VCS in place of a 111(d)/129 plan
submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This
rule does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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 rule 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. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 October 2, 2009. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action, approving the submitted West Virginia HMIWI
plan revision, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce
its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Aluminum, Fertilizers, Fluoride,
Intergovernmental relations, Paper and paper products industry,
Phosphate, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Sulfur acid plants, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: July 21, 2009.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR Part 62, Subpart XX, is amended as follows:

PART 62--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart XX--West Virginia

0
2. Section 62.12150 is amended by designating the existing paragraph as
paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  62.12150  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (b) On May 11, 2009, the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection submitted a State plan revision (1) that
consolidates all existing section 111(d)/129 incinerator regulatory
requirements into one modified rule, WV45CSR18.

0
3. Section 62.12152 is amended by designating the existing paragraph as
paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.12152  Effective date.

* * * * *
    (b) Plan revision 1 is effective October 2, 2009.

[FR Doc. E9-18482 Filed 7-31-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 752-754]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00032]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87880; File No. SR-ICEEU-2019-029]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Changes Relating
to Clearing Member Charges and Rates of Return on Cash and Collateral
in Relation to Margin Deposits and Guaranty Fund Contributions for All
Clearing Member House and Customer Accounts

January 2, 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 December

20, 2019, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule changes described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have
been primarily prepared by ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \4\ thereunder, so that the proposed rule change was
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to revise
Clearing Member Charges and Rates of Return on cash and collateral in
relation to margin deposits and Guaranty Fund contributions for all
Clearing Member House and Customer Accounts. The revisions do not
involve any changes to the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules or
Procedures.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the ICE Clear Europe Clearing 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, ICE Clear Europe included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of such 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
    The purpose of the proposed rule changes are for ICE Clear Europe
to: (i) Reduce the Rate of Return paid to Clearing Members on cash
balances; and (ii) increase the charges levied on Clearing Members in
relation to collateral in respect of margin deposits and Guaranty Fund
contributions.
    Attached [sic] as Exhibit 5 are the tables listing the new Clearing
Member Charges and Rates of Return that will be included in a Circular
in advance of the effective date. The new Clearing Member Charges and
Rates of Return are expected to come into effect on January 1, 2020.
The proposed revisions to the Clearing Member Charges and Rates of
Return are set forth in Exhibit 5 hereto, and described in detail as
follows.
    Currently, ICEU pays a rate of return on cash deposited by Clearing
Members in respect of margin deposits and Guaranty Fund contributions
referred to as the ICE Deposit Rate (``IDR''). IDR is calculated daily
and applied to cash balances held at the close of business on the
previous business day in respect of three currencies, U.S. Dollar, Euro
and Pound Sterling. It is calculated as follows: The net income earned
on cash deposits (positive or negative) less a charge of 12.5 basis
points (out of which the Clearing House shall cover external investment
management expenses). ICEU proposes to increase this charge to 15 basis
points.
    ICEU also proposes to increase the Clearing House charges for
Collateral and Triparty Collateral as per Exhibit 5.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Cash                  Collateral           Triparty collateral
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Margin Deposits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House and Affiliate Accounts (``H'',  Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    Clearing House charges
 ``F'' and ``R'').                                              8.33 [7.5] basis points.  8.33 [7.5] basis
                                                                                points.
Segregated Customer Accounts (``C'',  Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    Clearing House charges
 ``E'', ``K'', ``S'', ``T'', ``W''                              8.33 [7.5] basis points.  8.33 [7.5] basis
 and ``Z'').                                                                              points.
Standard Omnibus Indirect Customer    Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    Clearing House charges
 Accounts (O'', ``P'', ``X'' and                                8.33 [7.5] basis points.  8.33 [7.5] basis
 ``Y'').                                                                                points.
Gross Omnibus Indirect Customer       Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    Clearing House charges
 Accounts (``A'' and ``B'').           minus 15 bps.            10.33 [9.5] basis         10.33 [9.5] basis
                                                                points.                   points.
Individually Segregated               Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    Clearing House charges
 Operationally Co-mingled (``ISOC'')   minus 15 bps.            10.33 [9.5] basis         10.33 [9.5] basis
 Account (``I'' and ``J'' Account).                             points.                   points.
Individually Segregated Sponsored     Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    Clearing House charges
 Account (``Sponsored Principal'').    minus 20 bps.            13.33 [12.5] basis        13.33 [12.5] basis
                                                                points.                   points.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Guaranty Fund
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Clearing Members................  Clearing House pays IDR  Clearing House charges    N/A.
                                                                8.33 [7.5] basis points.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with the requirements of the Act, including Section 17A of
the Act \6\ and regulations thereunder applicable to it. More
specifically ICE Clear Europe has determined that imposing such Charges
and Rates of Return uniformly across all market participants thus
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Clearing Members, within the meaning of Section
17A(b)(3)(D) of the Act.\7\ As such, the proposed changes are
appropriately filed pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \8\ of the Act and
paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4\9\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(D). Under this provision, ``[a]
clearing agency shall not be registered unless the Commission
determines that--(D) The rules of the clearing agency provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its participants.''
    \8\ 15 U.S.C 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed rule changes would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or

appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act because the
changes to the Clearing Member Charges and Rates of Return will apply
uniformly across all market participants. ICE Clear Europe does not
believe that the amendments would adversely affect the ability of such
Clearing Members or other market participants generally to engage in
cleared transactions or to access clearing.

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

    Written comments relating to the proposed changes to the rules have
not been solicited or received. ICE Clear Europe will notify the
Commission of any written comments received by ICE Clear Europe.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based
Swap Submission and Advance Notice and Timing for Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \11\
thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, 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-ICEEU-2019-029 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-ICEEU-2019-029. 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 Europe and on ICE Clear Europe's website at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/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-ICEEU-2019-029 and should be
submitted on or before January 28, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-00032 Filed 1-6-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42491-42492]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17661]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9701-4]

Announcement of the Board of Trustees for the National
Environmental Education Foundation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency; Office of External Affairs and
Environmental Education.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The National Environmental Education Foundation (NEEF) was
created by Section 10 of Public Law 101-619, the National Environmental
Education Act of 1990. It is a private 501(c)(3) non-profit
organization established to promote and support education and training
as necessary tools to further environmental protection and sustainable,
environmentally sound development. It provides the common ground upon
which leaders from business and industry, all levels of government,
public interest groups, and others can work cooperatively to expand the
reach of environmental education and training programs beyond the
traditional classroom. The Foundation supports a grant program that
promotes innovative environmental education and training programs; it
also develops partnerships with government and other organizations to
administer projects that promote the development of an environmentally
literate public. The Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, as required by the terms of the Act, announces the following
appointment to the National Environmental Education Foundation Board of
Trustees. The appointee is Wonya Lucas, Chief Executive Officer and
President of TV One, LLC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding this Notice
of Appointment, please contact Mrs. Stephanie Owens, Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education
(1701A) U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
General information concerning NEEF can be found on their Web site at:
http://www.neefusa.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Additional Considerations: Great care has been taken to assure that
this new appointee not only has the highest degree of expertise and
commitment, but also brings to the Board diverse points of view
relating to environmental education. This appointment is a four-year
term which may be renewed once for an additional four years pending
successful re-election by the NEEF nominating committee.
    This appointee will join the current Board members which include:

 Decker Anstrom, Former CEO, The Weather Channel Companies
 JL Armstrong (NEEF Vice Chair), National Manger, Toyota Motor
Sales, USA, Inc.
 Raymond Ban, Executive Vice President, The Weather Channel
 Holly Cannon, Principal, Beveridge and Diamond, P.C.
 Phillipe Cousteau, Co-Founder and CEO, EarthEcho International
 Manuel Alberto Diaz, Partner, Lydecker Diaz, L.L.P.
 Arthur Gibson (NEEF Chair), Vice President, Environment,
Health and Safety, Baxter Healthcare Corporation
 Kenneth Olden, Chairman, Avon Foundation Scientific Advisory
Board
 Trish Silber, President, Aliniad Consulting Partners, Inc.
 Bradley Smith, Dean, Huxley College of the Environment,
Western Washington University
 Kenneth Strassner (NEEF Treasurer), Vice President, Global
Environment, Safety, Regulatory and Scientific Affairs, Kimberly-Clark
Corporation
 Diane Wood (NEEF Secretary), President, National Environmental
Education Foundation

