[Federal Register: December 30, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 249)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 69027-69028]
[DOCID:fr30de09-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-1053]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Inner Harbor Navigational Canal,
New Orleans, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Danziger lift span bridge across the Inner Harbor Navigational Canal,
mile 3.1, at New Orleans, LA. The deviation is necessary to remove and
install the roller guide assemblies on the bridge. This deviation
allows the bridge to remain closed at two different points of time
during the bridge repairs project.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on January 16, 2010
through 7 p.m. on January 30, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-1053 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-1053 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Lindsey Middleton, Bridge Administration Branch;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coastal Bridge Company, contracted by
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, has requested a
bridge closure for the Danziger Lift Span Bridge on Route US 90
crossing the Inner Harbor Navigational Canal, mile 3.1, in New Orleans,
LA. The vertical clearance of the bridge in the closed-to-navigation
position is 50 feet above mean high water and 55 feet above mean low
water. Currently, according to

33 CFR 117.458(b), the draw of the US 90 (Danziger) bridge, mile 3.1,
shall open on signal; except that, from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. the draw shall
open on signal if at least four hours notice is given, and the draw
need not be opened from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday. This deviation allows the draw span of the
bridge to remain closed-to-navigation for 12 consecutive hours between
7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on intermittent days from January 16, 2009 through
January 30, 2009. Uncontrollable variables such as inclement weather
make it difficult to predict the exact dates that work can be
conducted. Thus, the exact dates for the closures cannot be firmly
scheduled. Notices will be published in the Eighth Coast Guard District
Local Notice to Mariners and will be broadcast via the Coast Guard
Broadcast Notice to Mariners System as soon as information pertaining
to the exact closure dates becomes available. During the deviation
period seven new aerial cables between the two bridge towers will be
installed, the wiring for the roadway and navigation lighting will be
replaced, and the guide rollers and span locks will be replaced. The
closure periods are necessary for the guide rollers and span locks to
be replaced. During the non-closure times of the deviation period the
bridge will remain in the open position for vessel traffic. Navigation
on the waterway consists mainly of tugs with tows. As a result of
coordination between the Coast Guard and the waterway users, it has
been determined that this closure will not have a significant effect on
these vessels. The Coast Guard will inform these users through the
Local Notice to Mariners. Vessels will be allowed to pass underneath
the bridge in the closed-to-navigation position. There are alternate
routes available to vessel traffic. The bridge will not be able to open
for emergencies.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 14, 2009.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-30931 Filed 12-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85561-85562]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28562]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9955-68-ORD]

Office of Research and Development; Ambient Air Monitoring
Reference and Equivalent Methods: Designation of One New Equivalent
Method

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency(EPA).

ACTION: Notice of the designation of a new equivalent method for
monitoring ambient air quality.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has designated, in accordance with 40 CFR part 53, one new
equivalent method for measuring concentrations of nitrogen dioxide
(NO2) in ambient air.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Vanderpool, Exposure Methods
and Measurement Division (MD-D205-03), National Exposure Research
Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with regulations at 40 CFR
part 53, the EPA evaluates various methods for monitoring the
concentrations of those ambient air pollutants for which EPA has
established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) as set
forth in 40 CFR part 50. Monitoring methods that are determined to meet
specific requirements for adequacy are designated by the EPA as either
reference or equivalent methods (as applicable), thereby permitting
their use under 40 CFR part 58 by States and other agencies for
determining compliance with the NAAQSs. A list of all reference or
equivalent methods that have been previously designated by EPA may be
found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html.
    The EPA hereby announces the designation of one new equivalent
method for measuring concentrations of NO2 in ambient air.
This designation is made under the provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as
amended on October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65291-65468).
    The new equivalent method for NO2 is an automated method
(analyzer) utilizing the measurement principle based on gas phase
chemiluminescence reaction of nitric oxide (NO) with ozone, using a
photolytic NO2 to NO converter and the calibration procedure
specified in the operation manual. This newly designated equivalent
method is identified as follows:

    EQNA-1016-241, ``Teledyne Advanced Pollution Instrumentation
Model T200P chemiluminescence Nitrogen Oxides Analyzer,'' operated
on any full scale range between 0-50 ppb and 0-1000 ppb, with a PTFE
filter element or a Kynar[supreg] DFU installed in the filter
assembly, with any range mode (Single or Dual), at any operating
temperature in the range of 15[deg]C to 35[deg]C, with the high
efficiency photolytic converter, with software Temperature and
Pressure compensation ON, in accordance with the associated
instrument manual; and with or without any of the following options:
Zero/Span valves, internal Zero/Span permeation oven (IZS), Nafion-
type sample gas conditioner, external communication and data
monitoring interfaces; and the NumaViewTM software.

