William Thompson < WThompson@ aqmd . gov>

07/ 23/ 2003 01: 47 PM To: Ray Vogel/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA cc: Mohsen Nazemi < MNazemi1@ aqmd. gov>, Jay Chen < JChen@ aqmd. gov>, Edwin Pupka < EPupka@ aqmd. gov>, Ben Shaw < BShaw@ aqmd. gov> Subject: RE: FW: End of Area Sourc deferrals  Informal comments Hi Mr. Vogel,

I've checked with SCAQMD's compliance managers and have the following information to add:

A) Drycleaners are typically inspected about every 18 months and, thanks to newer technologies, emissions complianc rates are about 90%. Overall compliance rates for this source category are lower ( about 60%) due to record keeping infractions. Most dry cleaner owners have communications concerns so much effort is expended in outreach to associations and trade groups. So far, this has met with modest success. This is also a major concern with eliminating the Title V deferral for this area source. The added complexity of a Title V permit would certainly overwhelm a high proportion of these owner/ operators resulting in frustration and non compliance without a corresponding air quality ben Also please note that the SCAQMD adopted an amendment to it's rules that eliminate the use of perchloroethylene in t coming years. This rule is http:// www. aqmd. gov/ rules/ html/ r1421. html .

B) Degreasers using HAPs are quickly being phased out in favor of aqueous cleaners. There are only a few left in the areas regulated by AQMD and these will likely be retired soon. Needless to say, these are inspected annually and compliance rates are high (> 80%).

C) There are 7 ETO sterilizers in operation commercially. These are all inspected, at a minimum, annually. As in the ca of degreasers using HAPs, compliance rates, due to the small number of facilities and the nature of these sources, approaches 100%. These sources are subject to SCAQMD Rule 1405 http:// www. aqmd. gov/ rules/ html/ r1405. html D) There are two secondary lead facilities in our area  both have Title V permits already.

E) There are a handful of secondary aluminum facilities. These are all inspected annually and compliance rates are satisfactory. Getting an accurate source test can be problematic however, so we continue to make these facilities a priority.

F) The SCAQMD regulates about 190 chrome plating facilities and these are inspected at least annually. Many are inspected more frequently. SCAQMD rule 1469 http:// www. aqmd. gov/ rules/ html/ r1469. html applies to these facilities. This rule has technology and risk based requirements that result in a rule, that SCAQMD believes, is more health protective than the NESHAPS. Compliance rates have already been sent. Most of these facilities are small businesse and would face the same hurdles that dry cleaners would in navigating the administrative waters of Title V. Due to aggressive state and local rulemaking, permitting and enforcement, there would be no air quality benefit by requiring a Title V permit for these sources.

I will call you today or tomorrow to see if you have any questions regarding SCAQMD's program or to see if you need more information to continue the deferral.

Best regards,

William C. Thompson Senior Manager Operations ( 909) 396 2398  Original Message

From: Vogel. Ray@ epamail. epa. gov [ mailto: Vogel. Ray@ epamail. epa. gov]

Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 5: 37 AM To: William Thompson Cc: Swanson. Joanna@ epamail. epa. gov; Hitte. Steve@ epamail. epa. gov Subject: Re: FW: End of Area Source deferrals  Informal comments Thanks, William ( can I call you Bill?) That information was very helpful.

By way of followup, I'm wondering if you might have any compliance rate information on the other categories ( dry cleaners, degreasers, EO sterilizers, seconday lead and secondary aluminum). Also wondering if you have statistics about how many of these sources ( including the chrome platers) get inspected and how often. If you'd like, rather than you sending me this information in another email, I'll be glad to discuss this by phone.

Ray Vogel Operating Permits Group, OAQPS 919 541 3153 William Thompson < WThompson@ aqmd. g To: Ray Vogel/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA ov> cc:

Subject: FW: End of Area Source deferrals  Informal 07/ 18/ 03 12: 13 PM comments Hi Mr. Vogel,

I'm forwarding this e mail to you since Mr. Hitte is currently out of the office.

Best regards,

William C. Thompson Senior Manager Operations  Original Message

From: William Thompson Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 4: 32 PM To: ' Hitte. Steve@ epa. gov'

Cc: Mohsen Nazemi; Mike Mills; Jay Chen Subject: End of Area Source deferrals  Informal comments Dear Mr. Hitte,

By way of introduction, I'm the senior manager in charge of operations with the overall responsibility to track and coordinate the South Coast AQMD's Title V permitting program. I'm also the AQMD's representative on the CAPCOA Title V subcommittee.

The following are my informal comments to the proposal to end the deferral of area sources and dry cleaners from Title permitting requirements.

California has always been at the forefront of environmental regulations including those seeking to reduce toxic emissions.

Currently, the state has adopted Air Toxics Control Measures ( ATCM) for drycleaners, chrome platers, ETO sterilizers well as for many other significant sources of toxics. By state law, South Coast AQMD ( AQMD) must adopt these, or propose equivelant regulations, into our Regulation XIV. Some of these essentially mimic NESHAPS and some, like ou Drycleaner rule which will eliminate perchloroethylene, are more emissions reducing. The AQMD has a robust permitti and compliance system already in place that requires permits from major and non major sources of HAPS.

Compliance rates for these HAP sources are satisfactory. In a recent audit of chrome plating operations which include field inspections of 127 chrome plating facilities, the overall compliance rate ( no violations) was over 82% with only 2% having direct emissions violations. The balance of the violations were administrative (< 12%) or emissions related (< 4%).

Since the AQMD already has a permitting system as well as a dedicated field enforcement division, it would be overly burdensome, without any air quality benefit, for these sources to apply for a Title V permit. Moreover, most of these sources are small businesses while others are " mom and pop" type organizations that couldn't navigate the rough administrative tangle the Title V permitting embodies.

