[Federal Register: July 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 129)]
[Notices]
[Page 38254-38260]
[DOCID:fr03jy08-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-28321; File No. 812-13457]

Minnesota Life Insurance Company, et al.; Notice of Application

June 26, 2008.
AGENCY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of application for an order pursuant to Section 6(c) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the ``1940 Act''),
granting exemptions from the provisions of Sections 2(a)(32) and
27(i)(2)(A) of the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1 thereunder.

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

Applicants: Minnesota Life Insurance Company (``Minnesota Life''),
Variable Annuity Account (``Separate Account''), and Securian Financial
Services, Inc. (``SFS'') (collectively, ``Applicants'').

Summary of Application: Applicants seek an order pursuant to Section
6(c) of the 1940 Act, exempting them from the provisions of Sections
2(a)(32) and 27(i)(2)(A) of the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1 thereunder to
the extent necessary to permit recapture of certain bonuses (``Credit
Enhancements'') applied to cumulative net purchase payments that reach
certain aggregate amounts in accordance with the formula described in
the application, made under (i) new deferred variable annuity contracts
and certificates, including data pages, riders and endorsements,
described in the application (the ``New Contracts'') and under (ii) any
deferred variable annuity contracts and certificates, including data
pages, riders and endorsements, that Minnesota Life may issue in the
future (the ``Future Contracts'') through the Separate Account and any
other separate accounts of Minnesota Life and its successors in
interest (the ``Future Accounts''), provided that any such Future
Contracts are substantially similar in all material respects to the New
Contracts (New Contracts and Future Contracts referred to collectively
as the ``Contracts''). Applicants also request that the exemptive
relief extend to any Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(``FINRA'') member broker-dealers controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with any Applicant, whether existing or created in the
future, that in the future, may act as principal underwriter for the
Contracts (``Future Underwriters''). Applicants would recapture Credit
Enhancements previously applied to purchase payments under the New
Contracts in the following circumstances: (1) In the event a contract
owner exercises his or her right to cancellation/``free look'' under
the New Contract; (2) if the Credit Enhancements were added to the
contract within 12 months prior to the date of death of the contract
owner (unless the New Contract is continued under the surviving spouse
continuation option); and (3) if the Credit Enhancements were added to
the contract within 12 months prior to the date of annuitization or
partial annuitization of the contract. The requested relief would also
apply to any Future Contract funded by the Separate Account or Future
Accounts, provided that such Future Contract is substantially similar
in all material respects to the New Contract.

Filing Date: The application was filed on November 21, 2007, and
amended on June 24, 2008.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Secretary of the
Commission and serving Applicants with a copy of the request,
personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the
Commission by 5:30

p.m. on July 21, 2008, and should be accompanied by proof of service on
Applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's
interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons
may request notification of a hearing by writing to the Secretary of
the Commission.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, c/o Michael P. Boyle,
Senior Counsel, Minnesota Life Insurance Company, 400 Robert Street
North, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen J. Sazzman, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6762, or Harry Eisenstein, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Office of Insurance Products, Division of Investment Management.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application is available for a fee from the
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549 ((202) 551-8090).

Applicants' Representations

    1. Minnesota Life is a Minnesota stock life insurance company
organized under the laws of Minnesota. All of the shares of the voting
stock of Minnesota Life are owned by a second tier intermediate stock
holding company named ``Securian Financial Group, Inc.,'' which in turn
is a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Minnesota Mutual Companies,
Inc.
    2. Minnesota Life is authorized to sell insurance and annuities in
all states (except New York), and the District of Columbia. For
purposes of the 1940 Act, Minnesota Life is the depositor and sponsor
for the Separate Account. Minnesota Life also serves as depositor for
several other separate accounts. Minnesota Life may establish one or
more additional Future Accounts for which it will serve as depositor.
    3. The Separate Account is a segregated investment account under
Minnesota law. Under Minnesota law, the assets of the Separate Account
attributable to the Contracts and any other variable annuity contracts
through which interests in the Separate Account are issued are owned by
Minnesota Life, but are held separately from all other assets of
Minnesota Life, for the benefit of the owners of, and the persons
entitled to payment under, Contracts issued through the Separate
Account. Consequently, such assets are not chargeable with liabilities
arising out of any other business that Minnesota Life may conduct.
Income, gains and losses, realized or unrealized, from each sub-account
of the Separate Account, are credited to or charged against that sub-
account without regard to any other income, gains or losses of
Minnesota Life. The Separate Account is a ``separate account'' as
defined by Section 2(a)(37) of the 1940 Act, is registered with the
Commission as a unit investment trust (File No. 811-4294), and
interests in the Separate Account offered through the Contracts are
registered under the Securities Act of 1933 on Form N-4, File No. 333-
111067.
    4. The Separate Account is divided into a number of sub-accounts.
Each sub-account invests exclusively in shares representing an interest
in a separate corresponding investment portfolio of one of several
series-type, open-end management investment companies. The assets of
the Separate Account support one or more varieties of variable annuity
contracts, including the New Contract. Minnesota Life may issue Future
Contracts through the Separate Account. Minnesota Life also may issue
Contracts through Future Accounts.
    5. SFS is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Securian Financial Group,
Inc. SFS serves as the principal underwriter of Minnesota Life separate
accounts registered as unit investment trusts under the 1940 Act,
including the Separate Account, and is the distributor of variable life
insurance policies and variable annuity contracts issued through such
separate accounts, including the Contracts. SFS is registered as a
broker-dealer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and is a member
of FINRA. SFS may act as principal underwriter for Future Accounts of
Minnesota Life and as distributor for Future Contracts.
    6. The New Contracts are deferred combination variable and fixed
annuity contracts that Minnesota Life may issue to individuals on a
``non-qualified'' basis or in connection with certain types of
retirement plans that receive favorable federal income tax treatment
under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the ``Code''). The
New Contracts make available a number of sub-accounts of the Separate
Account to which a contract owner may allocate net purchase payments
and associated Credit Enhancement(s).
    7. The New Contracts also offer fixed-interest allocation options
under which Minnesota Life credits guaranteed rates of interest for
various periods. These include several guaranteed term account options
and the Minnesota Life general account. A market value adjustment may
apply to the fixed-interest allocation options under the New Contracts
in certain circumstances.
    8. A contract owner's initial purchase payment must be at least
$10,000 (unless a lower qualified plan limitation applies). Thereafter,
a contract owner may choose the amount and frequency of purchase
payments, except that the minimum subsequent purchase payment is $500
($100 for automatic payment plans). A contract owner may make transfers
of contract value among and between the sub-accounts and, subject to
certain restrictions, among and between the sub-accounts and the fixed-
interest allocation options at any time. Contract value is the sum of a
contract owner's values in the general account, guarantee periods of
the guaranteed term account and sub-accounts of the Separate Account on
any valuation date before the annuity commencement date.
    9. The New Contracts offer a contract owner a variety of annuity
payment options. The contract owner may annuitize any time. A contract
owner may choose to annuitize his/her entire contract or only a portion
of the contract value. If a deferred sales charge (``DSC'') would
otherwise apply to New Contract withdrawals at the time of
annuitization, the DSC will be waived for amounts applied to provide
annuity payments. In the event of a contract owner's (or the
annuitant's, if any contract owner is not an individual) death prior to
annuitization, the beneficiary may elect to receive the death benefit
in the form of one of several annuity payment options instead of a lump
sum.
    10. The New Contracts have a DSC which is applicable on surrender
and withdrawal of accumulation values as described more fully below.
Credit Enhancements are not recaptured upon surrender or withdrawal.
    11. If a contract owner withdraws contract value, Minnesota Life
may deduct a DSC equal to a percentage of each purchase payment
surrendered or withdrawn. The DSC is separately calculated and applied
to each purchase payment at any time that the purchase payment (or part
of the purchase payment) is surrendered or withdrawn. The amount of the
DSC depends on how long a contract owner's purchase payment has been
held under the New Contract. The DSC applicable to each purchase
payment diminishes to zero over time as the purchase payment remains in
the New Contract. The DSC does not apply in any circumstances under
which Credit Enhancements will be recaptured.

