[Federal Register: July 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 128)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32078-32080]
[DOCID:fr07jy09-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0522]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; San Clemente Island Northwest Harbor August and
September Training; Northwest Harbor, San Clemente Island, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on the navigable
waters of the Northwest Harbor of San Clemente Island in support of the
Naval Underwater Detonation. This safety zone is necessary to ensure
non-authorized personnel and vessels remain safe by keeping clear of
the hazardous area during the training activity. Persons and vessels
are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring
within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) or his designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from August 1, 2009 through September 30,
2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0522 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket
Search option on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0522
in the Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in
the Docket ID column. 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
temporary rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Kristen Beer, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone
619-278-7262, 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:

Regulatory 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 immediate action is necessary to
ensure the safety of commercial and recreational vessels in the
vicinity of any underwater detonation on the dates and times this rule
will be in effect and delay would be contrary to the public interest.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delay in the effective date would
be contrary to the public interest, since immediate action is needed to
ensure the public's safety.

Background and Purpose

    The Officer in Charge (OIC) of the Southern California Offshore
Range will be conducting intermittent training involving the detonation
of military grade explosives underwater throughout August and September
2009. This safety zone is necessary to ensure non-authorized personnel
and vessels remain safe by keeping clear of the hazardous area during
the training activity.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone that will be enforced
from August 1, 2009 through September 30, 2009. The limits of the
safety zone will be the navigable waters of the Northwest Harbor of San
Clemente Island bounded by the following coordinates: 33[deg]02'06'' N,
118[deg]35'36'' W; 33[deg]02'00'' N, 118[deg]34'36'' W; thence along
San Clemente Island shoreline to 33[deg]02'06'' N, 118[deg]35'36'' W.
This safety zone is necessary to ensure non-authorized personnel and
vessels remain safe by keeping clear of the hazardous area during the
training activities. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering
into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based
on the size and location of the safety zone. Commercial and
recreational vessels will not be allowed to transit through the
designated safety zone during the specified times while training is
being conducted.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    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 may be
small entities: The owners or operators of commercial and recreational
vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the Northwest
Harbor of San Clemente Island from August 1, 2009 through September 30,
2009.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone will apply to the entire width of the harbor,
commercial and recreational vessels will be allowed to pass through the
zone with the permission of the U.S. Navy or Coast Guard Sector San
Diego. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue a
broadcast notice to mariners (BNM) alerts and publish local notice to
mariners (LNM).

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    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.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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 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.

Taking of Private Property

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

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.

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.

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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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 concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a
temporary safety zone. An environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

0
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. 1226, 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; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a new temporary Sec.  165.T11-210 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-210  Safety Zone; San Clemente Island Northwest Harbor
August and September Training; Northwest Harbor, San Clemente Island,
CA.

    (a) Location. The limits of the safety zone will include the
navigable waters of the Northwest Harbor of San Clemente Island bounded
by the following coordinates: 33[deg]02'06'' N, 118[deg]35'36'' W;
33[deg]02'00'' N, 118[deg]34'36'' W; thence along the coast of San
Clemente Island to 33[deg]02'06'' N, 118[deg]35'36'' W.
    (b) Enforcement Period. This section will be enforced from August
1, 2009 through September 30, 2009 during naval training exercises. If
the training is concluded prior to the scheduled termination time, the
COTP will cease enforcement of this safety zone and will announce that
fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
(1) Designated representative means any Commissioned, Warrant, or Petty
Officers of the Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, or local, state,
and federal law enforcement vessels who have been authorized to act on
behalf of the COTP.
    (2) Non-authorized personnel and vessels, means any civilian boats,
fishermen, divers, and swimmers.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP San
Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) Non-authorized personnel and vessels requesting permission to
transit through the safety zone may request authorization to do so from
the COTP San Diego or his designated representative. They may be
contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16, or at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Naval units involved in the exercise are allowed in the
confines of the established safety zone.
    (4) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard COTP or his designated representative.
    (5) Upon being hailed by the U.S. Coast Guard or other official
personnel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator
of a vessel shall proceed as directed.
    (6) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies and the U.S. Navy.

