 [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 39944-39946] [FR Doc No: 2011-17033]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64791; File No. SR-EDGX-2011-18]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Make

Available Without Charge the EDGX Book Feed and To Add a Description of

the EDGX Book Feed to New Rule 13.8

July 1, 2011.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given

that on June 29, 2011, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or

``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission

(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and

II below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. The

Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the

proposed rule change from interested persons.

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

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

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

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the

Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to make available without charge the EDGX

book feed (``EDGX Book Feed''), an EDGX data feed that displays depth

of book information. The Exchange also proposes to add a description of

the EDGX Book Feed to new Rule 13.8. The text of the proposed rule

change is attached as Exhibit 5 and is available on the Exchange's Web

site at http://www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's principal office,

and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements

concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and

discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The

text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in

Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries,

set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects

of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to describe the

availability of the EDGX Book Feed, a data feed that contains all

orders for securities trading on the Exchange. The EDGX Book Feed is

available to all EDGX members equally at no charge, and offers all

firms real-time data concerning EDGX's depth of book. EDGX makes the

EDGX Book Feed available to all market participants via subscription

through an established connection to EDGX through extranets, direct

connection, and service bureaus. The EDGX Book Feed is available in

multicast and unicast formats.

    The EDGX Book Feed contains the following data elements: all

displayed orders for listed securities trading on EDGX, order

executions, order cancellations, order modifications, order

identification numbers, and administrative messages.

    By making the EDGX Book Feed data available, EDGX enhances market

transparency and fosters competition among orders and markets. Member

firms may use the EDGX Book Feed to more accurately price their orders

based on EDGX's view of the depth of book information, such as all

displayed limit orders at any point in time. Additionally, Members can

track their own orders from order entry to execution.

    The Exchange proposes to add the definition of EDGX Book Feed to

new Rule 13.8(a). In addition, the Exchange proposes to add to Rule

13.8(b) the process by which a Member can obfuscate their unique order

identification number on the EDGX Book Feed for subsequent

replenishments of reserve orders per Market Participant Identifier

(``MPID'') for all logical ports or specific logical ports, as

designated by the Member. In order to do so, and have a randomly

generated order identification number applied to the replenishment of

Member's reserve orders, the Member would contact Member Services via

e-mail or phone. Such feature would be enabled the next trading day by

the Exchange for the Member-selected MPID for all logical ports or

specific logical ports until further instructions are received by

Member Services from the Member. The Exchange believes that the random

order identification number would help deter other market participants

from being able to trace the life of a specific order, including short-

term price movements and trading patterns.

    At this time, EDGX does not have plans to charge an additional fee

associated with the receipt of the EDGX Book Feed. Should EDGX

determine to charge fees associated with the EDGX Book Feed, EDGX will

submit a proposed rule change to the Commission in order to implement

those fees.

2. Statutory Basis

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent

with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\3\ in general, and

furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\4\ in particular, as it is

designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to

promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation

and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,

settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating

transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the

mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,

in general, to protect investors and the public interest. EDGX believes

that this proposal is in keeping with those principles by promoting

increased transparency through the dissemination of the EDGX Book Feed

and by codifying its availability.

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

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

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

    In addition, EDGX is making a voluntary decision to make this data

available. EDGX is not required by the Act in the first instance to

make the data available, unlike the best bid and offer which must be

made available under the Act. EDGX chooses to make the data available

as proposed in order to improve market quality, to attract order flow,

and to increase transparency. Once this filing becomes effective, EDGX

will be required to continue making the data available until such time

as EDGX changes its rule.

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition

that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of

the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed

Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,

comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received

any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested

parties.

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

Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)

Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public

interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)

become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or

such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become

effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \5\ and Rule 19b-

4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\6\

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

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).

    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

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

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \7\ normally

does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the

filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\8\ the Commission

may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the

protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked

that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative waiting period

contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii).\9\ The Exchange has requested such

waiver because it believes that such waiver is consistent with the

protection of investors and the public interest because it would permit

EDGX to immediately provide the information regarding the EDGX Book

Feed access requirements to market participants. Specifically, the

Exchange believes that, because the EDGX Book Feed is already

available, strictly voluntary, and free to receive, waiver is

consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.

For these reasons, the Commission sees no reason to delay

implementation of the proposed rule change. The Commission believes it

is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest

to waive the 30-day operative delay, and hereby grants such waiver.\10\

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

    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).

    \9\ Id.

    \10\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,

the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule

change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule

change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or

appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or

otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of

the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-EDGX-2011-18 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,

Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGX-2011-18. This file

number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.