    This application for an equivalent method determination for this
candidate method was received by the Office of Research and Development
on September 19, 2016. This analyzer is commercially available from the
applicant, Teledyne Advanced Pollution Instrumentation, Inc., 9480
Carroll Park Drive, San Diego, CA 92121-2251.
    A representative test analyzer has been tested in accordance with
the applicable test procedures specified in 40 CFR part 53, as amended
on October 26, 2015. After reviewing the results of those tests and
other information submitted by the applicant, EPA has determined, in
accordance with Part 53, that this method should be designated as an
equivalent method.
    As a designated equivalent method, this method is acceptable for
use by states and other air monitoring agencies under the requirements
of 40 CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. For such purposes,
this method must be used in strict accordance with the operation or
instruction manual associated with the method and subject to any
specifications and limitations (e.g., configuration or operational
settings) specified in the designated method description (see the
identification of the method above).
    Use of the method also should be in general accordance with the
guidance and recommendations of applicable sections of the ``Quality
Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume I,''
EPA/600/R-94/038a and ``Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems, Volume II, Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Program,'' EPA-454/B-13-003, (both available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qalist.html). Provisions concerning modification of such methods
by users are specified under Section 2.8 (Modifications of Methods by
Users) of Appendix C to 40 CFR part 58.
    Consistent or repeated noncompliance with any of these conditions
should be reported to: Director, Exposure Methods and Measurement
Division (MD-E205-01), National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711.
    Designation of this equivalent method is intended to assist the
States in establishing and operating their air quality surveillance
systems under 40 CFR part 58. Questions concerning the commercial
availability or technical aspects of the method should be directed to
the applicant.

    Dated: November 18, 2016.
Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta,
Director, National Exposure Research Laboratory.
[FR Doc. 2016-28562 Filed 11-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 241 (Thursday, December 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78055-78057]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32139]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65924; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-167]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
the Permit Fee

December 9, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 28, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Fee Schedule to waive
Permit Fees for existing Exchange members or member organizations that
were members on the Exchange prior to the initiation of PSX and have
since determined to commence an equities business.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.sec.gov and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to extend the waiver of
Permit Fees to Exchange members or member organizations that were
members on the Exchange prior to the initiation of PSX and have since
determined to commence an equities business. The Exchange continues to
seek to encourage members to trade on NASDAQ OMX PSX (``PSX'') \3\
under a market participant identifier (``MPID'') \4\ registered to the
member or member organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ PSX is the Exchange's cash equities market electronic
trading platform.
    \4\ An MPID is a four-letter code used by a member to categorize
its trading activity for a specific purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange assesses members and member organizations
who are transacting business on the Exchange a Permit Fee of $1,100 per
month.\5\ A member or member organization is assessed the $1,100
monthly Permit Fee if that member or member organization: (1) Transacts
its option orders in its assigned Phlx house account in a particular
month; (2) is a clearing member of The Options Clearing Corporation or
a Floor Broker; or (3) for those member organizations which are under
common ownership, transacts at least one options trade in a Phlx house
account that is assigned to one of the member organizations under
common ownership.\6\ Members who are not transacting business on the
Exchange are assessed a Permit Fee of $7,500 per month. A member or
member organization is assessed the $7,500 Permit Fee for not
transacting business on the Exchange if that member is either: (i) Not
a PSX Participant;\7\ or not engaged in an options business at the
Exchange in a particular month. In