    Dated: June 22, 2009.
D.L. LeBlanc,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. E9-15885 Filed 7-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 91982]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30373]

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

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:
    Rule 104, SEC File No. 270-411, OMB Control No. 3235-0465.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 104 of Regulation M (17
CFR 242.104), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of
information to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
extension and approval.
    Rule 104--Stabilizing and Other Activities in Connection with an
Offering--permits stabilizing by a distribution participant during a
distribution so long as the distribution participant discloses
information to the market and investors. This rule requires disclosure
in offering materials of the potential stabilizing transactions and
that the distribution participant inform the market when a stabilizing
bid is made. It also requires the distribution participants (i.e., the
syndicate manager) to maintain information regarding syndicate covering
transactions and penalty bids and disclose such information to the
Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO).
    There are approximately 848 respondents per year that require an
aggregate total of 170 hours to comply with this rule. Each respondent
makes an estimated 1 annual response. Each response takes approximately
0.20 hours (12 minutes) to complete. Thus, the total compliance burden
per year is 170 hours. The total estimated internal labor cost of
compliance for the respondents is approximately $11,050.00 per year,
resulting in an estimated cost of compliance for each respondent per
response of approximately $13.03 (i.e., $11,050/848 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: 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: December 6, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30373 Filed 12-16-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 242 (Monday, December 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74723-74725]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30290]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68399; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2012-134]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule To Allow Manual Orders Entered Into the
Exchange's Electronic Order Capture System or Entered Into an Order
Entry Device and Contemporaneously Recorded Into the EOC System To
Qualify for the Manual Transaction Fee

December 11, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on November 29, 2012, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') to allow manual orders that are entered into the
Exchange's Electronic Order Capture (``EOC'') System or entered into an
order entry device approved by the Exchange and contemporaneously
recorded into the EOC System to qualify for the manual transaction fee.
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to allow manual
orders that are entered into the Exchange's EOC System \4\ or entered
into an order entry device approved by the Exchange and
contemporaneously recorded into the EOC System to qualify for the
manual transaction fee. The Exchange proposes to make the fee change
operative on December 1, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The EOC System is the Exchange's electronic audit trail and
order tracking system that provides an accurate time-sequenced
record of all orders and transactions on the Exchange. EOC records
the receipt of an order and documents the life of the order through
the process of execution, partial execution, or cancellation. See
NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.1(b)(39).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In December 2011, the Exchange amended endnote 5 of the Fee
Schedule to reflect that a manual order that executes in part against
an electronic order or quote resting on the Consolidated Book prior to
executing against interest in the trading crowd would be assessed the
applicable manual transaction fee for the entire order.\5\ However, if
a manual order executes completely against an electronic order or
quote, and therefore does not execute against interest in the trading
crowd, then the order would be charged the applicable electronic
transaction fee. The Exchange also specified that in order to be
eligible for the manual transaction fee, all orders must be entered
into the Exchange's EOC System. Therefore, currently, Floor Brokers
that enter orders into an order entry device rather than only into the