    Background: Section 10(a) of the National Environmental Education
Act of 1990 mandates a National Environmental Education Foundation. The
Foundation is established in order to extend the contribution of
environmental education and training to meeting critical environmental
protection needs, both in this country and internationally; to
facilitate the cooperation, coordination, and contribution of public
and private resources to create an environmentally advanced educational
system; and to foster an open and effective partnership among Federal,
State, and local government, business, industry, academic institutions,
community based environmental groups, and international organizations.
    The Foundation is a charitable and nonprofit corporation whose
income is exempt from tax, and donations to which are tax deductible to
the same extent as those organizations listed pursuant to section
501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The Foundation is not an
agency or establishment of the United States. The purposes of the
Foundation are--
    (A) Subject to the limitation contained in the final sentence of
subsection (d) herein, to encourage, accept, leverage, and administer
private gifts for the benefit of, or in connection with, the
environmental education and training activities and services of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency;
    (B) To conduct such other environmental education activities as
will further the development of an environmentally conscious and
responsible public, a well-trained and environmentally literate
workforce, and an environmentally advanced educational system;
    (C) To participate with foreign entities and individuals in the
conduct and coordination of activities that will further opportunities
for environmental education and training to address environmental
issues and problems involving the United States and Canada or Mexico.
    The Foundation develops, supports, and/or operates programs and
projects to educate and train educational and environmental
professionals, and to assist them in the development and delivery of
environmental education and training programs and studies.
    The Foundation has a governing Board of Directors (hereafter
referred to in this section as `the Board'), which consists of 13
directors, each of whom shall be knowledgeable or experienced in the
environment, education and/or training. The Board oversees the
activities of the Foundation and assures that the activities of the
Foundation are consistent with the environmental and education goals
and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency and with the
intents and purposes of the Act. The membership of the Board, to the
extent practicable, represents diverse points of view relating to
environmental education and training. Members of the Board are
appointed by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
    Within 90 days of the date of the enactment of the National
Environmental Education Act, and as appropriate thereafter, the
Administrator will publish in the Federal Register an announcement of
appointments of Directors of the Board. Such appointments become final
and effective 90 days after publication in the Federal Register. The
directors are appointed for terms of 4 years. The term may be renewed
once for an additional four years, pending successful re-election by
the NEEF nominating committee. The Administrator shall appoint an
individual to serve as a director in the event of a vacancy on the
Board within 60 days of said vacancy in the manner in which the
original appointment was made. No individual

may serve more than 2 consecutive terms as a director.

    Dated: June 28, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

Wonya Lucas

    Ms. Wonya Y. Lucas has been Chief Executive Officer and President
of TV One, LLC since August 08, 2011. Ms. Lucas was most recently
Executive Vice President of Discovery Channel, Chief Operating Officer
of Discovery Channel, Executive Vice President of Science Channel and
Chief Operating Officer of Science Channel at Discovery Communications
Holding, LLC since June 2010. She served as Chief Marketing Officer of
Discovery Communications Holding, LLC from March 24, 2008 to June 2010.
    Prior to joining Discovery Communications in 2008, Lucas served as
General Manager and Executive Vice President of The Weather Channel
Networks, where she was responsible for corporate strategy and
development, strategic marketing for The Weather Channel and
weather.com, and operations and programming for The Weather Channel,
The Weather Channel HD, Weatherscan, The Weather Channel Radio Network,
and newspaper syndication.
    Before joining The Weather Channel in 2002 as Executive Vice
President of Marketing, Lucas held several positions at Turner
Broadcasting System, including Senior Vice President of Strategic
Marketing for CNN Networks and Vice President of Business Operations
and Network Development for TBS, TNT, Turner Classic Movies and Turner
South. Her other experience includes brand management for The Coca-Cola
Company and The Clorox Company.
    In 2010, Lucas was named among the ``75 Most Powerful Women in
Business'' by Black Enterprise magazine. Previous honors include
listing among the 2009 ``Leading Women in Business'' and ``Leading
Minorities in Business'' by Cablefax Daily, recognition as a ``Woman To
Watch'' by Women in Cable Telecommunications, a Brand Builders Award at
the 2006 Promax & BDA Conference, recognition as a ``Women To Watch''
in the 2005 Wonder Women of Cable TV Awards, and the Inspiration Award
for ``Woman of the Year'' in the WICT-Atlanta's 2007 Red Letter Awards.
Lucas serves on the Board of Directors of the Cable &
Telecommunications Association for Marketing and she was the co-
chairperson for the 2007 CTAM Summit. She also has served as a board
member for WICT, Inc. and is a graduate of the Betsy Magness Leadership
Institute.
    Ms. Lucas earned a master's degree in business administration from
the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business and a
bachelor's degree in Industrial Engineering from Georgia Institute of
Technology.