Therefore, since these sources are currently regulated through state and local programs, and it is far too burdensome t the sources, I believe that these area sources should continue to be deferred and consideration be given to a permane exemption for California sources.

If you have any questions, please call me at ( 909) 396 2398.

William C. Thompson Senior Manager Operations


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 183 (Tuesday, September 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 57164]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23984]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1875-001.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2015-09-15 Limited Tariff Waiver
Petition to Modify CCE2 Effective Date to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 9/15/15.
    Accession Number: 20150915-5182.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2204-001.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2015-09-15 Limited Tariff Waiver
Petition to Modify ETC-TOR Effective Date to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 9/15/15.
    Accession Number: 20150915-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2654-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-09-15_SA 2753 NSP-Red
Pine Wind 2nd Rev GIA (H081) to be effective 9/16/2015.
    Filed Date: 9/15/15.
    Accession Number: 20150915-5071.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2655-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2015-09-15_SA 2830
Certificate of Concurrence ITCM, METC, and ATSI TIA to be effective 12/
7/2015.
    Filed Date: 9/15/15.
    Accession Number: 20150915-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2656-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Annual Calculation of the Cost of New Entry value
(``CONE'') for each Local Resource Zone (``LRZ'') in the MISO Region of
Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Filed Date: 9/15/15.
    Accession Number: 20150915-5196.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/6/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RR15-19-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Amendments to Exhibit B to the Delegation
Agreement with Southwest Power Pool, Inc. ? Amendments to Southwest
Power Pool, Inc.'s Bylaws.
    Filed Date: 9/16/15.
    Accession Number: 20150916-5031.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/7/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 16, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-23984 Filed 9-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 5 (Friday, January 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1573-1574]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00155]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-1999-6439, Notice No. 27]

Adjustment of Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of adjustment of Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is updating the Nationwide Significant Risk Threshold
(NSRT) for purposes of FRA's regulation on the Use of Locomotive Horns
at Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. This action is needed to ensure
the

public has the proper permissible risk threshold to evaluate risk
resulting from prohibiting routine locomotive horn sounding at highway-
rail grade crossings located in quiet zones. This is the ninth update
to the NSRT and it is increasing from 13,811 to 15,488.

DATES: The applicable date of this notice is January 8, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Payne, Staff Director, Highway-
Rail Crossing and Trespasser Programs Division (telephone: 202-493-
6005, email: james.payne@dot.gov); or Kathryn Gresham, Attorney
Adviser, Office of the Chief Counsel (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
kathryn.gresham@dot.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The NSRT is an average of the risk indexes for gated public
crossings nationwide where train horns are routinely sounded. FRA
developed this risk index to serve as one threshold of permissible risk
for quiet zones established across the nation under 49 CFR part 222,
Use of Locomotive Horns at Public Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. Thus, a
community trying to establish and/or maintain its quiet zone, under 49
CFR part 222, can compare the Quiet Zone Risk Index calculated for its
specific crossing corridor to the NSRT to determine whether sufficient
measures have been taken to compensate for the excess risk that results
from prohibiting routine sounding of the locomotive horn. In the
alternative, a community can establish its quiet zone in comparison to
the Risk Index With Horns, which is defined in 49 CFR 222.9 as a
measure of risk to the motoring public when locomotive horns are
routinely sounded at every public highway-rail grade crossing within a
quiet zone.
    FRA has periodically updated the NSRT since 2006. FRA last updated
the NSRT in 2019 to be 13,811. 84 FR 22562, May 17, 2019.

New NSRT

    Using collision data over a 5-year period from 2015 to 2019, FRA
has recalculated the NSRT based on formulas identified in 49 CFR part
222, appendix D. In making this recalculation, FRA noted the total
number of gated crossings nationwide where train horns are routinely
sounded was 48,607.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN08JA21.019

    Applying the fatality rate and injury rate to the probable number
of fatalities and injuries predicted to occur at each of the 48,607
identified crossings, and the predicted cost of the associated injuries
and fatalities, FRA calculates the NSRT to be 15,488. Accordingly, this
updated NSRT value will serve as one threshold of permissible risk for
quiet zones established across the nation pursuant to 49 CFR part 222.

John Karl Alexy,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2021-00155 Filed 1-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 70973]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28427]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 18f-1 and Form N-18f-1, OMB Control No. 3235-0211, SEC File
No. 270-187.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 18f-1 (17 CFR 270.18f-1) enables a registered open-end
management investment company (``fund'') that may redeem its securities
in-kind, by making a one-time election, to commit to make cash
redemptions pursuant to certain requirements without violating section
18(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-18(f)). A
fund relying on the rule must file Form N-18F-1 (17 CFR 274.51) to
notify the Commission of this election. The Commission staff estimates
that 26 funds file Form N-18F-1 annually, and that each response takes
one hour. Based on these estimates, the total annual burden hours
associated with the rule is estimated to be 26 hours.
    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information 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.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: November 21, 2013.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-28427 Filed 11-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59900-59903]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24189]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87437; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2019-62]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
of Amendment No. 1, and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to the
Listing and Trading of Shares of the Innovator MSCI EAFE Power Buffer
ETFs and Innovator MSCI Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETFs, Series of
the Innovator ETFs Trust, Under NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E