    To help the Commission process and review your comments more

efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all

comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that

are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating

to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,

other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance

with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site

viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room on

official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies

of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the

principal offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted

without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying

information from submissions. You should submit only information that

you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to

File Number SR-EDGX-2011-18, and should be submitted on or before July

28, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,

pursuant to delegated authority.\11\

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

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

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

Cathy H. Ahn,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2011-17033 Filed 7-6-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 47 (Monday, March 11, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15296-15299]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05484]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2005-NM-0006; FRL-9788-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico;
New Source Review (NSR) Preconstruction Permitting Program;
Clarification of EPA's Approval of the Sunland Park Section 110(a)(1)
Maintenance Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve revisions to the
applicable New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP) for
New Mexico. Among the changes, EPA is approving the following: the
establishment of a new Minor NSR (MNSR) general construction permitting
program; changes to the MNSR Public Participation requirements; the
establishment of three different types of MNSR Permit Revisions; and
the addition of exemptions for de minimis emission sources and
activities from obtaining a MNSR permit. EPA finds that these revisions
to the New Mexico SIP comply with the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act or
CAA) and EPA regulations and are consistent with EPA policies. EPA also
is providing clarification of an earlier separate EPA rulemaking action
approving the Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan for the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard for the Sunland Park 1997 8-hour attainment area. This
action is being taken under section 110 of the Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective on April 10, 2013.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R06-OAR-2005-NM-0006. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Permits Section (6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445
Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file will be made
available by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 Freedom
of Information Act Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30
p.m. weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese
at<PHONE_NUMBER> to make an appointment. If possible, please make the
appointment at least two working days in advance of your visit. There
will be a 15 cent per page fee for making photocopies of documents. On
the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6 reception
area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
    The State submittals related to this SIP revision, and which are
part of the EPA docket, are also available for public inspection at the
State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by
appointment:
    New Mexico Environment Department, Air Quality Bureau, 1301 Siler
Road, Building B, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ashley Mohr, Air Permits Section
(6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' means EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What public comments were received?
III. What final action is EPA taking?
    A. What are we not addressing in this final action?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this action?

    The background for today's action is discussed in detail in our
November 29, 2012 proposal (77 FR 71145). In that notice, we proposed
to approve revisions to the NSR SIP for New Mexico submitted on May 29,
1998, November 6, 1998, April 11, 2002, April 25, 2005, and November 2,
2006, which incorporate changes to the Construction Permits regulation
contained in 20.2.72 of the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC), also
known as Part 72. Part 72 contains the provisions that establish New
Mexico's Minor NSR permitting program as well as preconstruction
permitting requirements potentially applicable to other programs under
the NMAC. EPA also proposed to approve as part of the New Mexico NSR
SIP, the letter dated November 7, 2012, from the Secretary committing
the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) Air Quality Bureau to
providing notification on the NMED's Web site of all second 30-day
public comment periods provided for under Paragraph B of Section 206 of
Part 72.
    Our November 29, 2012 proposal provides a detailed description of
the submittals and the rationale for EPA's proposed action, together
with a discussion of the opportunity to comment. The public comment
period for this action closed on December 31, 2012.

II. What public comments were received?

    The Federal Register proposing approval of these SIP revisions was
published on November 29, 2012, and the public comment period closed on
December 31, 2012. EPA received one comment letter submitted by the
NMED (hereinafter referred to as ``the commenter''). The comment letter
is available for review in the docket for this rulemaking. We received
no adverse comments on the proposed rule from the commenter. The
commenter generally expressed support of EPA's proposed approval of
these SIP revisions, and raised two considerations that EPA is
clarifying in its responses.
    Comment: The commenter raised a concern about EPA's reference in
its proposed action incorrectly referring to the Sunland Park, New
Mexico area as being designated nonattainment for the revoked 1-hour
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The commenter
contends that this area is no longer designated as nonattainment for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
    Response: EPA agrees the Sunland Park area is no longer designated
nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ EPA revoked the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS for the Sunland Park area