    12. The New Contracts offer a standard DSC schedule as follows:

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contract Years Since Payment............     0-1     1-2     2-3     3-4     4-5     5-6     6-7     7-8      8+
Deferred Sales Charge (percent).........     8.0     8.0     7.0     6.0     6.0     5.0     4.0     3.0       0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The DSC does not apply to:
     The annual free withdrawal amount (as discussed below).
     Amounts withdrawn to pay the annual maintenance fee, any
transfer charge or any periodic charges for optional riders.
     Any amount attributable to recaptured Credit Enhancements.
     Amounts payable as a death benefit upon the death of the
contract owner or the annuitant, if applicable.
     Amounts applied to provide annuity payments under an
annuity option.
     Amounts withdrawn because of an excess contribution to a
tax-qualified contract (including, for example, IRAs and tax sheltered
annuities).
     The difference between any required minimum distribution
due (according to Internal Revenue Service rules) on the New Contract
and any annual free withdrawal amount allowed.
     A surrender or withdrawal requested any time after the
first contract anniversary and if a contract owner meets the
requirements of a qualifying confinement in a hospital or medical care
facility.
     A surrender or withdrawal requested any time after the
first contract anniversary and in the event that a contract owner is
diagnosed with a terminal illness as described in the New Contract.
     A surrender or single withdrawal amount any time after the
first contract anniversary if the unemployment waiver applies.
     If a certain optional living benefit is elected,
withdrawals in a contract year if less than or equal to the limit
specified for the benefit.
    13. A contract year is defined as a period of one year beginning
with the contract issue date and continuing up to, but not including,
the next contract anniversary, or beginning with a contract anniversary
and continuing up to, but not including, the next contract anniversary.
    14. The amount withdrawn plus any DSC is deducted from the contract
value. The amount of the DSC is determined from the percentages shown
in the table above. For purposes of determining the amount of DSC,
withdrawal amounts will be allocated to contract gain up to the free
withdrawal amount, and then to purchase payments on a first-in, first-
out, basis. The amount of the DSC is determined by: (a) Calculating the
number of years each purchase payment being withdrawn has been in the
New Contract; (b) multiplying each purchase payment being withdrawn by
the appropriate DSC percentage from the table; and (c) adding the DSC
from all purchase payments calculated in (b). Unless otherwise
instructed, the DSC will be deducted pro rata from all sub-accounts.
The New Contract permits a contract owner to withdraw from his or her
contract certain ``free amounts'' on an annual basis without imposition
of the DSC. The annual free withdrawal amount shall be equal to 10% of
purchase payments not previously withdrawn and received by Minnesota
Life during the current contract year, plus the greater of: (i)
Contract value less purchase payments not previously withdrawn as of
the most recent contract anniversary; or (ii) 10% of the sum of
purchase payments not previously withdrawn and still subject to the
DSC, as of the most recent contract anniversary. The free withdrawal
amount does not apply when a New Contract is surrendered.
    15. Subject to state availability, a contract owner may elect to
purchase optional living benefit riders. A contract owner may only
elect a single living benefit on a New Contract. These include a
minimum guaranteed income benefit rider, a guaranteed minimum
withdrawal benefit rider, and two guaranteed living withdrawal benefit
riders.
    16. If a contract owner dies before the annuity start date, the New
Contract provides for a death benefit payable to a beneficiary computed
as of the date Minnesota Life receives written notice and due proof of
death. The death benefit payable to the beneficiary depends on the
death benefit option selected by the contract owner: The guaranteed
minimum death benefit which is included as part of the base New
Contract; or one of four optional death benefits.
    17. Minnesota Life will credit the contract value allocated to the
sub-accounts and the fixed-interest accounts with a Credit Enhancement
when total cumulative net purchase payments reach certain aggregate
levels. The term ``cumulative net purchase payments'' is equal to the
total of all purchase payments applied to the contract less any amounts
previously withdrawn from contract value. The amount of the Credit
Enhancement to be added will be calculated as follows: (a) Cumulative
net purchase payments; multiplied by (b) the applicable Credit
Enhancement percentage from the table below; minus (c) any Credit
Enhancements previously applied to contract value.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Credit
           Cumulative net purchase payments               enhancement
                                                           percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$250,000-$499,999.99.................................               0.25
$500,000-$749,999.99.................................               0.50
$750,000-$999,999.99.................................               0.75
$1,000,000 or more...................................               1.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. For example, an original purchase payment equal to $251,000 is
made to the Contract; Minnesota Life applies a Credit Enhancement equal
to 0.25% of purchase payments ($627.50) to the Contract. Subsequently,
the contract owner requests a withdrawal from contract value of $35,000
including applicable deferred sales charge. Cumulative net purchase
payments are now equal to $251,000 - $35,000 = $216,000. An additional
purchase payment of $300,000 is later added to the Contract, making
cumulative net purchase payments equal to $216,000 + $300,000 =
$516,000. Applying the formula: $516,000 x 0.5% = $2,580 less $627.50
results in a Credit Enhancement added equal to $1,952.50.
    19. The Credit Enhancement amount is treated as earnings for
purposes of federal taxes under the Contract. Minnesota Life will
allocate the Credit Enhancement for the applicable purchase payment
among the sub-accounts and fixed-interest accounts the contract owner
selects in accordance with a contract owner's current purchase payment
allocation instructions. Minnesota Life applies the Credit Enhancement
to a contract owner's contract value either by ``purchasing''
accumulation units of an appropriate sub-account or adding to the
contract owner's fixed-interest allocation option values. Minnesota
Life reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of the
Credit Enhancement or discontinue the Credit Enhancement in the future.
In such case Minnesota