October 31, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On August 29, 2019, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change
relating to the listing and trading of shares (``Shares'') of the
Innovator MSCI EAFE Power Buffer ETFs and Innovator MSCI Emerging
Markets Power Buffer ETFs (each a ``Fund'' and collectively the
``Funds''), series of the Innovator ETFs Trust (``Trust''), under NYSE
Arca Rule 8.600-E, which governs the listing and trading of Managed
Fund Shares. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on September 18, 2019.\3\ On October 16, 2019, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which
replaced and superseded the proposed rule change as originally
filed.\4\ The Commission has received no comments on the proposed rule
change. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on
Amendment No. 1 from interested persons, and is approving the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86948 (September 12,
2019), 84 FR 49131.
    \4\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (1) Clarified that it is
submitting this proposal in order to allow each Fund to hold listed
derivatives (i.e., FLEX and standardized options on the Indexes and
on ETFs that track the Indexes) in a manner that does not comply
with Commentary .01(d)(2) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E; (2) clarified
the Funds' use of standardized options; (3) specified that while the
Funds will invest primarily in FLEX and standardized options, they
may also invest in cash and cash equivalents; and (4) made other
technical, clarifying, and conforming changes. Amendment No. 1 is
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2019-62/srnysearca201962-6310013-193523.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1

    The Exchange proposes to: (1) Permit the continued listing and
trading of Shares of the Innovator MSCI EAFE Power Buffer ETF (July
Series) and Innovator MSCI Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF (July
Series); (2) list and trade Shares of up to an additional eleven
Innovator MSCI EAFE Power Buffer ETF Series of the Trust (``EAFE Power
Buffer Funds''); and (3) list and trade Shares of up to an additional
eleven Innovator MSCI Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF Series of the
Trust (``Emerging Markets Power Buffer Funds'').\5\ Innovator Capital
Management, LLC (``Adviser'') is the investment adviser to the Funds
and Milliman Financial Risk Management LLC (``Sub-Adviser'') is the
sub-adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Trust is registered with the Commission as an investment
company and has filed a registration statement on Form N-1A under
the Securities Act of 1933 and the Investment Company Act of 1940
for each of the Innovator MSCI EAFE Power Buffer ETF (July Series
and October Series) and Innovator MSCI Emerging Markets Power Buffer
ETF (July Series and October Series).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The investment objective of the EAFE Power Buffer Funds is to
provide investors with returns that match those of the MSCI EAFE
Investable Market Index--Price Return (``MSCI EAFE Index'') over a
period of approximately one year, while providing a level of protection
from MSCI EAFE Index losses. The investment objective of the

Emerging Markets Power Buffer Funds is to provide investors with
returns that match those of the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market
Index--Price Return (``MSCI Emerging Markets Index'' and, together with
the MSCI EAFE Index, the ``Indexes'') over a period of approximately
one year, while providing a level of protection from MSCI Emerging
Markets Index losses.
    In particular, the Funds are actively managed funds that employ a
defined outcome strategy \6\ that: (1) For the EAFE Power Buffer Funds,
seeks to provide investment returns during the outcome period that
match the gains of the MSCI EAFE Index, up to a maximized annual return
(``EAFE Cap Level''),\7\ while guarding against a decline in the MSCI
EAFE Index of the first 15% (``EAFE Power Buffer Strategy''); and (2)
for the Emerging Markets Power Buffer Funds, seeks to provide
investment returns during the outcome period that match the gains of
the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, up to a maximized annual return
(``Emerging Markets Cap Level''),\8\ while guarding against a decline
in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index of the first 15% (``Emerging Markets
Power Buffer Strategy'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Defined outcome strategies are designed to participate in
market gains and losses within pre-determined ranges over a
specified period (i.e., point to point). These outcomes are
predicated on the assumption that an investment vehicle employing
the strategy is held for the designated outcome periods.
    \7\ The EAFE Cap Level will be determined with respect to each
EAFE Power Buffer Fund on the inception date of the EAFE Power
Buffer Fund and at the beginning of each outcome period and is
determined based on the price of the FLEX options acquired by the
EAFE Power Buffer Fund at that time. The EAFE Cap Level will be
determined only once at the beginning of each outcome period and not
within an outcome period.
    \8\ The Emerging Markets Cap Level will be determined with
respect to each Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund on the inception
date of the Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund and at the beginning
of each outcome period and is determined based on the price of the
FLEX options acquired by the Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund at
that time. The Emerging Markets Cap Level will be determined only
once at the beginning of each outcome period and not within an
outcome period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More specifically, pursuant to the EAFE Power Buffer Strategy, each
EAFE Power Buffer Fund's portfolio managers will seek to produce the
following outcomes during the outcome period:
     If the MSCI EAFE Index appreciates over the outcome
period, the EAFE Power Buffer Fund will seek to provide shareholders
with a total return that matches that of the MSCI EAFE Index, up to and
including the EAFE Cap Level;
     If the MSCI EAFE Index depreciates over the outcome period
by 15% or less, the EAFE Power Buffer Fund will seek to provide a total
return of zero; and
     If the MSCI EAFE Index decreases over the outcome period
by more than 15%, the EAFE Power Buffer Fund will seek to provide a
total return loss that is 15% less than the percentage loss on the MSCI
EAFE Index with a maximum loss of approximately 85%.
    In addition, pursuant to the Emerging Markets Power Buffer
Strategy, each Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund's portfolio managers
will seek to produce the following outcomes during the outcome period:
     If the MSCI Emerging Markets Index appreciates over the
outcome period, the Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund will seek to
provide shareholders with a total return that matches that of the MSCI
Emerging Markets Index, up to and including the Emerging Markets Cap
Level;
     If the MSCI Emerging Markets Index depreciates over the
outcome period by 15% or less, the Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund
will seek to provide a total return of zero;
     If the MSCI Emerging Markets Index decreases over the
outcome period by more than 15%, the Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund
will seek to provide a total return loss that is 15% less than the
percentage loss on the MSCI Emerging Markets Index with a maximum loss
of approximately 85%.
    Under normal market conditions: \9\ (1) Each EAFE Power Buffer Fund
will invest primarily in FLEX options or standardized options contracts
listed on a U.S. exchange that reference either the MSCI EAFE Index or
ETFs \10\ that track the MSCI EAFE Index; and (2) each Emerging Markets
Power Buffer Fund will invest primarily in FLEX options or standardized
options contracts listed on a U.S. exchange that reference either the
MSCI Emerging Markets Index or ETFs \11\ that track the MSCI Emerging
Markets Index.\12\ Each of the Funds may invest its net assets (in the
aggregate) in other investments (i.e., cash or cash equivalents \13\)
which the Adviser or Sub-Adviser believes will help each Fund to meet
its investment objective and that will be disclosed at the end of each
trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``normal market conditions'' is defined in NYSE
Arca Rule 8.600-E(c)(5).
    \10\ For purposes of this proposal, the term ``ETFs'' means
Investment Company Units (as described in NYSE Arca Rule 5.2-
E(j)(3)), Portfolio Depositary Receipts (as described in NYSE Arca
Rule 8.100-E), and Managed Fund Shares (as described in NYSE Arca
Rule 8.600-E). All ETFs will be listed and traded in the U.S. on a
national securities exchange.
    \11\ See supra note 10.
    \12\ Options on the Indexes are traded on Cboe Exchange, Inc.
(``Cboe Options''). Options on ETFs based on the Indexes are listed
and traded in the U.S. on national securities exchanges. The
Exchange, Cboe Options, and all other national securities exchanges
are members of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG'').
Moreover, Cboe Options and the Exchange are members of the Options
Regulatory Surveillance Authority.
    \13\ Cash equivalents are the short-term instruments enumerated
in Commentary .01(c) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange, it is submitting this proposal in order
to allow each Fund to hold listed derivatives (i.e., FLEX and
standardized options on the Indexes and on ETFs that track the Indexes)
in a manner that does not comply with Commentary .01(d)(2) to NYSE Arca
Rule 8.600-E. Commentary .01(d)(2) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E provides
that the aggregate gross notional value of listed derivatives based on
any five or fewer underlying reference assets shall not exceed 65% of
the weight of the portfolio (including gross notional exposures), and
the aggregate gross notional value of listed derivatives based on any
single underlying reference asset shall not exceed 30% of the weight of
the portfolio (including gross notional exposures).

