[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5650-5655]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02501]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82627; File No. SR-NYSE-2017-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 3 and Order Granting Accelerated
Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 3, To
Amend Section 102.01B of the NYSE Listed Company Manual To Provide for
the Listing of Companies That List Without a Prior Exchange Act
Registration and That Are Not Listing in Connection With an
Underwritten Initial Public Offering and Related Changes to Rules 15,
104, and 123D

February 2, 2018.

I. Introduction

    On June 13, 2017, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\3\ a proposed rule change to amend Section 102.01B of the
NYSE Listed Company Manual to modify the provisions relating to the
qualification of companies listing without a prior Exchange Act
registration in connection with an underwritten initial public offering
and amend Exchange rules to address the opening procedures on the first
day of trading of such securities. The proposal, as modified by
Amendment No. 3, would: (i) Eliminate the requirement in Footnote (E)
of Section 102.01B (``Footnote (E)'') of the Manual to have a private
placement market trading price if there is a valuation from an
independent third-party of $250 million in market value of publicly-
held shares; (ii) set forth several factors indicating when the
independent third party providing the valuation would not be deemed
``independent'' under Footnote (E); (iii) amend NYSE Rule 15 to add a
reference price for when a security is listed under Footnote (E); (iv)
amend NYSE Rule 104 to specify Designated Market Maker (``DMM'')
requirements when facilitating the opening of a security listed under
Footnote (E) when there has been no sustained history of trading in a
private placement trading market for such security; and (v) amend NYSE
Rule 123D to specify that the Exchange may declare a regulatory halt
prior to

opening a security that is the subject of an initial pricing upon
Exchange listing and that has not, immediately prior to such initial
pricing, traded on another national securities exchange or in the over-
the-counter market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on June 20, 2017.\4\ The Commission received one comment in
response to the Original Notice.\5\ The Exchange filed Amendment No. 1
to the proposed rule change on July 28, 2017, which, as noted below,
was later withdrawn. On August 3, 2017, the Commission extended the
time period within which to approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change to
September 18, 2017.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80933 (June 15,
2017), 82 FR 28200 (June 20, 2017) (``Original Notice'').
    \5\ See letter to the Commission from James J. Angel, Ph.D.,
CFA, Georgetown University, dated July 28, 2017 (``Angel Letter'').
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81309 (August 3,
2017), 82 FR 37244 (August 9, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 16, 2017, the Exchange withdrew Amendment No. 1 and filed
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change, which superseded and
replaced the proposed rule change in its entirety.\7\ The Commission
published Amendment No. 2 for comment in the Federal Register on August
24, 2017.\8\ The Commission received no comments in response to this
solicitation for comments. On September 15, 2017, the Commission
instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 2.\9\ Following
the Order Instituting Proceedings, the Commission received one
additional comment letter.\10\ On December 8, 2017, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change, which superseded and
replaced the proposed rule change in its entirety.\11\ On December 14,
2017, the Commission extended the time period for approving or
disapproving the proposal for an additional 60 days until February 15,
2018.\12\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comment
on Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change from interested persons,
and is approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.
3, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice, infra note 8, at n. 8, which describe the
changes proposed in Amendment No. 2 from the original proposal.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81440 (August 18,
2017), 82 FR 40183 (August 24, 2017) (``Notice'').
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81640 (September 15,
2017), 82 FR 44229 (September 21, 2017) (``Order Instituting
Proceedings'').
    \10\ See letter to Brent J. Fields, Commission, from Cleary
Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, dated October 12, 2017 (``Cleary
Gottlieb Letter'').
    \11\ Amendment No. 3 revised the proposal to eliminate the
proposed changes to Footnote (E) that would have allowed a company
to list immediately upon effectiveness of an Exchange Act
registration statement only, without any concurrent IPO or
Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act'') registration. Except for
removing this part of the proposal, the remaining proposed
amendments in Amendment No. 3 are identical to those noticed for
comment in Amendment No. 2. Amendment No. 3 also contained a
complete restated Form 19b-4 under the Exchange Act, which contained
the same discussions, statutory basis and other sections set forth
in Amendment No. 2, with slight modifications to take into account
the deleted provision. Amendment No. 3 is available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nyse-2017-30/nyse201730-2782322-161654.pdf.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82332 (December 14,
2017), 82 FR 60442 (December 20, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 3