Life would seek any additional exemptive relief to the extent required.
    20. Minnesota Life intends to recapture or retain the Credit
Enhancements only in the following circumstances. First, Minnesota Life
recaptures or retains 100% of the Credit Enhancements in the event that
the contract owner exercises his or her cancellation right during the
``free look'' period. Second, Minnesota Life recaptures all of the
Credit Enhancements added to the Contract within 12 months prior to the
date of death of the contract owner (unless the Contract is continued
under the surviving spouse benefit continuation option); any Credit
Enhancement added to the Contract more than 12 months prior to the date
of death would not be recaptured. Third, Minnesota Life will recapture
all of the Credit Enhancements added to the Contract within 12 months
prior to the annuitization date of the Contract. Any Credit Enhancement
added to the Contract more than 12 months prior to the date of
annuitization would not be recaptured. If only a partial annuitization
were elected, a pro rata portion of the Credit Enhancements added to
the Contract within 12 months of the annuitization date would be
recaptured. So for example, if half the contract value were annuitized,
half of the Credit Enhancements added within 12 months of the date of
the annuitization would be recaptured.
    21. Investment gains attributable to the Credit Enhancement will
not be recaptured. Since Minnesota Life does not recapture the
investment gain/loss attributable to the Credit Enhancement, only the
dollar amount of the Credit Enhancement added to the Contract is
recaptured in the circumstances described in the application.
    22. With regard to variable contract value, several consequences
flow from the foregoing. First, increases in the value of accumulation
units representing Credit Enhancements accrue to the contract owner
immediately. The initial value of such units belongs to the contract
owner except in the limited circumstances of recapture. Second,
decreases in the value of accumulation units representing Credit
Enhancements do not diminish the dollar amount of contract value
subject to recapture. Therefore, additional accumulation units must
become subject to recapture as their value decreases. Stated
differently, the proportionate share of any contract owner's variable
contract value (or the contract owner's interest in the Separate
Account) that Minnesota Life needs to ``recapture'' to avoid anti-
selection increases as variable contract value (or the contract owner's
interest in the Separate Account) decreases. This has the potential to
dilute somewhat the contract owner's interest in his/her Contract as
compared to other contract owners who do not trigger the recapture
provisions.
    23. Finally, because it is not administratively feasible to track
the Credit Enhancements in the Separate Account which may still be
subject to recapture, Minnesota Life deducts the daily mortality and
expense risk charge and the daily administrative charge from the entire
net asset value of the Separate Account. As a result, the daily
mortality and expense risk charge, and any optional benefit charges
paid by any contract owner may be greater than that which he or she
would pay without the Credit Enhancement. In other words, any asset
based fees taken on a dollar amount that is subsequently recaptured
cannot be refunded to contract owners.
    24. Applicants request that the Commission, pursuant to Section
6(c) of the 1940 Act, grant the exemptions set forth below from
Sections 2(a)(32) and 27(i)(2)(A) of the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1
thereunder to permit Applicants to recapture Credit Enhancements
previously applied to purchase payments under the New Contracts: (1) In
the event a contract owner exercises his or her right to cancellation/
``free look'' under the New Contract; (2) if the Credit Enhancements
were added to the Contract within 12 months prior to the date of death
of the contract owner (unless the New Contract is continued under the
surviving spouse continuation option); and (3) if the Credit
Enhancements were added to the Contract within 12 months prior to the
date of annuitization or partial annuitization of the Contract. The
requested relief would also apply to any Future Contract funded by the
Separate Account or Future Accounts provided such Future Contract is
substantially similar in all material respects to the New Contract.
    25. The relief sought in this Application is intended to permit
Minnesota Life with respect to the New Contract to: (i) Deduct any
Credit Enhancements from amounts returned after a contract owner
exercises his or her right to cancel the contract during the free-look
period; (ii) deduct from any death benefit the amount of any Credit
Enhancements applied during the 12 months prior to the date of the
contract owner's death; and (iii) deduct from any annuitization benefit
the amount of any Credit Enhancements applied during the 12 months
prior to the date of annuitization or partial annuitization.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 6(c) of the 1940 Act authorizes the Commission to exempt
any person, security or transaction, or any class or classes of
persons, securities or transactions from the provisions of the 1940 Act
and the rules promulgated thereunder, if and to the extent that such
exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and
consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of the 1940 Act.
    2. Subsection (i) of Section 27 provides that Section 27 does not
apply to any registered separate account supporting variable annuity
contracts, or to the sponsoring insurance company and principal
underwriter of such account, except as provided in paragraph (2) of
subsection (i). Paragraph (2) provides that it shall be unlawful for a
registered separate account or sponsoring insurance company to sell a
variable annuity contract supported by the separate account unless the
``* * * contract is a redeemable security; and * * * [t]he insurance
company complies with Section 26(e) * * *''.
    3. Section 2(a)(32) defines a ``redeemable security'' as any
security, other than short-term paper, under the terms of which the
holder, upon presentation to the issuer, is entitled to receive
approximately his proportionate share of the issuer's current net
assets, or the cash equivalent thereof.
    4. Rule 22c-1 imposes requirements with respect to both the amount
payable on redemption of a redeemable security and the time as of which
such amount is calculated. In pertinent part, Rule 22c-1 prohibits a
registered investment company issuing any redeemable security, a person
designated in such issuer's prospectus as authorized to consummate
transactions in any such security, and a principal underwriter of, or
dealer in, such security from selling, redeeming or repurchasing any
such security, except at a price based on the current net asset value
of such security which is next computed after receipt of a tender of
such security for redemption or of an order to purchase or sell such
security.
    5. Applicants submit that to the extent that the recapture of the
Credit Enhancement arguably could be seen as a discount from the net
asset value, or arguably could be viewed as resulting in the payment to
a contract owner of less than the proportional share of the issuer's
net assets, in violation of

Section 2(a)(32) or 27(i)(2)(A) of the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1
thereunder, the Credit Enhancement recapture would then trigger the
need for relief absent some exemption from the 1940 Act. Rule 6c-8
provides, in relevant part, that a registered separate account, and any
depositor of such account, shall be exempt from Sections 2(a)(32),
27(c)(1), 27(c)(2) and 27(d) of the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1 thereunder
to the extent necessary to permit them to impose a deferred sales load
on any variable annuity contract participating in such account.
Applicants assert, however, that the Credit Enhancement recapture is
not a sales load but a recapture of a Credit Enhancement previously
applied to a contract owner's purchase payments. Minnesota Life
provides the Credit Enhancement from its general account on a
guaranteed basis. The Contracts are designed to be long-term investment
vehicles. In undertaking this financial obligation, Minnesota Life
contemplates that a contract owner will retain a Contract over an
extended period, consistent with the long-term nature of the Contracts.
Minnesota Life contends that it designed the Contract so that it would
recover its costs (including the Credit Enhancements) over an
anticipated duration while a Contract is in force. If a contract owner
withdraws his or her money during the free look period, the contract
owner dies shortly after Credit Enhancements are applied, or the
Contract is annuitized before this anticipated period, Minnesota Life
asserts it must recapture the Credit Enhancement subject to recapture
in order to avoid a loss.
    6. Applicants submit that the proposed recapture of the Credit
Enhancement would not violate Section 2(a)(32) or 27(i)(2)(A) of the
1940 Act or Rule 22c-1 thereunder. Minnesota Life would grant Credit
Enhancements out of its general account assets. Applicants submit that
a contract owner's interest in the Credit Enhancements does not vest
until the expiration of the free look period and the expiration of the
12-month period following the application of a Credit Enhancement to
the contract owner's Contract; until such time, Minnesota Life
generally retains the right to and interest in each contract owner's
contract value representing the dollar amount of any unvested Credit
Enhancement amounts. Therefore, Applicants submit if Minnesota Life
recaptures any Credit Enhancements or part of a Credit Enhancement in
the circumstances described above, it would merely be retrieving its
own assets. Applicants further submit that to the extent that Minnesota
Life may grant and recapture Credit Enhancements in connection with
variable contract value, it would not, at either time, deprive any
contract owner of his or her then proportionate share of the Separate
Account's assets.
    7. Applicants further submit that the operation of the proposed
Credit Enhancements would not violate Section 2(a)(32) or 27(i)(2)(A)
of the 1940 Act because the recapture of Credit Enhancements would not,
at any time, deprive a contract owner of his or her proportionate share
of the current net assets of the Separate Account. Section 2(a)(32)
defines a redeemable security as one ``under the terms of which the
holder, upon presentation to the issuer, is entitled to receive
approximately his proportionate share of the issuer's current net asset
value.'' Applicants assert that taken together, these two sections of
the 1940 Act do not require that the holder receive the exact
proportionate share that his or her security represented at a prior
time. Therefore, Applicants submit that the fact that the proposed
Credit Enhancement provisions have a dynamic element that may cause the
relative ownership positions of Minnesota Life and a contract owner to
shift due to Separate Account performance would not cause the
provisions to conflict with Sections 2(a)(32) or 27(i)(2)(A).
Nonetheless, in order to avoid any uncertainty as to full compliance
with the 1940 Act, Applicants seek exemptions from these two sections.
    8. Minnesota Life's granting of Credit Enhancements would have the
result of increasing a contract owner's contract value in a way that
arguably could be viewed as the purchase of an interest in the Separate
Account at a price below the current net asset value. Similarly,
Minnesota Life's recapture of any Credit Enhancements arguably could be
viewed as the redemption of such an interest at a price above the
current net asset value. If such is the case, then the Credit
Enhancements arguably could viewed as conflicting with Rule 22c-1.
Applicants contend that these are not correct interpretations or
applications of these statutory and regulatory provisions. Applicants
also contend that the Credit Enhancements do not violate Rule 22c-1.
    9. Rule 22c-1 was intended to eliminate or reduce, as far as was
reasonably practicable: (1) The dilution of the value of outstanding
redeemable securities of registered investment companies through their
sale at a price below net asset value or their redemption at a price
above net asset value; or (2) other unfair results, including
speculative trading practices. Applicants submit that the industry and
regulatory concerns prompting the adoption of Rule 22c-1 were primarily
the result of backward pricing, the practice of basing the price of a
mutual fund share on the net asset value per share determined as of the
close of the market on the previous day. Backward pricing permitted
certain investors to take advantage of increases or decreases in net
asset value that were not yet reflected in the price, thereby diluting
the values of outstanding shares.
    10. Applicants submit that the Credit Enhancements do not give rise
to either of the two concerns that Rule 22c-1 was designed to address.
First, Applicants contend that the proposed Credit Enhancements pose no
such threat of dilution. A contract owner's interest in his or her
contract value or in the Separate Account would always be offered at a
price based on the net asset value next calculated after receipt of the
order. The granting of a Credit Enhancement does not reflect a
reduction of that price. Instead, Minnesota Life would purchase with
its general account assets, on behalf of the contract owner, an
interest in the Separate Account equal to the Credit Enhancement.
Because the Credit Enhancement will be paid out of the general account
assets, not the Separate Account assets, Applicants submit that no
dilution will occur as a result of the Credit Enhancement. Recaptures
of Credit Enhancements result in a redemption of Minnesota Life's
interest in a contract owner's contract value or in the Separate
Account at a price determined based on the Separate Account's current
net asset value and not at an inflated price. Moreover, the amount
recaptured will never exceed the amount that Minnesota Life paid from
its general account for the Credit Enhancement. Similarly, although a
contract owner is entitled to retain any investment gains attributable
to the Credit Enhancement, the amount of such gains would always be
computed at a price determined based on net asset value.
    11. Second, Applicants submit that speculative trading practices
calculated to take advantage of backward pricing will not occur as a
result of Minnesota Life's recapture of the Credit Enhancement.
Variable annuities are designed for long-term investment, and by their
nature, do not lend themselves to the kind of speculative short-term
trading that Rule 22c-1 was designed to prevent. More importantly, the
Credit Enhancement recapture simply does not