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\14\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\
which requires, among other things, that the Exchange's rules be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest. The Commission also finds that the proposal is consistent
with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act,\16\ which sets forth
Congress' finding that it is in the public interest and appropriate for
the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets to assure the availability to brokers, dealers and investors of
information

with respect to quotations for and transactions in securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange, intra-day and closing price information
regarding Index options and ETF options is available from the Options
Price Reporting Authority, Cboe Options' website, and from major market
data vendors. FINRA's Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (``TRACE'')
will be a source of price information for certain fixed income
securities to the extent transactions in such securities are reported
to TRACE. Price information regarding U.S. government securities and
other cash equivalents generally may be obtained from brokers and
dealers who make markets in such securities or through nationally
recognized pricing services through subscription agreements.
Information regarding market price and trading volume of the Shares
will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day
on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information
regarding the previous day's closing price and trading volume
information for the Shares will be published daily in the financial
section of newspapers. Quotation and last sale information for the
Shares will be available via the Consolidated Tape Association high-
speed line. In addition, the Portfolio Indicative Value, as defined in
NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E(c)(3), will be widely disseminated by one or
more major market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the
Core Trading Session.
    The Commission also believes that the proposal is reasonably
designed to promote fair disclosure of information that may be
necessary to price the Shares appropriately and to prevent trading when
a reasonable degree of transparency cannot be assured. Under NYSE Arca
Rule 8.600-E(d)(2)(D), if the Exchange becomes aware that the net asset
value (``NAV'') or the Disclosed Portfolio (as defined in NYSE Arca
Rule 8.600-E(c)(2)) is not disseminated to all market participants at
the same time, the Exchange is required to halt trading in such series
of Managed Fund Shares. In addition, the Exchange represents that if a
Fund is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the
Exchange will commence delisting procedures under NYSE Arca Rule 5.5-
E(m). The Exchange also states that it has a general policy prohibiting
the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.
Further, the issuer currently provides and maintains for the July
Series, and will provide and maintain for any future series of a Fund,
a publicly available web tool on its website that provides existing and
prospective shareholders with certain information to help inform
investment decisions. The information provided includes the start and
end dates of the current outcome period, the time remaining in the
outcome period, the Funds' current NAV, each Fund's cap for the outcome
period and the maximum investment gain available up to the cap for a
shareholder purchasing Shares at the current NAV. The web tool also
provides information regarding each Fund's buffer. This information
includes the remaining buffer available for a shareholder purchasing
Shares at the current NAV or the amount of losses that a shareholder
purchasing Shares at the current NAV would incur before benefitting
from the protection of the buffer.
    The Shares do not qualify for generic listing because the Funds
will not satisfy the requirements of Commentary .01(d)(2) to NYSE Arca
Rule 8.600-E that the aggregate gross notional value of listed
derivatives based on any five or fewer underlying reference assets
shall not exceed 65% of the weight of the portfolio (including gross
notional exposures) and the aggregate gross notional value of listed
derivatives based on any single underlying reference asset shall not
exceed 30% of the weight of the portfolio (including gross notional
exposures). As noted above, under normal market conditions: (1) Each
EAFE Power Buffer Fund will invest primarily in FLEX Options or
standardized options contracts listed on a U.S. exchange that reference
either the MSCI EAFE Index or ETFs that track the MSCI EAFE Index; and
(2) each Emerging Markets Power Buffer Fund will invest primarily in
FLEX Options or standardized options contracts listed on a U.S.
exchange that reference either the MSCI Emerging Markets Index or ETFs
that track the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. The Commission notes that,
although the Funds' holdings in these listed derivatives will not meet
the requirements of Commentary .01(d)(2) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E, the
Indexes are broad-based; the ETFs will be listed and traded in the U.S.
on national securities exchanges; and all Index and ETF options
contacts held by the Funds will trade on markets that are a member of
ISG or affiliated with a member of ISG, or with which the Exchange has
in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement, all of which
help to mitigate concerns about the prices of the Shares being
susceptible to manipulation.
    Additionally, in support of this proposal, the Exchange represents
that:
    (1) With the exception of the requirements of Commentary .01(d)(2),
each Fund will comply with the initial and continued listing standards
under NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E.
    (2) Trading in the Shares will be subject to the existing trading
surveillances, administered by FINRA on behalf of the Exchange, or by
regulatory staff of the Exchange, which are designed to detect
violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws.
    (3) For initial and continued listing, the Funds will be in
compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act,\17\ as provided by NYSE Arca
Rule 5.3-E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) With respect to each of the proposed additional eleven series
of each Fund, a minimum of 100,000 Shares will be outstanding at the
commencement of trading on the Exchange.
    This approval order is based on all of the Exchange's statements
and representations, including those set forth above and in Amendment
No. 1.