effective one year following the effective date of the area's
designation as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS--June 15,
2005.\2\ EPA subsequently approved a maintenance plan for the 8-hour
standard for the Sunland Park area under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA
and 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3)(iii). Therefore, Sunland Park's prior
designation under the 1-hour ozone standard is of historical interest
only.\3\ As NMED points out, EPA has determined that Sunland Park has
met all of its obligations under the revoked 1-hour ozone standard.
Therefore, the reference to the prior 1-hour ozone designation status
of the Sunland Park area in the proposal has no effect on its current
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA stated in the proposed action, in part: ``* * *the only
area designated nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS is Sunland
Park.'' 77 FR 71151, November 29, 2012.
    \2\ Codified at 70 FR 44470, April 3, 2005.
    \3\ The list of past 1-hour ozone designations in 40 CFR part 81
for Sunland Park is a historical reference only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment: The commenter states that New Mexico submitted, and EPA
approved, a timely maintenance plan for the new 8-hour ozone standard
for the Sunland Park area in accordance with 40 CFR 51.905(a)(3)(iii).
The commenter also states that EPA has previously noted in its approval
of the maintenance plan, ``[t]here are no outstanding obligations under
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS'' for the Sunland Park area. 76 FR 28181 at
28182 (May 16, 2011). The commenter affirms that because the State's
SIP-approved permitting rules are self implementing, the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements became
applicable for the Sunland Park area upon revocation of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.
    Response: EPA agrees the SIP's PSD rules are self-implementing and,
as a result, the PSD SIP permitting requirements are applicable to the
Sunland Park area. As long as New Mexico interprets its SIP as applying
PSD to Sunland Park, upon approval of the Sunland Park maintenance plan
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the 1-hour ozone Nonattainment NSR
(NNSR) permitting requirements for the Sunland Park area were no longer
required. New Mexico submitted, and EPA approved, a timely maintenance
plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Sunland Park area.\4\
Consistent with this confirmation, provided in the comment letter from
NMED, that the New Mexico SIP's PSD rules are self-implementing and
therefore applicable to the Sunland Park area, EPA wishes to clarify
its previous approval of the Sunland Park maintenance plan for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. Our previous approval did not make clear that New
Mexico's PSD SIP permitting requirements are applicable to the Sunland
Park area, and therefore EPA would not require the continued
application of 1-hour ozone NNSR permitting requirements for the area
upon approval of the maintenance plan. Consistent with the commenter's
affirmation and EPA's confirmation that the New Mexico SIP's PSD rules
are self-implementing, EPA clarifies that the PSD SIP permitting
requirements have been applicable to the Sunland Park area from the
effective date of EPA's approval of the maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation
Plans; New Mexico; Sunland Park Section 110(A)(1) Maintenance Plan
for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard, 76 FR 28181, May 16, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What final action is EPA taking?

    We are approving the SIP revisions to the Construction Permits
regulation found in Part 72 that were submitted by New Mexico on May
29, 1998, November 6, 1998, April 11, 2002, April 25, 2005, and
November 2, 2006, and the letter from the Secretary dated November 7,
2012. This action is being taken under section 110 of the CAA.
Additionally, EPA is clarifying statements made in the proposed action
and the approach it took with respect to the 1-hour ozone nonattainment
NSR/PSD transition in its approval of the Sunland Park 110(a)(1)
maintenance plan.

A. What are we not addressing in this final action?

    EPA is only taking final action on the severable revisions to Part
72 contained in the five SIP revision submittals listed above that were
submitted to us for review and incorporation into the New Mexico SIP.
By severable, we mean that the portions of the SIP revision submittals
relating to Part 72 can be implemented independently of the remaining
portions of the submittal, without affecting the stringency of the
submitted rules. In addition, the remaining portions of the submittal
are not necessary for approval of the provisions addressing Part 72.
The following is a list of other revisions contained in the November 6,
1998, April 11, 2002, April 25, 2005, and November 2, 2006 submittals
that are not being addressed in this final action:
     The November 6, 1998 submittal from New Mexico also
contained revisions to correct errors in 20.2.70 NMAC--Operating
Permits. Because 20.2.70 NMAC is outside the scope of the New Mexico
SIP, the revisions to the Operating Permits provisions were not
submitted as revisions to the state's SIP.
     The April 11, 2002 submittal from New Mexico also
contained revisions to 20.2.73 NMAC--Notice of Intent and Emissions
Inventory Requirements, 20.2.74 NMAC--Permits--Prevention of
Significant Deterioration, 20.2.75 NMAC--Construction Permit Fees, and
20.2.79 NMAC--Permits--Nonattainment Areas. Portions of the submittal
related to Parts 73, 74, 75, and 79 have been or will be addressed in
separate SIP revisions reviews and rule actions, as necessary.
     The April 11, 2002 submittal also included documentation
related to an additional revision to 20.2.72 NMAC (filed with the State
Records Center on February 28, 2001, effective March 30, 2001), which
was submitted to EPA for informational purposes only and was not
submitted for approval under the SIP. Therefore, the February 28, 2001
state adopted revisions to Part 72 are not included in this final
action.
     The April 25, 2005 submittal from New Mexico also
contained revisions to 20.2.66 NMAC--Cotton Gins, 20.2.73 NMAC--Notice
of Intent and Emissions Inventory Requirements, and 20.2.75 NMAC--
Construction Permit Fees. Portions of the submittal related to Parts
66, 73, and 75 have been or will be addressed in separate SIP revisions
reviews and rule actions, as necessary.
     The November 2, 2006 submittal from New Mexico also
contained revisions to 20.2.3 NMAC--Ambient Air Quality Standards,
20.2.70 NMAC--Operating Permits, and 20.2.99 NMAC--Conformity to the
State Implementation Plan of Transportation Plans, Programs and
Projects. Portions of the submittal related to Parts 3, 70, and 99 have
been or will be addressed in separate SIP revisions reviews and rule
actions, as necessary.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);