EOC System are not eligible to take advantage of the lower transaction
fees for manual orders, even though orders entered into such devices
are recorded in the EOC System. For example, a Floor Broker manual
order in a Non Penny Pilot Issue is currently charged a standard
execution fee of $0.25 per contract. However, if such Floor Broker
manual order is entered in an order entry device in order to interact
with orders in the Consolidated Book, then the Floor Broker is charged
the electronic execution rate of $0.85 per contract for taking
liquidity. The Exchange proposes to make explicit in endnote 5 that, in
order to be eligible for the manual transaction fee, all orders must be
entered into the Exchange's EOC System. In addition, the Exchange
proposes to expand such eligibility requirement to include manual
orders entered into an order entry device approved by the Exchange and
contemporaneously recorded in the Exchange's EOC System. The approved
order entry devices would provide an audit trail and order tracking
system for executed orders which would allow such orders to be matched
upon recordation into the EOC System. The approved order entry devices
would be announced via Regulatory Bulletin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65922 (December 9,
2011), 76 FR 78066 (December 15, 2011) (SR-NYSEArca-2011-91).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, electronic orders and quotes resting on the Consolidated
Book have priority over equal-priced bids or offers in the trading
crowd.\6\ In this regard, a Floor Broker, after negotiating a price
with the trading crowd, may be required to trade against resting
interest on the Consolidated Book (``clear the Book'') before trading
against interest in the trading crowd. Pursuant to NYSE Arca Rule 6.67,
Options Trading Permit (``OTP'') Holders and OTP Firms use the EOC for
the systematization and manual execution of orders executed by open
outcry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.75(a) and (b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To avoid Trade-Throughs, which are prohibited by NYSE Arca Rule
6.94, Floor Brokers often direct their support staff to enter orders
into an order entry device while they are executing an order in the
trading crowd in order to clear the Consolidated Book and away markets.
Floor Brokers are not required to use an order entry device; however,
the Exchange recognizes that Floor Brokers use order entry devices to
accommodate their business decisions regarding best practices because
such devices capture unique order information and OTP identification
and are able to pass such information to the Exchange for recordation
into the EOC System. The Exchange believes that Floor Brokers that
enter orders on order entry devices and contemporaneously record such
orders into the EOC System achieve the same execution goals for manual
orders as those entered only through the EOC System, and therefore,
should be subject to the same manual pricing structure.
    The Exchange notes that the proposed changes are not otherwise
intended to address any other issues and the Exchange is not aware of
any problems that OTP Holders and OTP Firms would have in complying
with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4)
of the Act,\8\ in particular, because it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not
unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, because it is
designed to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that incorporating the manual transaction fee
eligibility requirement into the Fee Schedule and expanding the
requirement to include manual orders entered into an order entry device
approved by the Exchange and contemporaneously recorded in the
Exchange's EOC System is reasonable because the Fee Schedule would more
clearly describe the types of manual orders that qualify for the manual
transaction fee. In addition, the Exchange believes that expanding the
requirement to include manual orders entered into order entry devices
and recorded in the EOC System is reasonable because Floor Brokers that
use order entry devices are executing trading interest in the
Consolidated Book on an efficient basis and should be able to benefit
from the reduced manual transaction fee. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because Floor Brokers that enter orders through order entry devices
achieve the same execution goals as orders entered only through the EOC
System, and, therefore, should be subject to the same fee structure.
Furthermore, any order entered through an order entry device would have
an audit trail and order tracking, and would be recorded into the EOC
System. In addition, Floor Brokers use order entry devices to avoid
Trade-Throughs on the Exchange, which thereby benefits the Exchange and
all market participants, and therefore, it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to extend the manual transaction fee to Floor
Brokers that use such devices to enter manual orders.
    By clarifying the eligibility requirement for the manual
transaction fee, the proposed rule change eliminates confusion, thereby
removing an impediment to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and
open market system. The clarification of this eligibility requirement
will also make it easier for the Exchange to administer the manual
transaction fee and ensure that it is appropriately assessed when it is
applicable.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its fees and credits to remain
competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \11\ thereunder, because it establishes a due,

fee, or other charge imposed by the NYSE Arca.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2012-134 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 Number SR-NYSEARCA-2012-134. 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 20549-1090, 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 NYSE's principal office and
on its Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. 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-2012-134, and should be
submitted on or before January 7, 2013.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-30290 Filed 12-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13660-13663]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05861]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74465; File No. SR-ISE-2014-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Order Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or
Disapprove a Proposed Rule Change To Modify ISE's Opening Process