addition, a member or member organization that sponsors an options
participant \8\ would pay an additional Permit Fee for each sponsored
options participant. If the Exchange member or member organization
meets the exemption criteria related to the $7,500 Permit Fee, the
member or member organization would be assessed the $1,100 Permit Fee
or $2,000 as of January 3, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange recently filed to amend its Permit Fees to
$2,000 for members transacting business on the Exchange. The rule
text of Exhibit 5 reflects the text of that currently effective
filing which will be operative on January 3, 2012, in part. See SR-
Phlx-2011-166.
    \6\ For purposes of the Permit Fee, ``common ownership'' shall
be defined as at least 75% common ownership between the member
organizations.
    \7\ Applicants that apply for membership solely to participate
in the NASDAQ OMX PSX equities market are not assessed a Permit Fee,
Application Fee, Initiation Fee, or Account Fee. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 61863 (April 7, 2010), 75 FR 20021 (April
16, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-54).
    \8\ See Exchange Rule 1094 titled Sponsored Participants. A
Sponsored Participant may obtain authorized access to the Exchange
only if such access is authorized in advance by one or more
Sponsoring Member Organizations. Sponsored Participants must enter
into and maintain participant agreements with one or more Sponsoring
Member Organizations establishing a proper relationship(s) and
account(s) through which the Sponsored Participant may trade on the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the time PSX began operations in October 2010, the Exchange
filed a rule change to waive the Application Fee, Initiation Fee,
Permit Fee and Account Fee for applicants applying to participate in
PSX (``October 2010 Rule Change'').\9\ The October 2010 Rule Change
applied the waivers to new Exchange members that solely participated in
PSX.\10\ Also, the October 2010 Rule Change did not apply the waivers
to an applicant seeking approval to participate solely in the options
market, or to an applicant seeking to participate in both the equities
and the options markets.\11\ Finally, the October 2010 Rule Change did
not apply waivers to members or member organizations that cease their
options operations, but remain as sole PSX Participants. The Exchange
subsequently filed an amendment to allow existing members or member
organizations that cease to conduct an options business on Phlx XL
II,\12\ but continue to conduct business PSX, to receive a waiver of
Permit Fee.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63351 (November 19,
2010), 75 FR 73140 (November 29, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-54).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63351 (November 19,
2010), 75 FR 73140 (November 29, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-54).
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63351 (November 19,
2010), 75 FR 73140 (November 29, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-54).
    \12\ Phlx XL II is the Exchange's electronic options trading
platform.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64265 (April 8,
2011), 76 FR 21080 (April 14, 2011) (SR-Phlx-2011-43).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This filing proposes to apply the waiver of the Permit Fee \14\ to
those Exchange members and member organizations that were members of
the Exchange before the initiation of PSX, but were not conducting an
options business, and thereafter commenced conducting an equities
business. These members and member organizations were not considered
``new'' members and were therefore not subject to the waiver. The
Exchange proposes to allow these members and member organizations to
receive a waiver of the Permit Fee. These members and member
organizations must not be conducting an options business to receive the
waiver, but would be considered PSX only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ These members and member organizations would not be
assessed an Application Fee or Initiation Fee because they are
already Exchange members or member organizations and have previously
paid those fees. In addition, the monthly Account Fee would not be
applicable to PSX Participants as MPIDs are used to identify member
firms' participation, not account numbers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \15\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \16\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to waive fees as an
incentive for existing Exchange members and member organizations to
continue to transact business on PSX.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the waiver applies uniformly to any
members and member organizations that solely conduct an equities
business on the Exchange. The fact that these members and member
organizations were at the Exchange prior to the commencement of PSX
should not prohibit them from receiving the same waiver as other
equities members who are not conducting an options Exchange.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\17\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-Phlx-2011-167 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2011-167. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the

Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-
2011-167 and should be submitted on or before January 5, 2012.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-32139 Filed 12-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42038-42040]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17483]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0595]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Town of Olcott Fireworks Display; Lake Ontario,
Olcott, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of Lake Ontario during the Town of Olcott
fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect
mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards associated with a
fireworks display.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from July 16, 2015
until September 6, 2015. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from June 25, 2015 until July 16, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2015-0595]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LTJG Amanda Garcia, Chief of Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing
the docket, call Ms. Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-647-5527.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TFR Temporary Final Rule