[FR Doc. 2012-17661 Filed 7-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 226 (Friday, November 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59431-59432]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25491]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rules 400-404 of Regulation Crowdfunding (Intermediaries); SEC
File No. 270-774, OMB Control No. 3235-0727

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information provided for Rule 17Ab2-1 (17 CFR 240.17Ab2-1) and Form CA-
1: Registration of Clearing Agencies (17 CFR 249b.200) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of
information to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
extension and approval.
    The collections of information required under Rules 400 through 404
is mandatory for all funding portals. Form Funding Portal helps ensure
that the Commission can make information about funding portals
transparent and easily accessible to the investing public, including
issuers and obligated persons who engage funding portals; investors who
may purchase securities through offerings on funding portals; and other
regulators. Further, the information provided on Form Funding Portal
expands the amount of publicly available information about funding
portals, including disciplinary history. Consequently, the rules and
forms allows issuers and the investing public, as well as others, to
become more fully informed about funding portals in a more efficient
manner.
    Rule 400 requires each person applying for registration with the
Commission as a funding portal to file electronically with the
Commission Form Funding Portal. Rule 400(a) requires a funding portal
to become a member of a national securities association registered
under Section 15A of the Exchange Act. Rule 400(b) requires a funding
portal to file an amendment to Form Funding Portal if any information
previously submitted on Form Funding Portal becomes inaccurate for any
reason. Rule 400(c) provides that a funding portal can succeed to the
business of a predecessor funding portal upon the successor filing a
registration on Form Funding Portal and the predecessor filing a
withdrawal on Form Funding Portal.
    Rule 400(d) requires a funding portal to promptly file a withdrawal
of registration on Form Funding Portal upon ceasing to operate as a
funding portal. Rule 400(e) states that duplicate originals of the
applications and reports provided for in this section must be filed
with surveillance personnel designated by any registered national
securities association of which the funding portal is a member. Rule
400(f) requires a nonresident funding portal to: (1) Obtain a written
consent and power of attorney appointing an agent for service of
process in the United States; (2) furnish the Commission with the name
and address of its agent for services of process on Schedule C of Form
Funding Portal; (3) certify that it can, as a matter of law, and will
provide the Commission and any registered national securities
association of which it becomes a member with prompt access to its
books and records and can, as a matter of law, and will submit to
onsite inspection and examination by the Commission and any registered
national securities association of which it becomes a member; and (4)
provide the Commission with an opinion of counsel and certify on
Schedule C on Form Funding Portal that the firm can, as a matter of
law, provide the Commission and registered national securities
association of which it becomes a member with prompt access to its
books and records and can, as a matter of law, submit to onsite
inspection and examination by the Commission and any registered
national securities association of which it becomes a member.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Exchange Act Section 3(h)(1)(C) permits us to impose, as
part of our authority to exempt funding portals from broker
registration, ``such other requirements under [the Exchange Act] as
the Commission determines appropriate.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 403(a) requires a funding portal to implement written policies
and procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the
federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder
relating to its business as a funding portal. Rule 403(b) provides that
a funding portal must comply with privacy rules. Rule 404 requires all
registered funding portals to maintain certain books and records
relating to their funding portal activities, for not less than five
years, the first two in an easily accessible place. Rule 404(e)
requires funding portals to furnish promptly to the Commission, its
representatives, and the registered national securities association of
which the funding portal is a member true, correct, complete and
current copies of such records of the funding portal that are requested
by the representatives of the Commission and the registered national
securities association.
    The Commission staff estimates that annualized industry burden
would be 17,554.35 hours to comply with Rules 400-404. The Commission
staff estimates that the costs associated with complying with Rules
400-404 are estimated to be approximately a total amount of $308,729.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Charles Riddle, Acting
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and

Exchange Commission, c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington,
DC 20549, or send an email to: [email protected].

    Dated: November 19, 2018.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25491 Filed 11-21-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P