1. Listing Standards

    Generally, Section 102 of the Manual sets forth the minimum
numerical standards for domestic companies, or foreign private issuers
that choose to follow the domestic standards, to list equity securities
on the Exchange. Section 102.01B of the Manual requires a listed
company to demonstrate at the time of listing an aggregate market value
of publicly-held shares of either $40 million or $100 million,
depending on the type of listing.\13\ Section 102.01B also states that,
in these cases, the Exchange relies on written representations from the
underwriter, investment banker, or other financial advisor, as
applicable, with respect to this valuation.\14\ While Footnote (E)
states that the Exchange generally expects to list companies in
connection with a firm commitment underwritten IPO, upon transfer from
another market, or pursuant to a spin-off, Section 102.01B of the
Manual also contemplates that companies that have not previously had
their common equity securities registered under the Exchange Act, but
which have sold common equity securities in a private placement, may
wish to list their common equity securities on the Exchange at the time
of effectiveness of a registration statement \15\ filed solely for the
purpose of allowing existing shareholders to sell their shares.\16\
Specifically, Footnote (E) permits the Exchange, on a case by case
basis, to exercise discretion to list such companies and provides that
the Exchange will determine that such a company has met the $100
million aggregate market value of publicly-held shares requirement
based on a combination of both (i) an independent third-party valuation
(a ``Valuation'') \17\ of the company and (ii) the most recent trading
price for the company's common stock in a trading system for
unregistered securities operated by a national securities exchange or a
registered broker-dealer (a ``Private Placement Market'').\18\ Under
the current rules, the Exchange will attribute a market value of
publicly-held shares to the company equal to the lesser of (i) the
value calculable based on the Valuation and (ii) the value calculable
based on the most recent trading price in a Private Placement
Market.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Section 102.01B of the Manual states that a company must
demonstrate ``an aggregate market value of publicly-held shares of
$40,000,000 for companies that list either at the time of their
initial public offerings (``IPO'') (C) or as a result of spin-offs
or under the Affiliated Company standard or, for companies that list
at the time of their Initial Firm Commitment Underwritten Public
Offering (C), and $100,000,000 for other companies (D)(E).'' Section
102.01B also requires a company to have a closing price, or if
listing in connection with an IPO or Initial Firm Commitment
Underwritten Public Offering, an IPO or Initial Firm Commitment
Underwritten Public Offering price per share of at least $4.00 at
the time of initial listing.
    \14\ See Section 102.01B, Footnote (C) of the Manual, which
states that for companies listing at the time of their IPO or
Initial Firm Commitment Underwritten Public Offering, the Exchange
will rely on a written commitment from the underwriter to represent
the anticipated value of the company's offering. For spin-offs, the
Exchange will rely on a representation from the parent company's
investment banker (or other financial advisor) in order to estimate
the market value based upon the distribution ratio.
    \15\ The reference to a registration statement refers to a
registration statement effective under the Securities Act.
    \16\ See Section 102.01B, Footnote (E) of the Manual.
    \17\ See Section 102.01B, Footnote (E) of the Manual, which sets
forth specific requirements for the Valuation. Among other factors,
any Valuation used for purposes of Footnote (E) must be provided by
an entity that has significant experience and demonstrable
competence in the provision of such valuations.
    \18\ Section 102.01B, Footnote (E) of the Manual also sets forth
specific factors for relying on a Private Placement Market price,
and states that the Exchange will examine the trading price trends
for the stock in the Private Placement Market over a period of
several months prior to listing and will only rely on such market if
it is ``consistent with a sustained history [of trading] over that
several month period.''
    \19\ See Section 102.01B, Footnote (E) of the Manual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposed two changes to Footnote (E). First, the
Exchange proposed to amend Footnote (E) to provide that, in the absence
of any recent trading in a Private Placement Market, the Exchange will
determine that a company has met its market value of publicly-held
shares requirement if the company provides a recent Valuation
evidencing a market value of

publicly-held shares of at least $250 million.\20\ In proposing this
change, the Exchange expressed the view that the current requirement of
Footnote (E) to rely on recent Private Placement Market trading in
addition to a Valuation may cause difficulties for certain companies
that are otherwise clearly qualified for listing.\21\ The Exchange
stated that some companies that are clearly large enough to be suitable
for listing on the Exchange do not have their securities traded at all
on a Private Placement Market prior to going public and, in other
cases, the Private Placement Market trading is too limited to provide a
reasonable basis for reaching conclusions about a company's
qualification.\22\ In proposing to adopt a Valuation that must be at
least two-and-a-half times the $100 million requirement of Section
102.01B of the Manual, the Exchange stated that this amount ``will give
a significant degree of comfort that the market value of the company's
shares will meet the [$100 million] standard upon commencement of
trading on the Exchange,'' particularly because any such Valuation
``must be provided by an entity that has significant experience and
demonstrable competence in the provision of such valuations.'' \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See proposed Section 102.01B, Footnote (E) of the Manual.
The Commission notes that the Exhibit 5 to Amendment No. 3 contains
the proposed rule language. Any references herein to the proposed
rule language shall refer to the language available in Exhibit 5 to
Amendment No. 3, which is available from the Exchange or on the
Commission's website www.sec.gov. See also Notice, supra note 8.
    \21\ See Notice, supra note 8, at 40184.
    \22\ See id.
    \23\ Id. In its proposal, the Exchange stated that it believed
that it is unlikely that any Valuation would reach a conclusion that
was incorrect to the degree necessary for a company using this
provision to fail to meet the $100 million requirement upon listing,
in particular because any Valuation used for this purpose must be
provided by an entity that has significant experience and
demonstrable competence in the provision of such valuations. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange proposed to further amend Footnote (E) by
establishing certain criteria that would preclude a valuation agent
from being considered ``independent'' for purposes of Footnote (E),
which the Exchange believes will provide a significant additional
guarantee of the independence of any entity providing such a
Valuation.\24\ Specifically, the Exchange proposed that a valuation
agent will not be deemed to be independent if:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     At the time it provides such Valuation, the valuation
agent or any affiliated person or persons beneficially own in the
aggregate as of the date of the Valuation, more than 5% of the class of
securities to be listed, including any right to receive any such
securities exercisable within 60 days;
     The valuation agent or any affiliated entity has provided
any investment banking services to the listing applicant within the 12
months preceding the date of the Valuation; \25\ or
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ For purposes of this provision, ``investment banking
services'' includes, without limitation, acting as an underwriter in
an offering for the issuer; acting as a financial adviser in a
merger or acquisition; providing venture capital, equity lines of
credit, PIPEs (private investment, public equity transactions), or
similar investments; serving as placement agent for the issuer; or
acting as a member of a selling group in a securities underwriting.
See proposed Section 102.01B, Footnote (E) of the Manual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The valuation agent or any affiliated entity has been
engaged to provide investment banking services to the listing applicant
in connection with the proposed listing or any related financings or
other related transactions.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Trading Rules