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. The final details for this event were
not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time
remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the
effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would
be impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it would
inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect spectators and vessels
from the hazards associated with a maritime fireworks display.
Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons
discussed in the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice
period to run would be impracticable.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis and authorities for this rule are found in 33
U.S.C. 1231, 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard to establish and define
regulatory safety zones.
    Between 9:30 p.m. and 11 p.m. on July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015;
August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and September 6, 2015, a fireworks
display will be held on the shoreline of Lake Ontario in Olcott, NY. It
is anticipated that numerous vessels will be in the immediate vicinity
of the launch point. The Captain of the Port Buffalo has determined
that such a launch proximate to a gathering of watercraft pose a
significant risk to public safety and property. Such hazards include
premature and accidental detonations, dangerous projectiles, and
falling or burning debris.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Buffalo has determined that this temporary safety zone is necessary to
ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the Town of Olcott
fireworks display. This zone will be enforced from 9:30 p.m. until 11
p.m. on July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015;
and September 6, 2015. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Ontario; Olcott, NY within a 1,050-foot radius of position
43[deg]20'23.6'' N. and 078[deg]43'09.5'' W. (NAD 83).
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.

    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be
relatively small and enforced for a relatively short time. Also, the
safety zone is designed to minimize its impact on navigable waters.
Furthermore, the safety zone has been designed to allow vessels to
transit around it. Thus, restrictions on vessel movement within that
particular area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions,
moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety zone when
permitted by the Captain of the Port.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this rule on small entities. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending
to transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Ontario on the evening of
July 10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and
September 6, 2015.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
safety zone would be effective, and thus subject to enforcement, for
only 90 minutes late in the day. Traffic may be allowed to pass through
the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port. The Captain of
the Port can be reached via VHF channel 16. Before the enforcement of
the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

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

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

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

ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0595 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0595  Safety Zone; Town of Olcott Fireworks Display; Lake
Ontario, Olcott, NY.

    (a) Location. This zone will encompass all waters of Lake Ontario;
Olcott, NY within a 1,050-foot radius of position 43[deg]20'23.6'' N.
and 078[deg]43'09.5'' W. (NAD 83).
    (b) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced on July
10, 2015; July 23, 2015; August 13, 2015; August 27, 2015; and
September 6, 2015 from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 25, 2015.
B.W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2015-17483 Filed 7-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24643-24644]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08426]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-698, OMB Control No. 3235-0655]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension: Regulation 14N
and Schedule 14N

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

    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.

    Schedule 14N (17 CFR 240.14n-101) requires the filing of certain
information with the Commission by shareholders who submit a nominee or
nominees for director pursuant to applicable state law, or a company's
governing documents. Schedule 14N provides notice to the company of the
shareholder's intent to have the company include the shareholder's or
shareholder groups' nominee or nominees for director in the company's
proxy materials. This information is intended to assist shareholders in
making an informed voting decision with regards to any nominee or
nominees put forth by a nominating shareholder or group, by allowing
shareholders to gauge the nominating shareholder's interest in the
company, longevity of ownership, and intent with regard to continued
ownership in the company. We estimate that Schedule 14N takes
approximately 40 hours per response and will be filed by approximately
10 issuers annually. In addition, we estimate that 75% of the 40 hours
per response (30 hours per response) is prepared by the issuer for an
annual reporting burden of 300 hours (30 hours per response x 10
responses).
    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 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 by June 20, 2023.
    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 comment to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o John
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: April 17, 2023.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-08426 Filed 4-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 58923-58924]
[DOCID:fr17oc07-122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56642; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-100]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Exchange Fees and Charges