March 10, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On November 19, 2014, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to modify the opening process of
the Exchange. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on December 10, 2014.\3\ On January 23, 2015, 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 disapprove the proposed rule
change, to March 10, 2015.\4\ The Commission received no comment
letters on the proposed rule change. This order institutes proceedings
under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \5\ to determine whether to
approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73736 (December 4,
2014), 79 FR 73354 (``Notice'').
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74126 (January 23,
2015), 80 FR 4953 (January 29, 2015).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to (1) clarify and codify existing
functionality within the trading system regarding the procedures for
initiation of the opening process, and (2) modify the manner in which
the Exchange's trading system opens trading at the beginning of the day
and after trading halts.
    According to the Exchange, the proposed rule change would codify
certain existing functionality within the trading system that was not
previously described in the Exchange's rule and would provide new
procedures for initiation of the opening rotation at the Exchange's
opening and reopening after a trading halt. A more detailed

description of the initiation procedure is available in the Notice.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 73355.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend its opening rotation process.
The Exchange believes that there are issues with its current opening
process. Namely, because its opening process does not provide away
market price protection, the Exchange believes that order flow
providers are sending fewer pre-open orders to ISE. In addition, the
Exchange states that ``the opening of options series can be delayed by
imbalances that prevent ISE from determining an opening price in a
timely manner'' and that ``such delays exacerbate the problem of not
providing price protection at the opening.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice, supra note 3 at 73356.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address its concerns, ISE proposes an iterative opening process.
As described in the Notice, in the first iteration, the trading system
will attempt to derive the first opening price to be at or better than
the ISE Market Maker quotes and away best bid or offer (``ABBO'')
prices. When there is executable interest, the trading system will
first calculate a range of prices within which to open the options
series (``Boundary Prices''). As is the case today, the trading system
will use quotes provided by the Primary Market Maker (``PMM'') for the
series in question to set the first Boundary Prices. If the PMM is not
present on either side of the market, then the best quotes from the
Competitive Market Makers (``CMMs'') will be used on the corresponding
side. If there are no PMM or CMM quotes on the bid side, the lowest
minimum trading increment for the option class will be used on the bid
side. If there are no PMM or CMM quotes on the offer side, the options
class will not open because in the absence of an offer there is no
limit as to the price at which an opening trade can occur. If the
options class is open on another exchange, the Boundary Prices will be
determined to be the higher of the ISE Market Maker's bid in that
options class and the national best bid, and the lower of the ISE
Market Maker's offer in that options class and the national best offer.
    Once the trading system has determined the Boundary Prices, as
appropriate, it then will determine the price at which the maximum
number of contracts can trade at or within the appropriate Boundary
Prices (the ``execution price'').\8\ Once the trading system determines
the execution price, orders and quotes will be processed as follows--
market orders will be given priority before limit orders and quotes,
and limit orders and quotes will be given priority by price. For limit
orders and quotes with the same price, priority will be accorded first
to Priority Customer Orders \9\ over Professional Orders \10\ and
quotes. Priority Customer Orders with the same limit price will be
executed in random \11\ while Professional Orders and quotes with the
same limit price will be executed pro-rata based on size. If the
Boundary Prices are calculated using the national best bid or offer
(``NBBO''), any remaining Public Customer Orders \12\ after this
iteration that would lock or cross a bid or offer from another exchange
will be processed in accordance with Supplementary Material .02 to ISE
Rule 1901.\13\ Any remaining Non-Customer Orders \14\ that would lock
or cross a bid or offer from another exchange may trade outside the
Boundary Prices by up to two trading increments as further described