    The Exchange also proposed to amend Exchange Rules 15, 104 and
123D, governing the opening of trading, to specify procedures for the
opening trade on the day of initial listing of a company that lists
under the proposed amendments to Footnote (E) and did not have any
recent trading in a Private Placement Market.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Notice, supra note 8, at 41085.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 15(b) provides that a DMM will publish a pre-opening
indication \28\ before a security opens if the opening transaction on
the Exchange is anticipated to be at a price that represents a change
of more than the ``Applicable Price Range,'' \29\ from a specified
``Reference Price.'' \30\ Rule 15(c)(1) specifies that the Reference
Price for a security (other than an American Depository Receipt) would
be either (A) the security's last reported sale price on the Exchange;
(B) the security's offering price in the case of an IPO; or (C) the
security's last reported sale price on the securities market from which
the security is being transferred to the Exchange.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Rule 15(a) states that a pre-opening indication will
include the security and the price range within which the opening
price is anticipated to occur. Pre-opening indications are published
on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds and the securities
information processor (``SIP''). See Rule 15(a). The Exchange may
also publish order imbalance information prior to the opening of a
security. The order imbalance information contains the price at
which opening interest may be executed in full. See Rule 15(g).
    \29\ See Rule 15(d) for a definition of ``Applicable Price
Range.''
    \30\ Rule 15(b) also provides that a DMM will publish a pre-
opening indication if a security has not opened by 10:00 a.m.
Eastern Time. See Rule 15(c) for a definition of ``Reference
Price.''
    \31\ See Rule 15(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposed to amend Rule 15(c)(1) to add new sub-
paragraph (D) to specify the Reference Price for a security that is
listed under Footnote (E). The Exchange proposed that if such security
has had recent sustained trading in a Private Placement Market prior to
listing, the Reference Price in such scenario would be the most recent
transaction price in that market or, if no such sustained trading has
occurred, the Reference Price used would be a price determined by the
Exchange in consultation with a financial advisor to the issuer of such
security.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See proposed Rule 15(c)(1)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 104(a)(2) provides that the DMM has a responsibility for
facilitating openings and reopenings for each of the securities in
which the DMM is registered as required under Exchange rules, which
includes supplying liquidity as needed. The Exchange proposed to amend
Rule 104(a)(2) to require the DMM to consult with the issuer's
financial advisor when facilitating the opening on the first day of
trading of a security that is listing under Footnote (E) and that has
not had recent sustained history of trading in a Private Placement
Market prior to listing, in order to effect a fair and orderly opening
of such security.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See proposed Rule 104(a)(2). The Exchange stated that this
requirement is based in part on Nasdaq Rule 4120(c)(9), which
requires that a new listing on Nasdaq that is not an IPO have a
financial advisor willing to perform the functions performed by an
underwriter in connection with pricing an IPO on Nasdaq. See Notice,
supra note 8, at 40185.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange stated that it believes that such a financial advisor
would have an understanding of the status of ownership of outstanding
shares in the company and would have been working with the issuer to
identify a market for the securities upon listing.\34\ As a result, it
believes such financial advisor would be able to provide input to the
DMM regarding expectations of where such a new listing should be
priced, based on pre-listing selling and buying interest and other
factors that would not be available to the DMM through other
sources.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Notice, supra note 8, at 40185.
    \35\ See id. The Exchange noted that despite the proposed
obligation to consult with the financial advisor, the DMM would
remain responsible for facilitating the opening of trading of such
security, and the opening of such security must take into
consideration the buy and sell orders available on the Exchange's
book. See id. Accordingly, the Exchange stated that just as a DMM is
not bound by an offering price in an IPO, and will open such a
security at a price dictated by the buying and selling interest
entered on the Exchange in that security, a DMM would not be bound
by the input he or she receives from the financial advisor. See id.
at 40185-86.

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

    In its proposal, the Exchange stated that the proposed amendments
to both Rule 15 and Rule 104 are designed to provide DMMs with
information to assist them in meeting their obligations to open a new
listing under the proposed amended text of Footnote (E).\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See id. at 40186.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further proposed to amend its rules to provide
authority to declare a regulatory halt for a non-IPO new listing. As
proposed, Rule 123D(d) would provide that the Exchange may declare a
regulatory halt in a security that is the subject of an initial pricing
on the Exchange and that has not been listed on a national securities
exchange or traded in the over-the-counter market pursuant to FINRA
Form 211 immediately prior to the initial pricing.\37\ In addition,
proposed Rule 123D(d) would provide that this regulatory halt would be
terminated when the DMM opens the security.\38\ The Exchange stated its
belief that it would be consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest for the Exchange, as a primary listing exchange, to
have the authority to declare a regulatory halt for a security that is
the subject of a non-IPO listing because it would ensure that a new
listing that is not the subject of an IPO could not be traded before
the security opens on the Exchange.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See proposed Rule 123D(d). The Exchange proposed to
renumber current subsection (d) of Rule 123D as subsection (e). See
proposed Rule 123D(e).
    \38\ See proposed Rule 123D(d). The Exchange stated that
proposed Rule 123D(d) is based in part on (i) Nasdaq Rule
4120(c)(9), which provides that the process for halting and initial
pricing of a security that is the subject of an IPO on Nasdaq is
also available for the initial pricing of any other security that
has not been listed on a national securities exchange or traded in
the over-the-counter market immediately prior to the initial public
offering, provided that a broker-dealer serving in the role of
financial advisor to the issuer of the securities being listed is
willing to perform the functions under Nasdaq Rule 4120(c)(7)(B)
that are performed by an underwriter with respect to an initial
public offering; and (ii) Nasdaq Rule 4120(c)(8)(A), which provides
that such halt condition shall be terminated when the security is
released for trading on Nasdaq. See Notice, supra note 8, at 40186.
    \39\ See Notice, supra note 8, at 40186.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Comments