October 11, 2007.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on October 1, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange. NYSE Arca has
designated this proposal as one establishing or changing a due, fee, or
other charge imposed by NYSE Arca under section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the
Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NYSE Arca proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Charges for
Exchange Services (``Fee Schedule''). The text of the proposed rule
change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and http://www.nysearca.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    NYSE Arca states that the purpose of this filing is to amend the
existing Fee Schedule by eliminating the Marketing Charges associated
with options on the S&P 500 Index (SPY). The Exchange also proposes to
revise a footnote in the Fee Schedule that references the Penny Pilot
program.
    The Exchange presently assesses a $1.00 per contract Marketing
Charge on certain Market Maker transactions in options that overlie the
S&P 500 Index (SPY). As per the Fee Schedule, the Exchange does not
assess Marketing Charges on issues that trade as part of the Penny
Pilot Program (``Pilot''). On September 28, 2007, options on SPY were
included in the Pilot. Therefore, the Exchange will no longer assess a
Marketing Fee on SPY options.
    In addition, in the Transaction Fees section on the Fee Schedule,
the Exchanges lists fees that are specific to the Pilot. The original
Pilot expired on July 27, 2007 and was extended through September 27,
2007. The Exchange has received approval to once again extend the
Pilot, this time until March 27, 2009.\5\ A footnote referencing the
expiration date of the Pilot is included on the Fee Schedule, and has
been revised each time the Pilot was extended. The Exchange now
proposes to remove the expiration date of the Pilot in the associated
footnote and instead reference NYSEArca Rule 6.72. The terms of the
Pilot, including any expiration date, are contained in Rule 6.72 and
are revised each time the Pilot is extended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56568 (September 27,
2007), 72 FR 56422 (October 3, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-88).

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

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act \6\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of section 6(b)(4) of the Act \7\ in particular, in that it
is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among NYSE Arca members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has been designated as a fee
change pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(2) \9\ thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due, fee,
or other charge imposed on members by the Exchange. Accordingly, the
proposal will take effect upon filing with the Commission. At any time
within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the
Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the
Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-100 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-100. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2007-100 and should
be submitted on or before November 7, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-20445 Filed 10-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 2896]
[FR Doc No: 2010-833]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

 Order of Suspension of Trading; East Delta Resources Corp.

January 13, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
East Delta Resources Corp. (``East Delta'') because it has not filed
any periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2008.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of East Delta.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of East
Delta is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on January 13,
2010, through 11:59 p.m. EST on January 27, 2010.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-833 Filed 1-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 136 (Monday, July 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 32852]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15126]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP17-495-000; CP17-494-000]

Jordan Cove Energy Project, L.P.; Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline,
L.P.; Notice of Meeting

    The environmental staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) along with representatives of the U.S. Forest Service,
Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will
meet with representatives of the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower
Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians to discuss the proposed Jordan Cove LNG and
Pacific Connector Pipeline Projects. The meeting will be held at the
location and time listed below:

North Bend Public Library--Big Meeting Room, 1800 Sherman Avenue, North
Bend, OR 97459, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Tuesday, July 17, 2018, 1:00
p.m. PDT

    Members of the public and intervenors in the referenced proceeding
may attend and observe this meeting; however, participation will be
limited to tribal representatives and agency personnel. If tribal
representatives decide to disclose information about a specific
location which could create a risk or harm to an archeological site or
Native American cultural resource, the public will be excused for that
portion of the meeting. A summary of the meeting will be entered into
the Commission's administrative record.
    If you plan to attend this meeting, please contact Mr. John
Peconom, Environmental Project Manager at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].

    Dated: July 10, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-15126 Filed 7-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43618-43620]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67468; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2012-062]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Modify Its Corporate Governance
Rules

July 19, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On May 17, 2012, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') 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 to modify an exception to Nasdaq Rule 5605 that
allows a non-independent director of a listed company to serve on its
audit committee, compensation committee or nominations committee under
exceptional and limited circumstances.\3\ The proposal was published
for comment in the Federal Register on June 5, 2012.\4\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See infra note 9 and accompanying text.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67076 (May 30,
2012), 77 FR 33261 (SR-NASDAQ-2012-062) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Nasdaq's listing rules generally require that a listed company's
audit, compensation and nominations committees consist of ``independent
directors,'' \5\ as defined in Nasdaq Rule 5605(a)(2). A director is
specifically prohibited from being considered independent under certain
circumstances.\6\ For example, a director who is currently, or during
the prior three years was, employed by the company, or a director who
is a family member of an individual who is, or at any time during the
prior three years was, employed as an executive officer \7\ by the
company, may not be considered independent.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See paragraphs (c)(2)(A), (d), and (e)(1)(B) of Nasdaq Rule
5605.
    \6\ See Nasdaq Rule 5605(a)(2).
    \7\ ``Executive Officer'' means those officers covered in Rule
16a-1(f) under the Act, 17 CFR 240.16a-1(f). See Nasdaq Rule
5605(a)(1).
    \8\ A director is not, however, barred from being independent if
he or she has a family member employed by the company, provided that
the family member is not an executive officer of the company. See
Nasdaq Rule 5605(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq's listing rules also include an exception (``Exception'') to
permit a listed company, under exceptional and limited circumstances,
with proper disclosure, and under specified conditions to allow one
non-independent director to serve on the audit, compensation, or
nominations committee for up to two years.\9\ Currently, a listed
company may not utilize the Exception for a non-