create the opportunity for speculative trading.
    12. Applicants assert that the Credit Enhancement is generally
beneficial to a contract owner. The recapture tempers this benefit
somewhat, but unless the owner (1) exercises his or her right to cancel
the contract during the ``free look'' period, or (2) Minnesota Life
applies Credit Enhancements and a death benefit during the same 12-
month period, or (3) Minnesota Life applies Credit Enhancements and a
contract owner annuitizes during the same 12-month period, the contract
owner retains the ability to avoid the Credit Enhancement recapture in
the circumstances described in the application. While there would be a
small downside in a declining market where the contract owner bears the
downside risk of incurring losses attributable to the Credit
Enhancements applied, it is the converse of the benefits a contract
owner would receive on the Credit Enhancement amounts in a rising
market because earnings on the Credit Enhancement amount vest with him
or her immediately. Applicants submit that as any earnings on Credit
Enhancements applied would not be subject to recapture and thus would
be immediately available to a contract owner, over time this would
increase the contract owner's share of contract value in the Separate
Account more than it would have increased without the Credit
Enhancements. Likewise any losses on Credit Enhancements would also not
be subject to recapture and over time would decrease the contract
owner's share of contract value in the Separate Account by more than it
would have decreased had the Credit Enhancements never been applied.
Applicants submit that the Credit Enhancement recapture does not
diminish the overall value of the Credit Enhancement.
    13. Applicants assert that the Credit Enhancement recapture
provision is necessary for Minnesota Life to offer the Credit
Enhancement and prevent anti-selection--the risk that a contract owner
would make significant purchase payments into the Contract solely to
receive a quick profit from the Credit Enhancements and then withdraw
his or her money. Applicants submit it would be unfair to Minnesota
Life to permit a contract owner to keep his or her Credit Enhancement
upon his or her exercise of the Contract's ``free look'' provision.
Because no DSC applies to the exercise of the ``free look'' provision,
individuals could purchase the contract with no intention of keeping
it, and the contract owner could obtain a quick profit in the amount of
the Credit Enhancement at Minnesota Life's expense by exercising that
right in just a short period of time. Applicants submit it would also
be unfair to Minnesota Life to permit a contract owner to keep his or
her Credit Enhancements paid shortly before death or annuitization.
Rather than spreading purchase payments over a number of years, a
contract owner could knowingly make very large payments shortly before
death or annuitization to obtain a quick profit in the amount of the
Credit Enhancement thereby leaving Minnesota Life less time to recover
the cost of the Credit Enhancement, to its financial detriment.
Applicants further submit because no additional DSC applies upon death
of a contract owner (or annuitant), a death shortly after the award of
Credit Enhancements would afford a contract owner or a beneficiary a
similar profit at Minnesota Life's expense. Finally Applicants submit
that because no additional DSC applies upon annuitization, if a
contract owner annuitizes his or her contract shortly after the award
of the Credit Enhancement, such event would afford a contract owner a
similar profit at Minnesota Life's expense.
    14. Applicants submit that in the event of such profits to a
contract owner or beneficiary, Minnesota Life could not recover the
cost of granting the Credit Enhancements. This is because Minnesota
Life intends to recoup the costs of providing the Credit Enhancement
through the charges under the Contract, particularly the daily
mortality and expense risk charge and through efficiencies associated
with administering contracts with higher aggregate purchase payments.
Applicants assert that if the profits described above are permitted, a
contract owner could take advantage of them, reducing the base from
which the daily charges are deducted and greatly increasing the amount,
and cost, of Credit Enhancements that Minnesota Life must provide.
Therefore, the recapture provisions are a price of offering the Credit
Enhancements. Applicants submit that Minnesota Life simply cannot offer
the proposed Credit Enhancements without the ability to recapture those
Credit Enhancements in the limited circumstances described in the
application.
    15. Applicants state that the Commission's authority under Section
6(c) of the 1940 Act to grant exemptions from various provisions of the
1940 Act and rules thereunder is broad enough to permit orders of
exemption that cover classes of unidentified persons. Applicants
request an order of the Commission that would exempt them, Minnesota
Life's successors in interest, Future Accounts and Future Underwriters
from the provisions of Sections 2(a)(32) and 27(i)(2)(A) of the 1940
Act and Rule 22c-1 thereunder with respect to the Contracts. Applicants
submit that the exemption of these classes of persons is appropriate in
the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the 1940
Act because all of the potential members of the class could obtain the
foregoing exemptions for themselves on the same basis as the
Applicants, but only at a cost to each of them that is not justified by
any public policy purpose. As discussed in the application, the
requested exemptions would only extend to persons that in all material
respects are the same as the Applicants. Applicants note that the
Commission has previously granted exemptions to classes of similarly
situated persons in various contexts and in a wide variety of
circumstances, including class exemptions for recapturing bonus-type
credits under variable annuity contracts.
    16. Applicants represent that any Future Contracts will be
substantially similar in all material respects to the New Contracts,
but particularly with respect to the Credit Enhancements and recapture
of Credit Enhancements and that each factual statement and
representation about the Credit Enhancement feature will be equally
true of any Future Contracts. Applicants also represent that each
material representation made by them about the Separate Account and SFS
will be equally true of Future Accounts and Future Underwriters, to the
extent that such representations relate to the issues discussed in the
Application. In particular, each Future Underwriter will be registered
as a broker-dealer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and be a
member of FINRA.
    17. Based upon the foregoing, Applicants submit that the recapture
of the proposed Credit Enhancement involves none of the abuses to which
provisions of the 1940 Act and rules thereunder are directed. The
contract owner will always retain the investment experience
attributable to the Credit Enhancement and will retain the principal
amount in all cases except under the circumstances described herein.
Further, Applicants assert that Minnesota Life should be able to
recapture such Credit Enhancement to limit potential losses associated
with such Credit Enhancements.