    The Commission received two comments on the proposed rule
change.\40\ Both commenters supported the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Angel Letter, supra note 5, and Cleary Gottlieb Letter,
supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter urged the Commission to approve the proposal promptly
and without further delay.\41\ This commenter stated the belief that
there is no public interest served in excluding the listing of a large
company with many investors that does not need to raise additional
capital through an IPO.\42\ The commenter further stated that in
determining whether a company is large enough to meet the listing
standards, if a company were to trade at a market capitalization far
below the thresholds, the harm would be to the Exchange's reputation,
not to the investing public.\43\ The commenter further discussed
concerns about how NYSE will open the market for a security under the
proposal when there is no reliable previous price or offering
price.\44\ The commenter stated that if NYSE gets the ``offering price
`wrong,' the secondary market trading will quickly find the market
price at which supply equals demand within a few minutes if not a few
seconds.'' \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Angel Letter, supra note 5, at 1.
    \42\ See id. at 2.
    \43\ See id. at 3.
    \44\ See id.
    \45\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The other commenter also supported the proposal.\46\ The commenter
stated that, in terms of the lack of an offering price or price range
for the securities, the factors that typically underpin the price
determination in an IPO are all publicly available, such as knowledge
of ``comparable public companies and the trading prices of their shares
and the corresponding financial metrics of the new issuer.'' \47\ The
commenter also stated that, in any case, ``the opening price will be
quickly adjusted through normal market forces.'' \48\ Further, the
commenter also did not believe that the lack of information on the
number of shares that will likely be made available for sale was an
issue because although the ``absence of a certain block of shares
offered at the outset necessarily creates greater uncertainty . . . ,
that concern seems to be reasonably mitigated by the practical reality
that an issuer is unlikely to incur the cost--both out of pocket and in
management time--of undertaking an exchange listing without having
sounded out its shareholders about their general interest in possibly
selling shares.'' \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Cleary Gottlieb Letter, supra note 10, submitted in
response to the Order Instituting Proceedings. Several of the
comments from this commenter focused on the Exchange's proposal to
allow a company to list on the Exchange immediately upon
effectiveness of an Exchange Act registration statement without any
concurrent Securities Act registration. In Amendment No. 3, the
Exchange removed this aspect of its proposal from its proposed rule
change. Therefore, those comments that related solely to the deleted
portion of the Exchange proposal are not relevant to the amended
proposal. See Amendment No. 3, supra note 11.
    \47\ Cleary Gottlieb Letter, supra note 10, at 3.
    \48\ Id.
    \49\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 3, is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\50\ In
particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 3, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Exchange Act,\51\ 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. Section 6(b)(5)
of the Exchange Act \52\ also requires that the rules of an exchange
not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ 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).
    \51\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has consistently recognized the importance of
exchange listing standards. Among other things, such listing standards
help ensure that exchange listed companies will have sufficient public
float, investor base, and trading interest to provide the depth and
liquidity necessary to promote fair and orderly markets.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ The Commission has stated in approving exchange listing
requirements that the development and enforcement of adequate
standards governing the listing of securities on an exchange is an
activity of critical importance to the financial markets and the
investing public. In addition, once a security has been approved for
initial listing, maintenance criteria allow an exchange to monitor
the status and trading characteristics of that issue to ensure that
it continues to meet the exchange's standards for market depth and
liquidity so that fair and orderly markets can be maintained. See,
e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 81856 (October 11, 2017),
82 FR 48296, 48298 (October 17, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2017-31); 81079 (July
5, 2017), 82 FR 32022, 32023 (July 11, 2017) (SR-NYSE-2017-11). The
Commission notes that, in general, adequate listing standards, by
promoting fair and orderly markets, are consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, in that they are, among other things,
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
promote just and equitable principles of trade and protect investors
and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has stated that it typically expects a company to list
in