under the third iteration below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 73356, for an example showing
the calculation of the execution price following the first
iteration.
    \9\ Pursuant to ISE Rules 100(a)(37A) and 100(a)(37B), a
Priority Customer Order is an order for the account of a person or
entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii)
does not place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on
average during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s).
    \10\ Pursuant to ISE Rule 100(a)(37C), a Professional Order is
an order that is for the account of a person or entity that is not a
Priority Customer.
    \11\ Priority Customer orders with the same limit price in the
regular order book are currently executed in time priority during
the opening. The Exchange believes executing these orders on a
random basis is a fairer approach because the current time priority
is dependent on when such orders are communicated to the Exchange by
a Priority Customer's broker before the market, not the time the
Priority Customer expressed interest in doing the trade. Executing
these orders in random will provide Priority Customer orders an
equal opportunity to participate at the open.
    \12\ Pursuant to ISE Rules 100(a)(38) and 100(a)(39), a Public
Customer means a person or entity that is not a broker or dealer in
securities and a Public Customer Order means an order for the
account of a Public Customer.
    \13\ Under the Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed
Market Plan (``Options Linkage Plan''), the Exchange cannot execute
orders at a price that is inferior to the NBBO, nor can the Exchange
place an order on its book that would cause the ISE best bid or
offer to lock or cross another exchange's quote. In compliance with
this requirement, Non-Customer Orders and Public Customer Orders are
exposed to all ISE Members for up to one second to give them an
opportunity to execute orders at the NBBO price or better before
orders are rejected (in the case of Non-Customer Orders) or routed
out to other exchanges (in the case of Public Customer Orders). See
Supplementary Material .02 to Rule 1901.
    \14\ Pursuant to ISE Rules 100(a)(27) and (28), a Non-Customer
means a person or entity that is a broker or dealer in securities
and a Non-Customer Order means an order for the account of a Non-
Customer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If after the first iteration there remain unexecuted orders and
quotes that lock or cross each other, the trading system will initiate
a second iteration.\15\ In the second iteration, the trading system
will use either the ISE Market Maker quotes or the ABBO prices,\16\
whichever was not used in the first iteration, to establish the
Boundary Prices. For example, if the ISE Market Maker quotes were used
in the first iteration, the second iteration will use ABBO prices and
vice versa. If there were no ABBO prices for consideration for the
first iteration, then this second iteration will not occur and the
trading system will initiate the third iteration as described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 73357, for an example showing
the calculation of the execution price following the second
iteration.
    \16\ The ABBO prices considered in the first iteration are also
used during the second iteration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the second iteration, the trading system will again determine
the execution price at which the maximum number of contracts can trade
at or within the widened Boundary Prices. Once the trading system
determines the second execution price, orders and quotes will be
processed as follows--market orders will be given priority before limit
orders and quotes, and limit orders and quotes will be given priority
by price. For limit orders and quotes with the same price, priority
will be accorded first to Priority Customer Orders over Professional
Orders and quotes. Priority Customer Orders with the same limit price
will be executed in random order while Professional Orders and quotes
with the same limit price will be executed pro-rata based on size. If
the Boundary Prices in the second iteration are calculated using the
NBBO, any remaining Public Customer Orders after this iteration that
would lock or cross a bid or offer from another exchange will be
processed in accordance with Supplementary Material .02 to ISE Rule
1901. Any remaining Non-Customer Orders that would lock or cross a bid
or offer from another exchange may trade outside the Boundary Prices by
up to two trading increments as further described under the third
iteration below.
    If after the second iteration there remain unexecuted orders and
quotes that lock or cross each other, the trading system will initiate
a third iteration.\17\ In the third iteration, the prior Boundary
Prices, i.e., the prices used in the second iteration, and in the case
where the second iteration does not occur, the prices used in the first
iteration, will be widened by two trading increments. The trading
system will then determine the