independent director who would otherwise qualify if that director has a
family member who is an employee of the listed company, even if that
family member is not an executive officer of the company. Nasdaq notes,
however, that the same family relationship would not otherwise preclude
a director from being considered independent.\10\ Nasdaq cites to the
example of a director who, until one year ago, was employed by a listed
company and who has a son who is a non-executive employee of the
company. The director, under ordinary circumstances, cannot be
considered independent until three years after the end of the
director's employment.\11\ Nasdaq notes that it is the director's own
prior employment relationship that precludes the director from being
considered independent. The son's employment does not preclude the
director from being considered independent. Thus, three years after the
end of the director's employment, the company's board of directors
(``board'') may determine that the director is independent, even if the
director's son is still a non-executive employee of the company at that
time. Nonetheless, under the current rule, if the listed company sought
to appoint this same director to its audit, compensation, or
nominations committee pursuant to the Exception prior to the expiration
of the three-year lookback period, it would be unable to do so solely
because of the son's employment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See paragraphs (c)(2)(B), (d)(3) and (e)(3) of Nasdaq
Listing Rule 5605. The Exception, however, does not permit a listed
company to appoint to its audit committee a director who does not
meet the independence criteria set forth in Section 10A(m)(3) of the
Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. 78j-1(m)(3), and Rule 10A-3 thereunder, 17
CFR. 240.10A-3(b)(1). See also Nasdaq Rule 5605(c)(2)(B)(ii).
    \10\ See paragraphs (a), (c)(2)(B), (d)(3) and (e)(3) of Nasdaq
Rule 5605.
    \11\ See Nasdaq Rule 5605(a)(2)(A), which provides that a
director who is, or at any time during the past three years was,
employed by a listed company may not be considered independent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq believes that this distinction in its listing rules is
incongruous. If employment of a director's family member, other than as
an executive officer, does not disqualify a director from being
considered independent, the Exchange states that it sees no reason to
preclude a listed company from relying on the Exception for that same
director where the listed company's board determines that the
director's membership on the relevant committee is required by the best
interests of the company and its shareholders.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Notice, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq proposes to amend paragraphs (c)(2)(B), (d)(3), and (e)(3)
of Nasdaq Rule 5605 to allow a director who is a family member of a
non-executive employee of a listed company to serve on the listed
company's audit committee, compensation committee, or nominations
committee under exceptional and limited circumstances as long as the
listed company's board concludes that the director's membership on the
relevant committee is required by the best interests of the company and
its shareholders. Under the proposed rule change, the board would still
be required, as under the current version of the Exception, to make an
affirmative determination that the non-independent director's
membership on a committee is required by the best interests of the
company and its shareholders. Nasdaq states that it expects the board,
in making such a determination, to consider any family relationship
between the non-independent director and a non-executive employee of
the company.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Under both the current and proposed versions of the
Exception, a listed company could not rely on the Exception for a
director who has a family member who is an executive officer of the
listed company. In addition, under both the current and proposed
versions of the Exception for audit committees, a listed company
could not rely on the Exception for a director who does not meet the
criteria in Section 10A(m)(3) of the Act and the rules thereunder to
allow the director to serve on the audit committee. See 15 U.S.C.
78j-1(m)(3) and 17 CFR 240.10A-3(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposed rule change, a listed company, other than a
foreign private issuer, that relies on the Exception for an audit
committee member would continue to be required to comply with the
disclosure requirements set forth in Item 407(d)(2) of Regulation S-
K.\14\ A foreign private issuer that relies on the Exception for an
audit committee member would continue to be required to disclose in its
next annual report (e.g., Form 20-F or 40-F) the nature of the
relationship that makes the committee member not independent and the
reasons for the board's determination to rely on the Exception.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Nasdaq Rule 5605(c)(2)(B).
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, a listed company that relies on the Exception for a
compensation or nominations committee member would continue to be
required to disclose either on or through the company's Web site or in
the proxy statement for the next annual meeting of the company (or, if
the company does not file a proxy, in its Form 10-K or 20-F), the
nature of the relationship that makes the committee member not
independent and the reasons for the determination to rely on the
Exception.\16\ A listed company that relies on the Exception for a
compensation or nominations committee member also would continue to be
required to provide any disclosure required by Instruction 1 to Item
407(a) of Regulation S-K regarding its reliance on the Exception.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See paragraphs (d)(3) and (e)(3) of Nasdaq Rule 5605.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposed rule change would replace the term
``officer'' with the defined term ``Executive Officer'' in paragraphs
(c)(2)(B), (d)(3), and (e)(3) of Nasdaq Rule 5605. Nasdaq notes that it
has always interpreted these terms in the same manner.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Notice, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After carefully reviewing the proposed rule change, 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.\19\ In particular, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\20\ which, among other things, requires that the rules of a
national securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating transactions in securities, 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.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ In approving this 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).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \21\ The Commission notes that it recently adopted new Rule 10C-
1 under the Act, relating to the independence of compensation
committees of listed issuers. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 67220 (June 20, 2012), 77 FR 28422 (June 27, 2012). In
accordance with Section 10C of the Act, which was added by Section
952 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
of 2010, new Rule 10C-1 directs each national securities exchange to
establish listing standards that, among other things, require each
member of a listed issuer's compensation committee to be a member of
the board of directors and to be ``independent,'' as defined in the
listing standards of the exchange adopted in accordance with Rule
10C-1. The exchanges must file with the Commission, no later than
September 25, 2012, proposed rule changes that comply with the
requirements of Rule 10C-1, and must have final rules or rule
amendments that comply with Rule 10C-1 approved by the Commission no
later than June 27, 2013. The Commission expects that, in submitting
a proposed rule change in compliance with Rule 10C-1, Nasdaq will
discuss whether and how its proposed rule change would relate to the
Exception and the Exchange's instant proposed rule change with
respect to compensation committees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the Exchange notes, in ordinary circumstances, when a family
member of a director is employed by the listed company, but not as an
executive officer, the director may still be deemed independent. The
Exchange believes that it is incongruous for the same relationship to
preclude a company from relying on the Exception where the requirements
of the Exception otherwise