connection with a firm commitment underwritten IPO, upon transfer from
another market, or pursuant to a spin-off.\54\ The Exchange listing
standards currently contain a provision, approved in 2008, that gives
the Exchange discretion to list companies upon effectiveness of a
registration statement under the Securities Act that is filed solely
for the purpose of allowing existing shareholders to resell shares they
obtained in earlier private placements if such companies can evidence
$100 million of publicly held shares based on the lesser amount from a
Valuation provided by an independent third party or the price in a
Private Placement Market.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See Notice, supra note 8, at 40183.
    \55\ According to the Exchange, companies listing their
securities upon a selling shareholder registration statement have
sold securities in one or more private placements and do not wish to
raise cash in an offering at the time of listing, unlike a company
listing in conjunction with its IPO. Because the Exchange believed
such companies meeting all other listing standards should not be
barred from listing, the Exchange proposed Footnote (E) to the
listing standards which the Commission approved in 2008. In
proposing Footnote (E) in 2008, the Exchange stated that with such
companies, there is no public trading market to rely on to evaluate
whether the company meets the market value standard as with a
company transferring from another market, nor is there a public
offering whose price would provide the basis for a letter of the
type typically provided by underwriters for companies listing in
conjunction with an IPO. See Section 102.01B, Footnote (E);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58550 (September 15, 2008), 73
FR 54442, 54442-43 (September 19, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-68) (``NYSE
2008 Order''). See also notes 18-19 supra and accompanying text,
describing the requirements in current rule to be able to rely on a
Private Placement Market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Exchange has proposed to provide an alternative
in cases where there is not sufficient Private Placement Market trading
to establish a reliable price. The Exchange has also proposed
additional standards concerning the independence of the third party
agent providing the Valuation.
    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change will provide
a means for a category of companies with securities that have not
previously been traded on a public market and that are listing only
upon effectiveness of a selling shareholder registration statement,
without a related underwritten offering, and without recent trading in
a Private Placement Market, to list on the Exchange. In particular, for
such companies that otherwise meet NYSE's listing standards,\56\ the
proposed rule change will provide that, in the absence of any recent
trading in a Private Placement Market, the Exchange will determine that
such company has met its market value of publicly-held shares
requirement if the company provides a Valuation from an independent
third party evidencing a market value of publicly-held shares of at
least $250 million. According to the Exchange, ``[a]dopting a
requirement that the Valuation must be at least two-and-a-half times
the $100 million requirement will give a significant degree of comfort
that the market value of the company's shares will meet the standard
upon commencement of trading on the Exchange.'' \57\ The Commission
believes that requiring a company that does not have a recent and
sustained history of trading of its securities in a Private Placement
Market to provide a Valuation of at least $250 million should provide
the Exchange with a reasonable level of assurance that the company's
market value supports listing on the Exchange and the maintenance of
fair and orderly markets thereby protecting investors and the public
interest in accordance with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Companies listing upon an effective registration statement
would have to meet the distribution requirements set forth in
Section 102.01A (i.e., that the company have 400 beneficial holders
of round lots of 100 shares and 1,100,000 publicly-held shares), the
requirements of Section 102.01B (which includes a $4.00 price
requirement at the time of initial listing), and one of the
financial standards set forth in Section 102.01C of the Manual
(i.e., the Earnings Test or the Global Market Capitalization Test),
as well as comply with all other applicable NYSE rules, including
the corporate governance requirements.
    \57\ See Notice, supra note 8, at 40184. Further, in approving
Footnote (E) in 2008, the Commission recognized that ``the most
recent trading price in a Private Placement Market may be an
imperfect indication as to the value of a security upon listing, in
part because the Private Placement Markets generally do not have the
depth and liquidity and price discovery mechanisms found on public
trading markets.'' NYSE 2008 Order, supra note 55, at 54443.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange rules also seek to ensure that the Valuation is reliable
by requiring it to be provided by an independent third party that has
significant experience and demonstrable competence in providing
valuations of companies.\58\ The proposed rule change establishes
additional independence criteria, pursuant to which the valuation agent
will not be ``independent'' if the valuation agent, or any affiliated
person, owns in the aggregate more than 5% of the securities to be
listed,\59\ or has provided investment banking services to the company
in the 12 months prior to the Valuation or in connection with the
listing.\60\ The Commission believes that, consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of Exchange Act and the protection of investors, these new
independence requirements should help to ensure that the Valuation is
reliable.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See Footnote (E) for additional requirements for the
Exchange to be able to rely on the Valuation.
    \59\ This calculation of ownership will include any right to
receive such securities exercisable within 60 days.
    \60\ See supra notes 24-26, and accompanying text.
    \61\ The Commission also notes that companies listing pursuant
to the new proposed provision will be required to meet the
distribution requirements of Section 102.01A of the Manual, the
requirements of Section 102.01(B) of the Manual, and one of the
financial standards in Section 102.01C of the Manual, which are the
same requirements that apply to most equity listings on the
Exchange. See note 56, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also has proposed to amend certain of its procedures
to address how the DMM is to establish the Reference Price in
connection with the opening, on the first day of trading, of a security
listed under Footnote (E).\62\ Specifically, for a security with
sustained trading in a Private Placement Market, the Reference Price
will be the most recent transaction price in that market; otherwise the
Reference Price will be determined by the Exchange in consultation with
a financial advisor to the issuer. The DMM will also be required to
consult with the financial advisor to the issuer where there is no
recent sustained history of trading in order to effect a fair and
orderly opening of such security.\63\ The Commission believes that the
proposed changes should help establish a reliable Reference Price, and
provide additional information to the DMM, and thereby facilitate the
opening by the DMM, when trading first commences on the Exchange for
certain securities not listed in connection with an underwritten IPO,
and should help to promote fair and orderly markets. The Commission
believes these changes, consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange
Act, are reasonably designed to protect investors and the public
interest and promote just and equitable principles of trade for the
opening of securities listed under the new standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Under Rule 15 a DMM is required to publish a pre-opening
indication before a security opens if the opening transaction on the
Exchange is anticipated to be at a price that represents a change of
more than the ``Applicable Price Range'' from a specified Reference
Price. Under Rule 15, for example, the ``Applicable Price Range''
for determining whether to publish a pre-opening indication is 5%
for securities with a Reference Price over $3.00.
    \63\ In its proposal, the Exchange stated that such ``financial
advisor would be able to provide input to the DMM regarding
expectations of where such a new listing should be priced, based on
pre-listing selling and buying interest and other factors that would
not be available to the DMM through other sources.'' See Notice,
supra note 8, at 40185.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange has proposed that it be permitted to declare
a regulatory halt in certain securities that are the subject of an
initial pricing on the Exchange, and have not been listed on an
exchange or quoted in an over-

the-counter quotation medium immediately prior thereto. Such regulatory
halt will be terminated when the DMM opens the security, and is for the
limited purpose of precluding other markets from trading a security
until the Exchange has completed the initial pricing process. The
Commission believes this proposed change also should facilitate the
initial opening by the DMM of certain securities not listed in
connection with an underwritten IPO, and thereby promote fair and
orderly markets and the protection of investors.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ The proposed regulatory halt allows the Exchange to have a
similar opening procedure for securities listed pursuant to Footnote
(E) as an IPO security under Section 12(f) of the Exchange Act and
Rule 12f-2, since such securities raise similar issues in terms of
initial pricing on the first day of trading. See 15 U.S.C. 78l(f);
17 CFR 240.12f-2. Similar to unlisted trading privilege rules that
prevent other exchanges from trading an IPO security until the
primary listing market has reported the first opening trade, the
regulatory halt will allow the DMM to complete the initial pricing
and open the security before other markets can trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons set forth above, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 3, is consistent
with the Exchange Act.