price at which the maximum number of contracts could trade at or within
the widened Boundary Prices. Once the trading system determines the
third execution price, orders and quotes will be processed as follows--
market orders will be given priority before limit orders and quotes,
and limit orders and quotes will be given priority by price. For limit
orders and quotes with the same price, priority will be accorded first
to Priority Customer Orders over Professional Orders and quotes.
Priority Customer Orders with the same limit price will be executed in
random order while Professional Orders and quotes with the same limit
price will be executed pro-rata based on size. Thereafter, any
unexecuted Priority Customer Orders that lock or cross the Boundary
Prices will be handled by the PMM \18\ and any unexecuted Professional
Orders and Non-Customer Orders that lock or cross the Boundary Prices
will be canceled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 73357, for an example showing
the calculation of the execution price following the third
iteration.
    \18\ The PMM has the obligation under existing Exchange rules to
engage in dealings for its own account when, among other things,
there is a temporary disparity between the supply of and demand for
a particular options contract, and to act with due diligence in
handling orders. See ISE Rule 803(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If after the third iteration there remain unexecuted orders and
quotes that lock or cross each other, the trading system will initiate
a fourth and final iteration.\19\ In the fourth iteration, the trading
system will not calculate new Boundary Prices. The trading system will
simply trade any remaining interest. Thereafter, the trading system
will open the options series by disseminating the Exchange's best bid
and offer derived from the remaining orders and quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 73357-8, for an example
showing the calculation of the execution price following the fourth
and final iteration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-ISE-
2014-24 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \20\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of such
proceedings is appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy
issues raised by the proposed rule change, as discussed below.
Institution of proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has
reached any conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved.
Rather, as described in greater detail below, the Commission seeks and
encourages interested persons to provide additional comment on the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). Id. Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act also provides that proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove a proposed rule change must be concluded within 180 days
of the date of publication of notice of the filing of the proposed
rule change. See id. The time for conclusion of the proceedings may
be extended for up to 60 days if the Commission finds good cause for
such extension and publishes its reasons for so finding. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that ``each iteration of the proposed
iterative process complies with Section 5(a) of the [Options] Linkage
Plan, or qualifies as an exception under Section 5(b)(ii) of the
[Options] Linkage Plan.'' \21\ Section 5(a)--Order Protection--of the
Options Linkage Plan requires that each participant exchange establish
written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent
trade-throughs and to conduct surveillance to ascertain the
effectiveness of such policies and procedures.\22\ Section 5(b)
provides a number of exceptions to the order protection
requirements.\23\ Section 5(b)(ii), in particular, provides an
exception for a ``transaction traded through a Protected Quotation
being disseminated by an Eligible Exchange during a trading rotation.''
\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 73358.
    \22\ Section 5(a) of the Options Linkage Plan.
    \23\ Section 5(b) of the Options Linkage Plan.
    \24\ Section 5(b)(ii) of the Options Linkage Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Commission's Order approving the Options Linkage Plan,\25\
the Commission stated that the Section 5(b)(ii) exception from trade-
throughs was carried over from the previous linkage plan and is similar
to an exception available for NMS stocks under Regulation NMS.\26\ The
Commission further noted that the ``trading rotation'' in the Options
Linkage Plan is ``effectively a single price auction to price the
option.'' \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60405 (July 30,
2009), 74 FR 39362 (August 6, 2009) (``Options Linkage Plan Approval
Order).
    \26\ See Options Linkage Plan Approval Order, id. at 39366.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that ISE's proposal raises interpretive
issues that warrant further public comment and Commission
consideration. Namely, the Commission believes that proceedings are
appropriate to consider whether the Exchange's proposed opening
process, which would undertake potentially four separate iterations,
each with its own execution price, is consistent with the Options
Linkage Plan and with Section 6 of the Act, particularly Section
6(b)(5),\28\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data and arguments with respect to the
concerns identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposed rule change. In particular, the Commission invites
the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal
is inconsistent with Section 6(b)(5) \29\ or any other provision of the
Act, or the rules and regulation thereunder. Although there do not
appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval which would
be facilitated by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments,
the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for
an opportunity to make an oral presentation.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \30\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Act Amendments of 1975, Pub. L. 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants to the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Act Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm. on
Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to any other facets of the proposal on which persons
may seek to comment, the Commission is soliciting the views of
interested persons regarding provisions of the proposed rule change
concerning compliance with Section 5(a) of the Options Linkage Plan or
qualification as an exception under Section 5(b)(ii) of the Options
Linkage Plan.
    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposal should be approved or
disapproved by April 6, 2015. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal
to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by April 20,
2015. The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency and
merit of the Exchange's statements in support of the proposed rule
change, in addition to any other comments they may wish to submit about
the proposed rule change. In particular, the Commission seeks comment
on the statements of the Exchange contained in the Notice,\31\
including the statements made with