are satisfied. The Commission believes that the Exchange's view is not
unreasonable. In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that in any instance in which a listed company relies on the
Exception, the company's board would continue to be required under the
proposal to affirmatively determine that the director does not have any
relationship which, in the opinion of the board, would interfere with
the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the
responsibilities of a director.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Nasdaq Rule 5605(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further notes that a listed company is permitted to
use the Exception only if its board, under exceptional and limited
circumstances, determines that membership on the committee by the
individual is required by the best interests of the company and its
shareholders. Moreover, the Commission notes that any time an issuer
relies on the Exception, it is required to make the public disclosures
indicated above.
    Finally, the Commission believes that replacing the undefined term
``officer'' with the defined term ``Executive Officer,'' in keeping
with the Exchange's longstanding interpretation of its listing rules,
clarifies the applicability of the listing rules.
    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that the rule
change is consistent with the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\23\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NASDAQ-2012-062), be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-18106 Filed 7-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86358-86359]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27345]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2390]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before March 12, 2024.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2390, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Stark County, Illinois and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 20-05-0021S Preliminary Date: December 15, 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Toulon.........................  City Hall, 122 North Franklin
                                          Street, Toulon, IL 61483.
City of Wyoming........................  City Hall, 108 East Williams
                                          Street, Wyoming, IL 61491.
Unincorporated Areas of Stark County...  Stark County Courthouse, 130
                                          West Main Street, Toulon, IL
                                          61483.
Village of Bradford....................  Village Hall, 160 West Main
                                          Street, Bradford, IL 61421.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bristol County, Massachusetts (All Jurisdictions)
        Project: 17-01-0182S Preliminary Date: February 03, 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Attleboro......................  City Hall, 77 Park Street,
                                          Attleboro, MA 02703.

Town of North Attleborough.............  Town Hall, 43 South Washington
                                          Street, North Attleborough, MA
                                          02760.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-27345 Filed 12-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P