V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 3

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 3 is consistent with the
Exchange Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following
methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2017-30 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2017-30. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2017-30, and should be submitted on
or before March 1, 2018.

VI. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 3

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 3, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of the notice of Amendment No. 3 in the
Federal Register. The Commission notes that the proposed rule change,
as modified by Amendment No. 3 remains identical to the version
published for notice and comment on August 24, 2017,\65\ except for the
proposed deletion described above,\66\ and that the only comments the
Commission received on this proposed rule change were in support of the
proposal. The Commission also has found that the proposal, as modified
by Amendment No. 3, is consistent with the Exchange Act for the reasons
discussed herein. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause for
approving the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 3, on
an accelerated basis, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange
Act.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ See Notice, supra note 8.
    \66\ See note 11, supra.
    \67\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Conclusion

    It is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\68\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2017-30), as
modified by Amendment No. 3 thereto, be, and hereby is, approved on an
accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-02501 Filed 2-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


You Asked For the Following: Year : From: 1980 To: 2003 State : Chesapeake By State Species : CRAB, BLUE " Year"," State"," Species"," Metric Tons"," Pounds","$" " 1980"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 11,477.8"," 25,304,000"," 6 ,030,052" " 1980"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 520.5"," 1,1 47,600"," 1,357,799" " 1980"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 17,096.9"," 37,691,800"," 6 ,794,452" " 1980"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 138.2"," 304,600"," 200,902" " 1980"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 148.8"," 3 28,100"," 466,272" " 1981"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 26,016.9"," 57,356,900"," 15 ,570,252" " 1981"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 1,060.6"," 2,3 38,300"," 2,823,668" " 1981"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 19,071.0"," 42,044,000"," 8 ,064,175" " 1981"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 78.6"," 173,300"," 166,763" " 1981"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 185.7"," 4 09,500"," 624,558" " 1982"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 18,695.1"," 41,215,200"," 12 ,743,253" " 1982"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 1,110.2"," 2,4 47,500"," 3,107,455" " 1982"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 19,970.8"," 44,027,700"," 9 ,047,196" " 1982"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 219.0"," 482,800"," 390,523" " 1982"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 1.9"," 4,100"," 6,905" " 1982"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 150.8"," 3 32,400"," 515,735" " 1983"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 22,049.4"," 48,610,000"," 17 ,104,638" " 1983"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 1,750.9"," 3,8 60,100"," 5,461,686" " 1983"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 20,912.7"," 46,104,200"," 11 ,042,861" " 1983"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 283.7"," 625,400"," 785,146" " 1983"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 14.5"," 31,900"," 61,586" " 1983"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 37.5"," 82,700"," 76,421" " 1984"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 21,229.2"," 46,801,800"," 16 ,023,444" " 1984"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 893.0"," 1,9 68,700"," 4,053,624" " 1984"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 22,436.7"," 49,464,000"," 11 ,135,400" " 1984"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 401.3"," 884,700"," 1,012,418" " 1984"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 17.8"," 39,300"," 53,019" " 1984"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 21.0"," 46,200"," 42,071" " 1985"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 25,163.9"," 55,476,400"," 17 ,957,943" " 1985"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 1,339.6"," 2,9 53,300"," 6,054,064" " 1985"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 18,476.4"," 40,733,180"," 8 ,434,209" " 1985"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 474.4"," 1,045,800"," 1,081,267" " 1985"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 24.0"," 52,900"," 63,557" " 1985"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 33.3"," 73,500"," 74,094" " 1986"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 21,821.6"," 48,107,900"," 18 ,192,796" " 1986"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 954.5"," 2,1 04,300"," 3,715,593" " 1986"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 17,022.3"," 37,527,300"," 9 ,090,401" " 1986"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 303.5"," 669,000"," 686,300" " 1986"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 18.7"," 41,300"," 78,003" " 1986"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 17.5"," 38,600"," 38,381" " 1987"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 20,063.4"," 44,231,800"," 20 ,055,018" " 1987"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 864.9"," 1,9 06,700"," 4,800,367" " 1987"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 14,536.2"," 32,046,500"," 9 ,063,908" " 1987"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 192.5"," 424,400"," 522,222" " 1987"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 22.4"," 49,400"," 145,354" " 1987"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 18.3"," 40,300"," 65,930" " 1988"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 20,052.1"," 44,206,900"," 20 ,249,286" " 1988"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 525.4"," 1,1 58,400"," 2,256,984" " 1988"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 16,432.0"," 36,225,900"," 11 ,750,455" " 1988"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 83.8"," 184,700"," 188,695" " 1988"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 3.8"," 8,300"," 31,723" " 1988"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 423.8"," 9 34,300"," 1,411,874" " 1989"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 20,598.8"," 45,412,100"," 22 ,732,461" " 1989"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 568.6"," 1,2 53,500"," 4,128,589" " 1989"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 19,615.6"," 43,244,500"," 12 ,316,589" " 1989"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 428.2"," 943,900"," 1,451,559" " 1989"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 108.5"," 239,200"," 882,295" " 1989"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 57.3"," 1 26,400"," 211,407" " 1990"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 23,036.5"," 50,786,161"," 21 ,570,207" " 1990"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 8.2"," 18,159"," 19,744" " 1990"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 715.2"," 1,5 76,660"," 4,399,070" " 1990"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 22,229.3"," 49,006,688"," 15 ,633,916" " 1990"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 431.2"," 950,641"," 1,220,103" " 1990"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 69.4"," 152,940"," 571,392" " 1990"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 3.7"," 8,256"," 12,122" " 1991"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 22,569.3"," 49,756,236"," 18 ,912,550" " 1991"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 9.2"," 20,242"," 17,293" " 1991"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 822.1"," 1,8 12,299"," 4,314,992" " 1991"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 19,768.1"," 43,580,734"," 10 ,266,191" " 1991"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 355.6"," 784,033"," 842,366" " 1991"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 56.1"," 123,661"," 479,269" " 1991"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 197.5"," 4 35,426"," 403,212" " 1992"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 13,233.3"," 29,174,069"," 14 ,930,465" " 1992"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 13.8"," 30,533"," 51,292" " 1992"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 455.8"," 1,0 04,940"," 2,624,107" " 1992"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 10,573.1"," 23,309,460"," 9 ,058,840" " 1992"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 131.8"," 290,505"," 539,359" " 1992"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 103.6"," 228,324"," 855,074" " 1993"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 27,108.7"," 59,763,788"," 32 ,250,221" " 1993"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 16.9"," 37,254"," 64,013" " 1993"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 839.4"," 1,8 50,517"," 5,099,309" " 1993"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 23,316.8"," 51,404,223"," 30 ,759,678" " 1993"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 671.3"," 1,480,000"," 2,537,104" " 1993"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 122.5"," 270,041"," 1,278,253" " 1994"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 20,383.6"," 44,937,722"," 36 ,595,329" " 1994"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 11.2"," 24,794"," 46,271" " 1994"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 746.5"," 1,6 45,658"," 5,431,313" " 1994"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 15,431.4"," 34,020,062"," 19 ,874,278" " 1994"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 570.6"," 1,257,974"," 2,330,897" " 1994"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 66.6"," 146,934"," 607,470" " 1995"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 19,288.8"," 42,523,992"," 36 ,849,840" " 1995"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 16.1"," 35,428"," 80,341" " 1995"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 776.0"," 1,710,847"," 4,859,595" " 1995"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 13,971.0"," 30,800,424"," 20 ,185,974" " 1995"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 729.3"," 1,607,723"," 3,632,008" " 1995"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 73.0"," 160,856"," 768,831" " 1996"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 16,862.3"," 37,174,668"," 26 ,170,445" " 1996"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 0.1"," 262"," 568" " 1996"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 808.6"," 1,782,582"," 7,634,490" " 1996"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 14,750.2"," 32,518,256"," 19 ,718,691" " 1996"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 741.1"," 1,633,792"," 3,384,431" " 1996"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 29.3"," 64,683"," 316,314" " 1997"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 19,948.6"," 43,978,676"," 36 ,379,289" " 1997"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 17.5"," 38,603"," 70,378" " 1997"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 706.7"," 1,557,882"," 7,129,716" " 1997"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 16,782.2"," 36,998,000"," 24 ,516,428" " 1997"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 906.1"," 1,997,506"," 3,617,863" " 1997"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 31.3"," 69,035"," 269,888" " 1998"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 13,402.2"," 29,546,458"," 28 ,294,910" " 1998"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 23.3"," 51,316"," 93,035" " 1998"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 577.3"," 1,272,673"," 5,881,549" " 1998"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 14,581.6"," 32,146,616"," 21 ,249,195" " 1998"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 1,084.6"," 2,391,209"," 5,641,837" " 1998"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 27.9"," 61,459"," 304,454" " 1999"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 15,340.9"," 33,820,654"," 30 ,862,082" " 1999"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 15.6"," 34,381"," 90,686" " 1999"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 0.9"," 1,982"," 9,377" " 1999"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 686.8"," 1,5 14,013"," 7,896,529" " 1999"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 13,306.9"," 29,336,320"," 21 ,315,957" " 1999"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 930.3"," 2,050,989"," 4,937,459" " 1999"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 22.6"," 49,768"," 271,690" " 2000"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 9,715.8"," 21,419,470"," 23 ,607,074" " 2000"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 15.2"," 33,483"," 54,160" " 2000"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 0.6"," 1,418"," 6,015" " 2000"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 631.7"," 1,3 92,648"," 7,175,351" " 2000"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 12,142.6"," 26,769,521"," 18 ,616,481" " 2000"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 925.7"," 2,040,865"," 5,421,344" " 2000"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 16.2"," 35,787"," 76,698" " 2001"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 10,987.0"," 24,222,045"," 24 ,964,595" " 2001"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 3.8"," 8,367"," 36,543" " 2001"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 0.3"," 601"," 2,142" " 2001"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 772.1"," 1,7 02,131"," 9,677,413" " 2001"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 10,291.3"," 22,688,171"," 17 ,295,178" " 2001"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 1,054.7"," 2,325,135"," 8,125,852" " 2001"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 20.0"," 44,089"," 179,196" " 2002"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 11,447.8"," 25,237,841"," 23 ,949,838" " 2002"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 2.9"," 6,401"," 12,232" " 2002"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 0.2"," 420"," 1,268" " 2002"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 560.6"," 1,2 35,891"," 6,375,046" " 2002"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 11,418.0"," 25,172,221"," 16 ,370,701" " 2002"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 951.2"," 2,097,112"," 4,596,825" " 2002"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 14.2"," 31,196"," 115,601" " 2003"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE"," 11,893.5"," 26,220,305"," 25 ,896,295" " 2003"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 1.7"," 3,751"," 5,993" " 2003"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 0.2"," 447"," 1,706" " 2003"," Maryland"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT AND PEELER"," 722.0"," 1,5 91,712"," 8,628,415" " 2003"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE"," 9,012.8"," 19,869,714"," 14 ,967,365" " 2003"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, PEELER"," 710.5"," 1,566,339"," 4,029,425" " 2003"," Virginia"," CRAB, BLUE, SOFT"," 12.8"," 28,326"," 132,897"


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES January 10, 2006 James R. Cranney, Jr. Vice President US Apple Association 6707 Old Dominion Dr., Suite 320 McLean, VA 22101 4556 Dear Jim,

Thank you for your letters of Dec. 19 and 20 regarding extending the comment period for the azinphos methyl benefits and ecological risk assessments. We very much appreciate your commitment on behalf of the US Apple to make every effort possible to submit comments by the Feb 6th deadline.