respect to compliance with the Options Linkage Plan, and any other
issues raised by the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2014-24 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-ISE-2014-24. 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
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-ISE-2014-24 and should be
submitted by April 6, 2015. Rebuttal comments should be submitted by
April 20, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-05861 Filed 3-13-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 207 (Friday, October 25, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57547-57548]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23314]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee
(SOCAC) meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the SOCAC.

DATES: The meeting will be held on November 13, 2019, from 1:00 p.m. to
3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
    Requests to attend the meeting must be received by November 1,
2019.
    Requests for accommodations to a disability must be received by
November 1, 2019.
    Requests to speak during the meeting must submit a written copy of
their remarks to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) by November 1,
2019.
    Requests to submit written materials to be reviewed during the
meeting must be received no later than November 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
Information on the committee and copies of the meeting minutes will be
available on the FAA Committee website at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lakisha Pearson, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any committee related request should be sent to the
person listed in this section.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The SOCAC was created under the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), in accordance with the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, Public
Law 115-254, to provide advice to the Secretary on policy-level issues
facing the aviation community that are related to FAA safety oversight
and certification programs and activities.

II. Agenda

    At the meeting, the agenda will cover the following topics:

 Overview of FACA
 Overview of SOCAC
 Briefing on FAA Certification Process
 Assignment of tasks

    A detailed agenda will be posted on the committee's website listed
in the ADDRESSES section at least one week in advance of the meeting.

III. Public Participation

    The meeting will be open to the public on a first-come, first
served basis, as space is limited. Please confirm your attendance with
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section no
later than November 1, 2019. Please provide the following information:
Full legal name, country of citizenship, and name of your industry
association, or applicable affiliation. If you are attending as a
public citizen, please indicate so.
    For persons participating by telephone, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by email or phone
for the teleconference call-in number and passcode. Callers are
responsible for paying long-distance charges.
    The U.S. Department of Transportation is committed to providing
equal access to this meeting for all participants. If you need
alternative formats or services because of a disability, such as sign
language, interpretation, or other ancillary aids, please contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    There will be 15 minutes allotted for oral comments from members of
the public joining the meeting. To accommodate as many speakers as
possible, the time for each commenter may be limited. Individuals
wishing to reserve speaking time during the meeting must submit a
request at the time of registration, as well as the name, address, and
organizational affiliation of the proposed speaker. If the number of
registrants requesting to make statements is greater than can be
reasonably accommodated during the meeting, the FAA Office of
Rulemaking may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers. Speakers
are requested to submit a written copy of their prepared remarks for
inclusion in the meeting records and for circulation to SOCAC members.
All prepared remarks submitted on time will be accepted and considered
as part of the record. Any member of the public may present a written
statement to the committee at any time.
    The public may present written statements to the SOCAC by providing
25 copies to the Designated Federal Officer, by sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by bringing the copies to the meeting.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 21, 2019.
Brandon Roberts,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2019-23314 Filed 10-24-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 206 (Thursday, October 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 49645]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23246]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3384-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-3384-EM), dated September 5,
2017, and related determinations.

DATES: The change occurred on October 10, 2017.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Michael F.
Byrne, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this emergency.
    This action terminates the appointment of Alejandro DeLaCampa as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this emergency.

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

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-23246 Filed 10-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P