IV. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule
Change

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1 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-2019-62 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2019-62. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than

those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2019-62, and should
be submitted on or before November 27, 2019.

V. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No.
1 in the Federal Register. As discussed above, in Amendment No. 1, the
Exchange: (1) Clarified that it is submitting this proposal in order to
allow each Fund to hold listed derivatives (i.e., FLEX and standardized
options on the Indexes and on ETFs that track the Indexes) in a manner
that does not comply with Commentary .01(d)(2) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-
E; (2) clarified the Funds' use of standardized options; (3) specified
that while the Funds will invest primarily in FLEX and standardized
options, they may also invest in cash and cash equivalents; and (4)
made other technical, clarifying, and conforming changes. The
Commission believes that Amendment No. 1 does not raise any novel
regulatory issues and provides additional clarity to the proposal.
Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\18\ to approve the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\19\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2019-62), as
modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24189 Filed 11-5-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 28 (Thursday, February 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 7370]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02752]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4247-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2016-0001]

Oklahoma; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-4247-DR), dated December 29, 2015, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: February 3, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of December 29, 2015.

    Bryan, Garfield, and Greer Counties for Public Assistance.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-02752 Filed 2-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 167 (Monday, August 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59221-59222]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20600]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0646; FRL-9948-33-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Incinerators (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NSPS for Incinerators (40 CFR
part 60, subpart E) (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1058.12, OMB Control No.
2060-0040), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through August 31, 2016. Public comments were previously
requested via the Federal Register (80 FR 32116) on June 5, 2015,
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 28,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0646 to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,

Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information for which disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required
to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the
General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), as well as for the
specific requirements at 40 CFR part 60, subpart E. This includes
submitting initial notification reports, performance tests and periodic
reports and results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and
duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of
an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system
is inoperative. These reports are used by EPA to determine compliance
with these standards.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Incinerators constructed or modified
after August 17, 1971.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart E).
    Estimated number of respondents: 82 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially and occasionally.
    Total estimated burden: 8,490 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $717,000 (per year), which includes $205,000
in either annualized capital/startup or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
total estimated labor hours. This increase is not due to any program
changes. The change occurred due to this ICR assuming all existing
respondents must re-familiarize themselves with the regulatory
requirements each year.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-20600 Filed 8-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 210)]
[Notices]
[Page 64395]
[DOCID:fr29oc08-107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

 Federal Railroad Administration

 Notice of Application for Approval of Discontinuance or
Modification of a Railroad Signal System or Relief From the
Requirements of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 236

    Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 235 and
49 U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad has petitioned the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) seeking approval for the discontinuance
or modification of the signal system or relief from the requirements of
49 CFR part 236, as detailed below.
    Docket Number: FRA-2008-0102.
    Applicant: Canadian National Railway, Mr. Timothy R. Luhm, Senior
Manager of S&C, 1625 Depot Street, Stevens Point, Wisconsin 54481.
    The Canadian National Railway Company (CN) seeks approval of the
proposed discontinuance and removal of an automatic block signal system
from Milepost 40.2 to Milepost 41.9 on the Dresser slide fence, CN Lake
Zone, Dresser Subdivision, Wisconsin. The reason for the proposed
changes is that the slide fence is not required with the current
restricted speed requirement. A 10 miles per hour speed restriction
will extend through the entire slide area.
    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 ( Docket No. FRA-2008-0102) 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 within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    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 comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC on October 22, 2008.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-25769 Filed 10-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 26, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60872-60873]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27796]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0484; FRL-9972-55-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements for Municipal
Waste Combustors; Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Due to the receipt of an adverse comment, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is withdrawing the November 6, 2017 direct
final rule (DFR) that approved revisions to the State of Maryland's
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(d)/129 State Plan for municipal waste
combustors (MWCs). The revisions contain Maryland's amendments to
Regulations .07 and .08 under the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR)
26.11.08. This withdrawal

action is being taken under sections 129 and 111(d) of the CAA.