Conclusions

    Applicants submit that the exemptions requested are necessary or

appropriate in the public interest, consistent with the protection of
investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions
of the 1940 Act, and consistent with and supported by Commission
precedent. Applicants also submit that the provisions for recapture of
Credit Enhancements under the Contracts do not violate Section 2(a)(32)
and 27(i)(2)(A) of the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1 thereunder.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-15071 Filed 7-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 69150]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28331]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63245; File No. SR-DTC-2010-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Automate the Approval Process
in Providing Trustee Access to the Security Position Report Service

November 4, 2010.

I. Introduction

    On September 14, 2010, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed
rule change SR-DTC-2010-12 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal
was published in the Federal Register on September 29, 2010.\2\ The
Commission received no comment letters in response to the proposed rule
change. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62990 (September 24,
2010), 75 FR 60158.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    DTC's Security Position Report (``SPR'') service provides valuable
information on the record date holdings of an issuer's security in DTC
Participant accounts. An SPR provides information needed to contact
shareholders about corporate-related events such as annual meetings.
DTC currently provides SPRs to issuers, trustees, and authorized third
parties.
    DTC's Proxy area receives requests for SPR services access and
reviews such requests to ensure that only appropriate parties receive
access. The current review process to approve a trustee's access to the
SPR service for a security is done manually, and the process is
therefore subject to error. Currently, the SPR system sends an e-mail
to the DTC Proxy mailbox notifying the Proxy staff that a trustee has
added a CUSIP to its eligible issues list. Any trustee can add a CUSIP
to its eligible issues list. The CUSIP will show ``unauthorized'' until
reviewed and approved by the DTC Proxy staff. DTC Proxy staff requires
that the trustee provide to it one of the following: Trust agreement,
Annual Report, 10K, 10Q, SEC filing, or any other document deemed
necessary and appropriate to prove that the trustee is in fact the
trustee for the CUSIP and therefore is entitled to access to SPRs for
the CUSIP. Generally, it takes two or more days for a decision on
access requests because of the manual process associated with the
review of trustee information.
    To increase the efficiency by which DTC provides trustees with
access to the SPR service, DTC is seeking to collect trustee data at
the point of eligibility of the issue. This will allow DTC to store and
maintain trustee data on the Entity Master File and the Security Master
File (``Master Files''). DTC will then have the ability to automate the
validation using the information stored on the Master Files in response
to a trustee's request for SPR access.
    Initially, DTC will populate and update the trustee field on the
Master Files through DTC's Participant Terminal System. Ultimately and
as set forth below this information will be supplied by underwriters at
the time of issue eligibility through DTC's UW (underwriting) Source
System. This change requires DTC to update the UW Source System to
designate trustee data as a mandatory field at the time of eligibility.
In order to provide the time it may take for underwriters to update
their systems to supply the information required by this new mandatory
field, DTC plans to implement the change to the UW Source System in the
fourth quarter of 2011. In the event of a change in trustee, DTC will
require that the new and the prior trustees both update the trustee
information using Form 17Ad-16, which is used today to update transfer
agent changes. By automating the trustee authorization process, DTC
will increase the efficiency of the SPR system and will reduce the risk
of error associated with the manual processing of trustee data.

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization. Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules
of a clearing agency be designed to protect investors and the public
interest.\3\ The Commission believes that DTC's rule change is
consistent with this requirement because by replacing the current
manual process for approving a trustee's access to DTC's SPR service
for an issue with an automated approval process, DTC will be able to
reduce the number of errors associated with manual processing and
thereby better protect investors' confidential information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular Section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder. In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation.
    IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-DTC-2010-12) be and hereby
is approved.

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-28331 Filed 11-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21859-21860]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08472]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC16-8-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-539); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, FERC-539 (Gas Pipeline
Certificates: Import & Export Related Applications).

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due June 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC16-8-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-539, Gas Pipeline Certificates: Import & Export Related
Applications.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0062.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-539 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) \1\ provides, in
part, that ``. . . no person shall export any natural gas from the
United States to a foreign country or import any natural gas from a
foreign country without first having secured an order from the
Commission authorizing it to do so.'' The 1992 amendments to section 3
of the NGA concern importation or exportation from/to a nation which
has a free trade agreement with the United States and requires that
such importation or exportation: (1) Shall be deemed to be a ``first
sale'' (i.e. not a sale for a resale) and (2) shall be deemed to be
consistent with the public interest. Applications for such importation
or exportation should be granted without modification or delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 717-717w.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulatory functions of section 3 are shared by the Commission
and the Secretary of Energy, Department of Energy (DOE). The Commission
has the authority to approve or disapprove the construction and
operation of particular facilities, the site at which such

facilities shall be located, and, with respect to natural gas that
involves the construction of new domestic facilities, the place of
entry for imports or exit for exports. DOE approves the importation or
exportation of the natural gas commodity.\2\ Additionally, pursuant to
the DOE Delegation Order and Executive Order Nos. 10485 and 12038, the
Commission has the authority to issue Presidential Permits for natural
gas facilities which cross an international border of the United
States. Persons seeking Section 3 authorizations or Presidential
Permits from the Commission file applications for such requests
pursuant to part 153 of the Commission's Regulations.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Secretary of DOE's current delegation of authority to the
Commission relating to import and export facilities was renewed by
the Secretary's Delegation Order No. 00-004.00A, effective May 16,
2006.
    \3\ Part 153, subpart B and subpart C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondents: The respondents include all jurisdictional
natural gas companies seeking authorization from the Commission to
import or export natural gas.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \4\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                                        FERC-539--Gas Pipeline Certificates: Import & Export Related Applications
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Annual  number
                                            of  responses   Total number of    Average burden & cost per    Total annual burden hours &      Cost per
        Number of respondents (1)           per respondent   responses  (1)        response \5\  (4)        total annual cost (3) * (4)  respondent  ($)
                                                 (2)          * (2) = (3)                                              = (5)                 (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.......................................               2               24   12 hrs.; $864...............  288 hrs.; $20,736...........          $1,728
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: April 7, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-08472 Filed 4-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80949-80952]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33060]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002]

Request for Nominations for Voting Members on Public Advisory
Panels or Committees

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting
nominations for voting members to serve on the Device Good
Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee, certain device panels of the
Medical Devices Advisory Committee, and the National Mammography
Quality Assurance Advisory Committee in the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health. Nominations will be accepted for current vacancies
and those that will or may occur through December 31, 2012.
    FDA has a special interest in ensuring that women, minority groups,
and individuals with disabilities are adequately represented on
advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of qualified
candidates from these groups.

DATES: Because scheduled vacancies occur on various dates throughout
each year, no cutoff date is established for the receipt of
nominations. However, when possible, nominations should be received at
least 6 months before the date of scheduled vacancies for each year, as
indicated in this notice.