If for some reason US Apple is not able to meet the deadline, the Agency will make every reasonable effort to consider your, and any other stakeholder's, comments that provide useful information and are submitted within a reasonably short time, i. e., a week or so, after the close of the comment period. We recognize that with the new FDMS docketing system there were some delays in accessing the documents and, as you note, the holidays also tend to shorten the time available for some stakeholders to comment.

Please note, however, that the FDMS system, unlike the previous edockets system will not accept late comments. Therefore if your comments are submitted after Feb. 6th, they should be submitted directly to Diane Isbell, the Chemical Review Manager for azinphosmethyl at: isbell. diane@ epa. gov . Diane will ensure that they are distributed to the azinphos technical team and posted to the docket as soon as possible.

Also, it is important to understand that there will be, according to the current plan, one more comment period on the azinphos methyl human health assessment and the Agency's proposed decision on the Group 3 uses, before the Agency finalizes its decision. Thus, any comments that are not addressed during the comment period that ends Feb 6th, will be considered before the Agency's final decision. Don't hesitate to contact me or Diane if you have any other questions or concerns related to the process and schedule for azinphos methyl.

Sincerely,

Margaret Rice, Chief Reregistration Branch II Special Review and Reregistration Division


[Federal Register: July 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 138)]
[Notices]
[Page 41066-41067]
[DOCID:fr17jy08-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13213-000]

Lock 14 Hydro Partners; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comment, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

July 10, 2008.
    On April 28, 2008, Lock 14 Hydro Partners filed an application,
pursuant

to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the
feasibility of the Kentucky Lock and Dam 14 Project to be located at
river mile 249 on the Kentucky River at Lock and Dam 14 in Lee County,
Kentucky. Existing facilities are owned by the Kentucky River
Authority.
    The proposed project would utilize the existing Lock and Dam 14
owned by the Kentucky River Authority and would consist of: (1) A
powerhouse containing 4 turbine generator units with a total installed
capacity of 2.7 MW; (2) a 2,000 foot transmission line; and; (3)
appurtenant facilities. The annual production would be 11 GWh which
would be sold to a local utility.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. David Brown Kinloch, 414 S. Wenzel Street,
Louisville, KY 40204,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Steven Sachs,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
    Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    For more information on how to submit these types of filings please
go to the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the Commission's Web site at http:/
/www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13213) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-16296 Filed 7-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 50 (Thursday, March 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14095-14096]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05272]

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

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:
    Form 144, OMB Control No. 3235-0101, SEC File No. 270-112

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), 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.
    Form 144 (17 CFR 239.144) is used to report the sale of securities
during any three-month period that exceeds 5,000 shares or other units
or has an aggregate sales price that does not exceed $50,000. Under
Sections 2(a)(11), 4(a)(1), 4a(2), 4(a)(4) and 19(a) of the Securities
Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(11), 77d(a)(1), 77d(a)(2), 77d(a)(4) and
77s (a)) and Rule 144 (17 CFR 230.144) there under, the Commission is
authorize to solicit the information required to be supplied by Form
144. Form 144 takes approximately 1 burden hour per response and is
filed by 400 respondents for a total of 400 total burden hours.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by 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 collections 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 unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/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: March 13, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05272 Filed 3-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REGION 8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1595 Wynkoop Street
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Denver, CO   80202-1129
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.epa.gov/region8
Ref: 8ARD-PM

Mr. Mike Natchees
Director, Air Quality Program
Energy and Minerals Division
Ute Indian Tribe
P.O. Box 70
Fort Duchesne, Utah  84026

Dear Mr. Natchees:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 is proposing to issue a synthetic minor permit for the Anadarko Uintah Midstream, LLC. (Anadarko), Ouray Compressor Station on the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation. As requested by Anadarko, this permit would incorporate enforceable requirements for the installation and operation of one low-emission tri-ethylene glycol (TEG) dehydration system, and one flare for control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from 15 storage tanks. Anadarko also requested enforceable requirements to install and operate only instrument air-driven or low-bleed/no-bleed pneumatic controllers. This permit is only intended to incorporate requested emission limits and provisions from the permit application for existing emissions units operating at the facility.

A public comment period for the proposed permit will begin on July 30, 2019 and end on August 28, 2019.

We have enclosed a CD and paper copy containing the proposed permit and supporting documentation, and we ask that you please make this material available for public review until the end of the public comment period. Comments may be submitted via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or through https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID #EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0330). In addition, we have provided copies of the bulletin board public notice announcement and would appreciate it if you would post this announcement in prominent locations in your area. All of these documents will also be available for review in electronic format on our website at: https://www.epa.gov/caa-permitting/caa-permit public-comment-opportunities-region-8.

If you have any questions concerning the enclosed proposed permit or technical support documents, please contact Patrick Wauters, of my staff, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

                                       Sincerely,

                                      Carl Daly
                                      Acting Director
                                      Air and Radiation Division

Enclosures