DATES: The direct final rule published at 82 FR 51350 on November 6,
2017 is withdrawn effective December 26, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0484 for
this action. The index to the docket is available electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Linn,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 10, 2016, the State of Maryland
submitted a formal revision (MD Submittal #16-05) to its CAA section
111(d)/129 State Plan for MWCs. The revisions contain Maryland's
amendments to COMAR 26.11.08, ``Requirements for an Existing Large MWC
with a Capacity Greater Than 250 Tons Per Day.'' These amendments
update the MWC references to opacity compliance previously made by the
Maryland Department of the Environment. The Maryland state submittal is
available in the docket for this rulemaking and available online at
www.regulations.gov.
    Please see additional information provided in the direct final
action published in the Federal Register on November 6, 2017 (82 FR
51350) and in the companion proposed rule which was also published on
November 6, 2017 (82 FR 51380). In the DFR, we stated that if we
received adverse comment by December 6, 2017, the rule would be
withdrawn and not take effect. EPA subsequently received an adverse
comment. As a result of the comment received, EPA is withdrawing the
DFR approving the revisions submitted by the State of Maryland to their
CAA section 111(d)/129 State Plan for MWCs. EPA will address the
comment received in a subsequent final action based upon the proposed
action also published on November 6, 2017. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: December 15, 2017.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
Accordingly, the amendments to 40 CFR 62.5110 and 40 CFR 62.5112,
published on November 6, 2017 (82 FR 51350), are withdrawn effective
December 26, 2017.

[FR Doc. 2017-27796 Filed 12-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 11 (Friday, January 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2457-2460]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00579]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74036; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-97]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change Amending Rules 311--Equities and 313--Equities To
Add Limited Liability Companies as Eligible Member Organizations and
Delineate the Information Limited Liability Companies Must Submit to
the Exchange as Part of the Membership Process; Eliminate the
Requirement That a Member Corporation Be Created or Organized, and
Maintain Its Principal Place of Business, in the United States; and
Make Additional Related Amendments To Update Its Membership Rules

January 12, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On November 12, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposal
to amend NYSE MKT Rules 311--Equities (``Rule 311'') and 313--Equities
(``Rule 313'') to add limited liability companies (``LLCs'') to the
types of eligible member organizations and delineate the information
LLCs must submit to the Exchange as part of the membership process;
eliminate the requirement that a member corporation be created or
organized, and maintain its principal place of business, in the United
States; and make additional related amendments to update its membership
rules. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on November 28, 2014.\3\ The Commission received one
comment on the proposal.\4\ This order approves the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73671 (Nov. 21,
2014), 79 FR 70900 (Nov. 28, 2014) (``Notice'').
    \4\ See anonymous comment submitted through the Commission's
Internet comment form on December 19, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

A. Rule 311

    NYSE MKT Rule 311 governs the formation and approval of member
organizations. The Exchange proposes to revise Rule 311 to explicitly
provide for LLCs to apply to become member organizations and eliminate
the requirement that a member corporation be created or organized, and
maintain its principal place of business, in the United States.
    The Exchange's membership rules currently provide for member
organizations to be corporations or partnerships, but have not
explicitly provided for LLCs.\5\ The Exchange proposes to add LLCs to
the types of potential member organizations and require LLCs to meet
the same requirements currently applicable to partnerships and
corporations set forth in Rule 311(b). As part of the proposed
revision, the Exchange seeks to add a new section (4) to Rule 311(b)
requiring every member of an LLC to be a member, principal executive,
or approved person.\6\ The Exchange also proposes to amend current Rule
311(b)(6) to reflect that proposed LLC member organizations must, like
corporations and partnerships, also comply with any additional
requirements as the rules of the Exchange may prescribe. In addition,
the Exchange proposes to add new Supplementary Material .16 to Rule 311
to specify that LLC applicants for Exchange membership are subject to
Rule 313.24 regarding the submission of copies of proposed or existing
limited

liability company documents and other agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Current Rule 311(f) permits the Exchange to approve
``entities that have characteristics essentially similar to
corporations, partnerships, or both'' as a member organization ``on
such terms and conditions as the Exchange may prescribe.''
    \6\ Rule 311(b)(2) and (b)(3) currently impose the same
requirement on the relevant control persons at corporations and
partnerships, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 311(f) to eliminate the
geographic limitation on incorporation and domicile of corporation
members. The first sentence of Rule 311(f) currently provides that
every member corporation be a corporation ``created or organized under
the laws of, and shall maintain its principal place of business in, the
United States or any State thereof.'' \7\ The Exchange does not believe
that the Exchange's restriction on whether foreign entities may be a
member organization is consistent with either federal rules or those of
other self-regulatory organizations (``SRO''). The Exchange states that
rules promulgated pursuant to the Act require, under certain
circumstances, a foreign broker-dealer to register with the
Commission.\8\ The Exchange also states that other SROs, including the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''), do not
require their members to be domiciled in the United States.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The first sentence of Rule 311(f) also provides that every
member firm organization shall be a partnership or corporation. This
statement is redundant to Rule 311(b), which the Exchange is
amending to add LLCs. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to delete
the first sentence of Rule 311(f) in its entirety.
    \8\ See 17 CFR 240.15a-6 and Commission Guide to Broker-Dealer
Registration, Division of Trading and Markets, available at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/bdguide.htm (foreign broker-dealers
that, from the outside of the United States, induce or attempt to
induce securities transactions by any person in the United States,
or that use the means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce in
the United States for this purpose, must register as broker-dealers
with the Commission).
    \9\ See, e.g., NASD Membership and Registration Rules (1000
Series). NASD Rule 1090 imposes specific requirements on members
that do not maintain an office in the United States responsible for
preparing and maintaining financial and other reports required to be
filed with the SEC and the Exchange, which the Exchange proposes to
import into Rule 313. See infra note 10 and accompanying text. See
also BATS Exchange, Inc. Rules 2.3, 2.5 and 2.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the current restriction in Rule 311(f)
puts it at a competitive disadvantage because it restricts foreign
broker-dealers that are registered with the Commission and are members
of another SRO from also becoming Exchange member organizations. The
Exchange notes that its rules already require member organizations to
meet prerequisites as specified in Rule 2(b). Specifically, regardless
of corporate form, all member organizations must be registered broker-
dealers that are members of FINRA or another registered securities
exchange. If a registered broker-dealer transacts business with public
customers or conducts business on the Floor of the Exchange, such
member organization must be a member of FINRA.
    The Exchange further notes that a member organization will be
subject to regulatory examination and jurisdiction for misconduct
whether or not it is based in the United States. However, for the
avoidance of doubt, as discussed below, the Exchange proposes to add
supplementary material to Rule 313 based on NASD Rule 1090 that imposes
certain requirements on foreign members that do not maintain an office
in the United States.