ADDRESSES: All nominations for membership should be sent electronically
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and
Management Staff, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 5103, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002.
    Information about becoming a member on a FDA advisory committee can
also be obtained by visiting FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For specific Committee/Panel
questions, contact the following persons listed in table 1 of this
document.

           Table 1--Contact Persons and Committee/Panel Names
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Committee/certain device panels
             Contact person              of the Medical Devices Advisory
                                                    Committee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LCDR Sara Anderson, Center for Devices   National Mammography Quality
 and Radiological Health, Food and Drug   Assurance Advisory Committee.
 Administration, 10903 New Hampshire     Clinical Chemistry and Clinical
 Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 1544, Silver         Toxicology Devices Panel.
 Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:  Dental Products Panel.
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>             General Hospital and Personal
                                          Use Devices Panel.
                                         Ophthalmic Devices Panel.
Shanika Craig, Center for Devices and    Microbiology Devices Panel.
 Radiological Health, Food and Drug      Obstetrics and Gynecology
 Administration, 10903 New Hampshire      Devices Panel.
 Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 1613, Silver
 Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Lt. Avena Russell, Center for Devices    Device Good Manufacturing
 and Radiological Health, Food and Drug   Practice Advisory Committee.
 Administration, 10903 New Hampshire     Gastroenterology and Urology
 Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 1535, Silver         Devices Panel.
 Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:  General and Plastic Surgery
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>              Devices Panel.
                                         Neurological Devices Panel.
                                         Orthopedic and Rehabilitation
                                          Devices Panel.
Jamie Waterhouse, Center for Devices     Circulatory System Devices
 and Radiological Health, Food and Drug   Panel.
 Administration, 10903 New Hampshire     Ear, Nose and Throat Devices
 Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 1544, Silver         Panel.
 Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email   Molecular and Clinical Genetics
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>           Devices Panel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Vacancies

    FDA is requesting nominations of voting members for vacancies
listed as follows:

                 Table 2--Committee/Panel and Vacancies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Current &
  Committee/Panel expertise       upcoming      Approximate date needed
            needed                vacancies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circulatory System Devices                  2  July 1, 2012.
 Panel of the Medical Devices
 Advisory Committee--
 Interventional
 cardiologists,
 electrophysiologists,
 invasive (vascular)
 radiologists, vascular and
 cardiothoracic surgeons, and
 cardiologists with special
 interest in congestive heart
 failure.
Clinical Chemistry and                      2  March 1, 2012.
 Clinical Toxicology Devices
 Panel of the Medical Devices
 Advisory Committee--Doctors
 of medicine or philosophy
 with experience in clinical
 chemistry, clinical
 toxicology, clinical
 pathology, clinical
 laboratory medicine,
 endocrinology, and diabetes.
Dental Products Panel of the                1  November 1, 2012.
 Medical Devices Advisory
 Committee--Dentists,
 engineers, and scientists
 who have expertise in the
 areas of dental implants,
 dental materials,
 periodontology, tissue
 engineering, and dental
 anatomy.
Ear, Nose and Throat Devices                1  November 1, 2012.
 Panel of the Medical Devices
 Advisory Committee--
 Otologists, neurotologists,
 and audiologists.
Gastroenterology and Urology                3  January 1, 2013.
 Devices Panel of the Medical
 Devices Advisory Committee-
 Transplant specialists,
 gastroenterologists,
 urologists, and
 nephrologists.
General and Plastic Surgery                 1  Immediately.
 Devices Panel of the Medical               2  September 1, 2012.
 Devices Advisory Committee--
 Surgeons (general, plastic,
 reconstructive, pediatric,
 thoracic, abdominal, pelvic
 and endoscopic);
 dermatologists; experts in
 biomaterials, lasers, wound
 healing, and quality of
 life; and biostatisticians.
General Hospital and Personal               1  January 1, 2013.
 Use Devices Panel of the
 Medical Devices Advisory
 Committee--Internists,
 pediatricians,
 neonatologists,
 endocrinologists,
 gerontologists, nurses,
 biomedical engineers or
 microbiologists/infection
 control practitioners or
 experts.
Microbiology Devices Panel of               1  March 1, 2012
 the Medical Devices Advisory
 Committee--Infectious
 disease clinicians, e.g.,
 pulmonary disease
 specialists, sexually
 transmitted disease
 specialists, pediatric
 infectious disease
 specialists, experts in
 tropical medicine and
 emerging infectious
 diseases, biofilm
 development; mycologists;
 clinical microbiologists and
 virologists; clinical
 virology and microbiology
 laboratory directors, with
 expertise in clinical
 diagnosis and in vitro
 diagnostic assays, e.g.,
 hepatologists; molecular
 biologists.
Molecular and Clinical                      1  June 1, 2012.
 Genetics Devices Panel of
 the Medical Devices Advisory
 Committee--Experts in human
 genetics and in the clinical
 management of patients with
 genetic disorders, e.g.,
 pediatricians,
 obstetricians, and
 neonatologists. Individuals
 with training in inborn
 errors of metabolism,
 biochemical and/or molecular
 genetics, population
 genetics, epidemiology and
 related statistical
 training, and clinical
 molecular genetics testing
 (e.g., genotyping, array
 CGH, etc.). Individuals with
 experience in genetics
 counseling and medical
 ethics are also desired, and
 individuals with experience
 in ancillary fields of study
 will be considered.
Neurological Devices Panel of               2  December 1, 2012.
 the Medical Devices Advisory
 Committee--Neurosurgeons
 (cerebrovascular and
 pediatric), neurologists
 (stroke, pediatric, pain
 management, and movement
 disorders), interventional
 neuroradiologists,
 psychiatrists, and
 biostatisticians.

Obstetrics and Gynecology                   1  February 1, 2012.
 Devices Panel of the Medical
 Devices Advisory Committee--
 Experts in perinatology,
 embryology, reproductive
 endocrinology, pediatric
 gynecology, gynecological
 oncology, operative
 hysteroscopy, pelviscopy,
 electrosurgery, laser
 surgery, assisted
 reproductive technologies,
 contraception, postoperative
 adhesions, and cervical
 cancer and colposcopy;
 biostatisticians and
 engineers with experience in
 obstetrics/gynecology
 devices; urogynecologists;
 experts in breast care;
 experts in gynecology in the
 older patient; experts in
 diagnostic (optical)
 spectroscopy; experts in
 midwifery; labor and
 delivery nursing.
Ophthalmic Devices Panel of                 1  Immediately.
 the Medical Devices Advisory                  November 1, 2012.
 Committee--Ophthalmologists
 specializing in cataract and
 refractive surgery and
 vitreo-retinal surgery, in
 addition to vision
 scientists, optometrists,
 and biostatisticians
 practiced in ophthalmic
 clinical trials.
Orthopaedic and                             2  September 1, 2012.
 Rehabilitation Devices Panel
 of the Medical Devices
 Advisory Committee--
 Orthopedic surgeons (joint,
 spine, trauma, and
 pediatric); rheumatologists;
 engineers (biomedical,
 biomaterials, and
 biomechanical); experts in
 rehabilitation medicine,
 sports medicine, and
 connective tissue
 engineering; and
 biostatisticians.
National Mammography Quality                3  February 1, 2012.
 Assurance Advisory
 Committee--Physicians,
 practitioners, or other
 health professionals whose
 clinical practice, research
 specialization, or
 professional expertise
 include a significant focus
 on mammography.
Device Good Manufacturing                   2  June 1, 2012.
 Practice Advisory Committee--
 Vacancies include a public
 representative and a health
 professional representative.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Functions

A. Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    The committee reviews and evaluates data on the safety and
effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices and makes
recommendations for their regulation. The panels engage in a number of
activities to fulfill the functions of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) envisions for device advisory panels. With
the exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each
panel, according to its specialty area performs the following duties:
(1) Advises the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner)
regarding recommended classification or reclassification of devices
into one of three regulatory categories, (2) advises on any possible
risks to health associated with the use of devices, (3) advises on
formulation of product development protocols; (4) reviews premarket
approval applications for medical devices, (5) reviews guidelines and
guidance documents, (6) recommends exemption of certain devices from
the application of portions of the FD&C Act, (7) advises on the
necessity to ban a device, and (8) responds to requests from the Agency
to review and make recommendations on specific issues or problems
concerning the safety and effectiveness of devices. With the exception
of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according
to its specialty area, may also make appropriate recommendations to the
Commissioner on issues relating to the design of clinical studies
regarding the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational
devices.
    The Dental Products Panel also functions at times as a dental drug
panel. The functions of the dental drug panel are to evaluate and
recommend whether various prescription drug products should be changed
to over-the-counter status and to evaluate data and make
recommendations concerning the approval of new dental drug products for
human use.
    The Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel provides advice to the
Commissioner on complex or contested scientific issues between FDA and
medical device sponsors, applicants, or manufacturers relating to
specific products, marketing applications, regulatory decisions and
actions by FDA, and Agency guidance and policies. The panel makes
recommendations on issues that are lacking resolution, are highly
complex in nature, or result from challenges to regular advisory panel
proceedings or Agency decisions or actions.

B. National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee

    The functions of the committee are to advise FDA on the following
topics: (1) Developing appropriate quality standards and regulations
for mammography facilities; (2) developing appropriate standards and
regulations for bodies accrediting mammography facilities under this
program; (3) developing regulations with respect to sanctions; (4)
developing procedures for monitoring compliance with standards; (5)
establishing a mechanism to investigate consumer complaints; (6)
reporting new developments concerning breast imaging which should be
considered in the oversight of mammography facilities; (7) determining
whether there exists a shortage of mammography facilities in rural and
health professional shortage areas and determining the effects of
personnel on access to the services of such facilities in such areas;
(8) determining whether there will exist a sufficient number of medical
physicists after October 1, 1999, and (9) determining the costs and
benefits of compliance with these requirements.

C. Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee

    The functions of the committee are to review proposed regulations
issuance regarding good manufacturing practices governing the methods
used in, and the facilities and controls used for manufacture,
packaging, storage, installation, and servicing of devices, and make
recommendations regarding the feasibility and reasonableness of those
proposed regulations. The committee also reviews and makes
recommendations on proposed guidelines developed to assist the medical
device industry in meeting the good manufacturing practice
requirements, and provides advice with regard to any petition submitted
by a manufacturer for an exemption or variance from good manufacturing
practice regulations.
    Section 520 of the FD&C Act, (21 U.S.C. 360(j)), as amended,
provides that the Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee
shall be composed of nine members as follows: (1) Three of the members
shall be appointed from persons who are officers

or employees of any Federal, State, or local government; (2) two shall
be representatives of the interests of the device manufacturing
industry; (3) two shall be representatives of the interests of
physicians and other health professionals; and (4) two shall be
representatives of the interests of the general public.

III. Qualifications

A. Panels of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    Persons nominated for membership on the panels should have
adequately diversified experience appropriate to the work of the panel
in such fields as clinical and administrative medicine, engineering,
biological and physical sciences, statistics, and other related
professions. The nature of specialized training and experience
necessary to qualify the nominee as an expert suitable for appointment
may include experience in medical practice, teaching, and/or research
relevant to the field of activity of the panel. The particular needs at
this time for each panel are listed in section I of this document. The
term of office is up to 4 years, depending on the appointment date.

B. National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee

    Persons nominated for membership should be physicians,
practitioners, and other health professionals, whose clinical practice,
research specialization, or professional expertise include a
significant focus on mammography and individuals identified with
consumer interests. Prior experience on Federal public advisory
committees in the same or similar subject areas will also be considered
relevant professional expertise.
    The particular needs at this time for this committee are listed in
section I of this document. The term of office is up to 4 years,
depending on the appointment date.

C. Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee

    Persons nominated for membership as a health professional or
officer or employee of any Federal, State, or local government should
have knowledge of or expertise in any one or more of the following
areas: Quality assurance concerning the design, manufacture, and use of
medical devices. To be eligible for selection as a representative of
the general public, nominees should possess appropriate qualifications
to understand and contribute to the committee's work. The particular
needs at this time for this committee are listed in section I of this
document. The term of office is up to 4 years, depending on the
appointment date.

IV. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified persons
for membership on one or more of the advisory panels or advisory
committees. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations must
include a current, complete r[eacute]sum[eacute] or curriculum vitae
for each nominee, and their current business address and/or home
address, telephone number, and email address if available. Nominations
must specify the advisory panel(s) or advisory committee(s) for which
the nominee is recommended. Nominations must also acknowledge that the
nominee is aware of the nomination unless self-nominated. FDA will ask
potential candidates to provide detailed information concerning such
matters related to financial holdings, employment, and research grants
and/or contracts to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflict
of interest.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14 relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: December 20, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-33060 Filed 12-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 225 (Friday, November 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 67458]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25852]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-425-000]

Enerwise Global Technologies, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Enerwise Global Technologies, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is December 9, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 19, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-25852 Filed 11-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 4 (Thursday, January 7, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 837-838]
[FR Doc No: 2015-33216]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-247; OMB Control No. 3235-0259]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

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

Reinstatement:
    Rule 19h-1

    Notice by a Self-Regulatory Organization of Proposed Admission to
or Continuance in Membership or Participation or Association with a
Member of Any Person Subject to a Statutory Disqualification, and
Applications to the Commission for Relief Therefrom.
    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'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for approval of a reinstatement, with
change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has
expired--Rule 19h-1, Notice by a Self-Regulatory Organization of
Proposed Admission to or Continuance in Membership or Participation or
Association with a Member of Any Person Subject to a Statutory
Disqualification, and Applications to the Commission for Relief
Therefrom (17 CFR 240.19h-1).
    Rule 19h-1 (``Rule'') under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Exchange Act'') prescribes the form and content of notices and
applications by self-regulatory organizations (``SROs'') regarding
proposed admissions to, or continuances in, membership, participation
or association with a member of any person subject to a statutory
disqualification.
    The Commission uses the information provided in the submissions
filed pursuant to Rule 19h-1 to review decisions of SROs to permit the
entry into or continuance in the securities business of persons who
have committed serious misconduct. The filings submitted pursuant to
the Rule also permit inclusion of an application to the Commission for
consent to associate with a member of an SRO notwithstanding a
Commission order barring such association.
    The Commission reviews filings made pursuant to the Rule to
ascertain whether it is in the public interest to permit the employment
in the securities business of persons subject to a statutory
disqualification. The filings contain information that is essential to
the staff's review and ultimate determination on whether an association
or employment is in the public interest and consistent with investor
protection. Without these filings, persons subject to a statutory
disqualification could reenter or continue employment in the securities
business without the Commission's critical review of their character,
ability to act as a fiduciary, and their employer's plan of
supervision. The failure to collect and review this information could
result in significant harm to the investing public.
    The Commission estimates the annual burden of responding to this
collection of information is as follows.

                                                  Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           19h-1(a)(4)--
                                                          Notification of                          19h-1(d)--
                                       19h-1(a)--Notice       proposed                           Application to
                                       of admission or      admission or        19h-1(b)--       the Commission
                                         continuance        continuance        Preliminary      for relief from
                                       notwithstanding    pursuant to  an     notifications    certain statutory
                                         a statutory      exception  from
                                       disqualification      the notice                        disqualifications
                                                            requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number of respondents =...                 20                 20                 20                 20
Estimated number of annual responses                 11                  9                 28                  5
 per respondent =...................
Estimated annual reporting burden                    80                 80                 13                 80
 per response =.....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated total annual reporting  17,600 (20          14,400 (20          7,280 (20           8,000 (20
 burden =.                         respondents x 11    respondents x 9     respondents x 28    respondents x 5
                                   annual responses    annual responses    annual responses    annual responses
                                   per respondent x    per respondent x    per respondent x    per respondent x
                                   80 hours per        80 hours per        13 hours per        80 hours per
                                   respondent).        respondent).        respondent).        respondent).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a
valid OMB control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following Web site, www.reginfo.gov. Persons
submitting comments on the collection of information requirements
should direct them to (i) the Office of Management and Budget,
Attention: Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, and
(ii) 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>
Comments should reference SEC File No. 270-247. Comments must be
submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: December 30, 2015.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-33216 Filed 1-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61121-61122]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25353]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65410; File No. 4-631]

Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for
Commission Action on the National Market System Plan To Address
Extraordinary Market Volatility by BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS Y-
Exchange, Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago
Stock Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc.,
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.,
NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, National Stock
Exchange, Inc., New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE Amex LLC, and NYSE
Arca, Inc.

September 27, 2011.
    On April 5, 2011, NYSE Euronext, on behalf of New York Stock
Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex''), and NYSE Arca,
Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), and the following parties to the proposed
National Market System Plan: BATS Exchange, Inc., BATS Y-Exchange,
Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Stock
Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc., NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc., NASDAQ OMX
PHLX LLC, the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, and National Stock Exchange,
Inc. (collectively with NYSE, NYSE Amex, and NYSE Arca, the
``Participants''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 608 of Regulation NMS (``Rule 608'')
thereunder,\2\ a proposed Plan to Address Extraordinary Market
Volatility (``Plan'').\3\ The proposed Plan was published for comment
in the Federal Register on June 1, 2011.\4\ The Commission received 18
comments on the proposed Plan.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ See Letter from Janet M. McGinness, Senior Vice President,
Legal and Corporate Secretary, NYSE Euronext, to Elizabeth M.
Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated April 5, 2011.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64547 (May 25,
2011), 76 FR 31647.
    \5\ See Letter from Steve Wunsch, Wunsch Auction Associates,
LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 2,
2011; Letter from Peter J. Driscoll, Investment Professional,
Chicago, IL, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 17, 2011; Letter from Stuart J. Kaswell, Executive Vice
President & Managing Director, General Counsel, Managed Funds
Association, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
June 21, 2011; Letter from George U. Sauter, Managing Director and
Chief Investment Officer, The Vanguard Group, Inc., to Elizabeth M.
Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 22, 2011; Letter from
Karrie McMillan, General Counsel, Investment Company Institute, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 22, 2011;
Letter from Manisha Kimmel, Executive Director, Financial
Information Forum, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated June 22, 2011; Letter from Craig S. Donohue, Chief Executive
Officer, CME Group Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 22, 2011; Letter from Joseph N. Cangemi,
Chairman, and Jim Toes, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Security Traders Association, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission, dated June 22, 2011; Letter from Leonard J. Amoruso,
General Counsel, Knight Capital Group, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 22, 2011; Letter from Ann L.
Vlcek, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, Securities
Industry and Financial Markets Association, to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Commission, dated June 22, 2011; Letter from Jamie
Selway, Managing Director, and Patrick Chi, Chief Compliance
Officer, ITG Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated June 23, 2011; Letter from Jose Marques, Managing Director and
Global Head of Electronic Equity Trading, Deutsche Bank Securities
Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 23,
2011; Letter from Kimberly Unger, Esq., Executive Director, The
Security Traders Association of New York, Inc., to Elizabeth M.
Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 23, 2011; Letter from
James J. Angel, PhD, CFA, Associate Professor of Finance, Georgetown
University, McDonough School of Business, to Commission, dated June
24, 2011; Letter from John A. McCarthy, General Counsel, GETCO, to
Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated June 24, 2011;
Letter from Andrew C. Small, Executive Director and General Counsel,
Scottrade, Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
dated July 5, 2011; Letter from Peter Skopp, President, Molinete
Trading Inc., to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
July 19, 2011; and Letter from Sal Arnuk, Joe Saluzzi, and Paul
Zajac, Themis Trading, LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
Commission. Copies of all comments received on the proposed Plan are
available on the Commission's Web site, located at http://www.sec.gov/comments/4-631/4-631.shtml. Comments are also 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 ET.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 608 \6\ under Section 11A of the Act \7\ provides that within
120 days of the date of publication of notice of filing of a national
market system plan or an amendment to an effective national market
system plan, or within such longer period as the Commission may
designate up to 180 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons

for so finding or as to which the sponsors consent, the Commission
shall approve such plan or amendment, with such changes or subject to
such conditions as the Commission may deem necessary or appropriate, if
it finds that such plan or amendment is necessary or appropriate in the
public interest, for the protection of investors and the maintenance of
fair and orderly markets, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanisms of, a national market system, or otherwise in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. The 120th day for this notice of filing of a
national market system plan is September 29, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is hereby extending the 120-day time period for
Commission action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds
that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to
take action on the proposed rule change. In particular, the extension
of time will ensure that the Commission has sufficient time to consider
and take action on the Participants' proposal, in light of, among other
things, the comments received on the proposal.
    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act \8\ and Rule 608
thereunder,\9\ the Commission designates November 28, 2011 as the date
by which the Commission shall approve the proposed Plan (File Number 4-
631), with such changes or subject to such conditions as the Commission
may deem necessary or appropriate, if it finds that such plan or
amendment is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a
national market system, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
    \9\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(42).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-25353 Filed 9-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Cooling Water Intake Structure ( CWIS) Information Data Required 7 24 02 Rig Information Rig Name Cajun Express Sedco Energy Sedco Express Rig Type Semisubmersible ( Dynamically positioned) Total Installed Power Generation Capacity 41,286 HP Number of Cooling Water Intake Structures ( CWISs) 3 ea. Port and 3 ea. Starboard Brief description of each CWIS ( e. g., sea chest, simple pipe) 32" sea chest inlet to a 14" strainer Rough dimensions of each CWIS and indicate whether onboard CWIS has an existing flange Yes 14" flange Screen type ( e. g., strainer, wedge wire) with mesh size 14" / 8" corrugated basket strainer Total Design Specifications for Daily Maximum Water Intake Volume of each CWIS 1,019,130 gals ( 24,265 bbls)

Total Daily Water Intake Volume of each CWIS ( Set up/ Drilling) 142,572 gals ( 3,466 bbls)

Design Specs for Through Screen Velocity of each CWIS ( i. e., Q= V* A) ( Set up/ Drilling) 0.23 fps List of Purposes of Cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., cool crude oil, produced water, power generators, drill pipe brakes) Engine cooling, Mud pumps, Dowell unit, ROV, Air compressors, HP compressors, Synchrodrive, Thrusters.

List of Purposes of Non cooling Water Intakes ( e. g., fire water, hotel loads) Dowell educator, Mud pits, Gumbo dump Total Volume of Water Intake for Ballasting, Duration of the Ballast intake, and the Through Screen Velocity of the Ballast intake 16,458,624 gal ( 391,872 bbls) when you need ballast 6.38 fps Mitigation Measures for reducing Exotic Species Migration through Ballast water The rig doesn't carry any ballast water for location to location. Ballast is taken and discharged while at the same location Mitigation Measures for reducing Impingement and Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms, as well as Bio fouling Prevention Measures Sea Chest strainers, cathodic protection, sacrificial anodes are use thought the barge and hull, and in ballast tanks.

Is the Rig equipped with a Radiator Cooling System for the Main Engines? No