B. Rule 313

    NYSE MKT Rule 313 sets forth certain corporate or partnership
documents that each member organization must submit to enter into and
continue in NYSE membership. The Rule also sets forth certain
restrictions on capital withdrawals and distributions applicable to
member corporations and partnerships. The Exchange proposes to amend
Rule 313 to delineate the types of documents that LLCs must submit
that, as noted, mirror the requirements currently in place for member
corporations and partnerships.
    First, the Exchange proposes to add a subsection (d) to Rule 313
requiring all articles of organization and operating documents for LLCs
to be submitted for Exchange approval prior to becoming effective.
Relatedly, the Exchange proposes to add Supplementary Material .24
setting forth that existing LLCs must promptly submit certified copies
(to the extent possible) of articles of organization and operating
agreements to the Exchange.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to add Supplementary Material .25
providing restrictions on capital withdrawals by LLC members that are
substantially the same as those applicable to corporations and
partnerships. The Supplementary Material would provide that the capital
contribution of any LLC member may not be withdrawn on less than six
months' written notice of withdrawal given no sooner than six months
after such contribution was first made without the prior written
approval of the Exchange. The Supplementary Material would also specify
that each member firm shall promptly notify the Exchange of the receipt
of any notice of withdrawal of any part of a member's capital
contribution or if any withdrawal is not made because prohibited under
the provisions of Rule 15c3-1 under the Act.
    Third, the Exchange proposes to add Supplementary Material .26
providing that LLCs not organized under the laws of New York State must
subject themselves to the following restrictions: No distributions
shall be declared or paid that impair the LLC's capital; and no
distribution of assets shall be made to any member unless the value of
the LLC's assets remaining after such payment or distribution is at
least equal to the aggregate of its debts and liabilities, including
capital. These proposed restrictions are based on existing restrictions
applicable to member corporations and partnerships.
    In addition, as noted above, the Exchange proposes to add new
Supplementary Material .27 to Rule 313 specifying the requirements
applicable to Foreign Member Organizations. The proposed new rule text
would adopt, without substantive change, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)
of NASD Rule 1090 (Foreign Members), which impose specific requirements
on FINRA members that do not maintain an office in the United States
responsible for preparing and maintaining financial and other reports
required to be filed by the SEC and FINRA.\10\ As proposed, foreign
member organizations that do not maintain an office in the United
States responsible for preparing and maintaining financial and other
reports required to be filed with the Commission and the Exchange would
be required to: (1) Prepare all such reports, and maintain a general
ledger chart of account and any description thereof, in English and
U.S. dollars; (2) reimburse the Exchange or its representatives for
expenses incurred in connection with examinations of the member
organization to the extent that such expenses exceed the cost of
examining a member organization located within the continental United
States in the geographic location most distant from the Exchange's
principal office or, in such other amount as the Exchange may deem to
be an equitable allocation of such expenses; and (3) ensure the
availability of an individual fluent in English and knowledgeable in
securities and financial matters to assist

representatives of the Exchange during examinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange is not proposing to adopt a rule similar to
NASD Rule 1090(d), which requires foreign members to ``utilize,
either directly or indirectly, the services of a broker/dealer
registered with the Commission, a bank or a clearing agency
registered with the Commission located in the United States in
clearing all transactions involving members of the Association,
except where both parties to a transaction agree otherwise.'' The
Exchange agrees with FINRA, which similarly recommended skipping
paragraph (d) as part of its contemplated adoption of NASD Rule
1090, that the provision is ``outdated'' and that clearing
arrangements are better addressed by FINRA Rule 4311 (Carrying
Agreements). See FINRA Regulatory Notice 13-29 at 27 (Sept. 2013).
FINRA Rule 4311 governs the requirements applicable to members when
entering into agreements for the carrying of any customer accounts
in which securities transactions can be effected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to eliminate certain restrictions, which
the Exchange considers redundant, on member organizations and
prospective member organizations organized as partnerships and
corporations. The Exchange proposes to eliminate the requirement in
Rule 313.11 that the partnership articles of each member firm provide
that capital withdrawals by partners cannot be made without the prior
written approval of the Exchange. Rule 313.11 already requires the
Exchange's prior written approval for any such capital withdrawals, and
member organizations need to monitor for and comply with the
prohibition, including whether particular withdrawals violate net
capital requirements. The Exchange believes that because Exchange rules
already govern this behavior, a partnership seeking approval as a
member organization would not need to amend its partnership articles to
reflect this existing rule requirement.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See also infra note 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the requirement in Rule
313.20 that prospective member corporations submit an opinion of
counsel stating, among other things, that the corporation is duly
organized and existing, that its stock is validly issued and
outstanding, and that the restrictions and provisions required by the
Exchange on the transfer, issuance, conversion and redemption of its
stock have been made legally effective. Corporate members are required
under the Rule to submit relevant corporate documents, including
articles of incorporation, that contain the same information required
in the opinion of counsel. The Exchange represents that requiring a
legal opinion attesting to facts contained in a corporation's public
filings is redundant and, given the expense, potentially a disincentive
to smaller entities applying for Exchange membership.
    Similarly, the Exchange proposes to remove the requirement in Rule
313.23 that the opinion of counsel submitted to the Exchange at the
time the corporation applies for approval under Rule 313.20 state the
extent to which the corporation has made the following prohibitions
legally effective: The prohibition on declaring or paying a dividend
that impairs the capital of the corporation and the prohibition on
distributing assets to any stockholder unless the value of the
corporate assets remaining after such payment or distribution is at
least equal to the aggregate of its debts and liabilities, including
capital. Rule 313.23 would continue to prohibit corporation members
from declaring or paying dividends or distributing corporate assets
that impair the corporation's capital, and member corporations would
not be relieved of the obligation to monitor and enforce these
prohibitions. The Exchange believes that requiring these
representations in a separate legal opinion is redundant and serves no
necessary regulatory or other purpose.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ FINRA Rule 4110 (Capital Compliance) contains similar
prohibitions on capital withdrawals by FINRA members without
requiring that the prohibitions be reflected in a firm's partnership
articles or requiring a legal opinion that the member has made the
prohibitions legally effective. See FINRA Rule 4110(c)(1) (``No
equity capital of a member may be withdrawn for a period of one year
from the date such equity capital is contributed, unless otherwise
permitted by FINRA in writing.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to make certain miscellaneous
amendments to Rule 313. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to replace
outdated references to ``Regulation and Surveillance'' with ``the
Exchange'' in Rules 313.10 and 313.20.\13\ Similarly, the Exchange
proposes to replace outdated references to ``photostatic'' copies in
Rules 313.10 and 313.20 in connection with the submission of documents
to the Exchange and replace them with ``electronically or mechanically
reproduced.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Under Rule 0--Equities, references to the Exchange also
refer to FINRA staff and FINRA departments acting on behalf of the
Exchange pursuant to a Regulatory Services Agreement (``RSA'').
FINRA currently provides member application proceedings services to
the Exchange pursuant to an RSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Commission received only one comment on the
proposed rule change.\14\ The comment expressed the view that the
proposed rule change was a ``good idea'' but did not elaborate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After carefully considering the proposal and the one comment
submitted, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\15\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\16\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule change's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission agrees with the Exchange that adding LLCs to the
list of eligible member organizations would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system by expanding the types of organizational forms a member
organization may take. The Exchange also believes that permitting LLCs
to become member organizations subject to the same restrictions and
requirements currently applicable to corporations and partnerships also
protects investors and the public interest by holding LLCs to the same
high standards.
    In addition, permitting non-United States-based registered broker-
dealers that are members of FINRA or another registered securities
exchange and that do not have their principal place of business in the
United States to become Exchange member organizations would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market by
removing geographic restrictions on Exchange membership that are not
required by FINRA or other exchanges. Broadening the Exchange
membership pool by facilitating the participation of additional
foreign-based U.S. registered broker-dealers would benefit investors
and the public interest by increasing market participation and depth at
the Exchange. Moreover, adoption of specific requirements for foreign
members that do not maintain an office in the United States based on
NASD Rule 1090 would further assure that foreign Exchange members, once
approved, remain subject to regulatory examination and jurisdiction.
    In addition, updating the Exchange's rules to remove requirements
that the Exchange believes are redundant--that a member firm's
partnership articles provide that capital withdrawals by partners
cannot be made without the prior written approval of the Exchange, that
prospective member corporations submit an opinion of counsel reciting
facts contained in its public filings, and that certain prohibitions
have been made legally effective--would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system by ensuring that potential member organizations, persons subject
to the Exchange's jurisdiction, regulators, and

the public could more easily navigate the Exchange's rulebook and
better understand what obligations attach and when. Further, updating
the Exchange's rules to remove what the Exchange considers redundant
requirements also would protect investors as well as the public
interest by providing transparency and reducing potential confusion
regarding the Exchange membership process that may result from having
what the Exchange characterizes as obsolete rules and outdated
guidelines in the Exchange's rulebook. For the same reasons, updating
the Exchange's rules to remove requirements that the Exchange considers
outdated would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and is equally
designed to protect investors as well as the public interest.
    Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\17\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-97) be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00579 Filed 1-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 4, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 85)]
[Notices]
[Page 23749-23750]
[DOCID:fr04my10-70]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

April 27, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP10-634-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits capacity
release agreement containing negotiated rate provisions with Texla
Energy Management, Inc.
    Filed Date: 04/23/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 5, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-635-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation.
    Description: Request for waiver of Carolina Gas Transmission
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 04/23/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0208.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 5, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-636-000.
    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. submits First
Revised Sheet 6 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be
effective 6/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-637-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, L.P.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits Second Revised
Fifth Revised Sheet 645 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh Revised
Volume 1, to be effective 11/13/09.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-638-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation submits an amended negotiated rate agreement between MRT
and LER.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0211
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-639-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission
Corporation submits an amended negotiated rate agreement between MRT
and CES.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0212.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-640-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.204: Texas Eastern April 26, 2010, Clean-up Filing to be
effective 4/22/2010.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-5042.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-641-000.
    Applicants: Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Trans. LLC.
    Description: Petition of Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission
LLC for a Limited Waiver of Tariff Provision.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-642-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
Second Revised Sheet 195 part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised
Volume 1, to be effective 5/26/2010.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0224.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-643-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Dominion Transmission, Inc. submits Thirtieth Revised
Sheet 39 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, to
effective 5/26/2010.
    Filed Date: 04/26/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100426-0225.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-644-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.204: South Jersey Negotiated Rate be effective 4/26/2010.
    Filed Date: 04/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100427-5005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, May 10, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-10346 Filed 5-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P