     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 10, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 26, 2013.
Samuel Coleman, P.E.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. Section 52.1620 is amended as follows:
0
a. The first table in paragraph (c) entitled ``EPA Approved New Mexico
Regulations'' is amended by revising the entry for part 72.
0
b. The second table in paragraph (e) entitled ``EPA Approved
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New
Mexico SIP'' is amended by adding to the end of the table a new entry
for ``Letter of commitment for the New Mexico SIP for Minor NSR Public
Notice.''
    The revision and addition read as follows:

Sec.  52.1620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                           EPA Approved New Mexico Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    State approval/
            State citation                    Title/subject          effective date       EPA approval date                      Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20--Environment Protection Chapter 2--Air Quality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Part 72...............................  Construction Permits.....           9/6/2006  3/11/2013 [Insert FR page  The SIP includes NMED's letter dated 11/
                                                                                number where document      7/2012, which commits the NMED Air
                                                                                begins].                   Quality Bureau to providing
                                                                                notification on the NMED's website of
                                                                                all second 30-day public comment
                                                                                periods provided for under paragraph B
                                                                                of <IP_ADDRESS>. NOT in SIP: the
                                                                                definitions of ``Accelerated review'',
                                                                                ``Affiliate'', ``Conflict of
                                                                                interest'', ``Interested party'' and
                                                                                ``Qualified outside firm'' in
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>; subsection (B)(15) of
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>; subsection (H) of
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>; <IP_ADDRESS>; <IP_ADDRESS>0-
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>9; and <IP_ADDRESS>2.
                                                                                References to 20.2.77, 20.2.78, and
                                                                                20.2.82 are approved for Part 72 only;
                                                                                underlying and related regulations for
                                                                                referred Parts NOT in SIP.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
* * * * *

                 EPA Approved Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the New Mexico SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Applicable
                                   geographic or     State submittal/
     Name of SIP provision         nonattainment      effective date   EPA approval date        Explanation
                                        area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Letter of commitment for the     Statewide (except          11/7/2012  3/11/2013 [Insert  Letter dated 11/7/2012
 New Mexico SIP for Minor NSR     Bernalillo                            FR page number     from NMED to EPA that
 Public Notice.                   County).                              where document     commits the NMED Air
                                                                        begins].           Quality Bureau to
                                                                                providing
                                                                                notification on the
                                                                                NMED's website of all
                                                                                second 30-day public
                                                                                comment periods
                                                                                provided for under
                                                                                paragraph B of
                                                                                <IP_ADDRESS>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-05484 Filed 3-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 22 (Friday, February 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1265-1266]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00722]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Survey of
Airmen Satisfaction With Aeromedical Certification Services

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The collection involves soliciting feedback from airmen on
service quality of Aeromedical Certification Services. The information
to be collected will be used to inform improvements in Aeromedical
Certification Services.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by April 2, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Barbara
Hall, Federal Aviation Administration, ASP-110, 10101 Hillwood Parkway,
Fort Worth, TX 76177.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Hall by email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0707.
    Title: Survey of Airmen Satisfaction with Aeromedical Certification
Services.
    Form Numbers: N/A.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), through the
Office of Aerospace Medicine (OAM), is responsible for the medical
certification of pilots and certain other personnel under 14 CFR 67 to
ensure they are medically qualified to operate aircraft and perform
their duties safely. In the accomplishment of this responsibility, OAM
provides a number of services to pilots, and has established goals for
the performance of those services. This is a biennial survey designed
to meet the requirement to survey stakeholder satisfaction under
Executive Order No. 12862, ``Setting Customer Service Standards,'' and
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA).
    The survey of airman satisfaction with Aeromedical Certification
Services assesses airman opinion of key dimensions of service quality.
These dimensions, identified by the OMB Statistical Policy Office in
the 1993 ``Resource Manual for Customer Surveys,'' are courtesy,
competence, reliability, and communication. The survey also provides
airmen with the

opportunity to provide feedback on the services and a medical
certificate application tool they use. This information is used to
inform improvements in Aeromedical Certification Services. The survey
was initially deployed in 2004, and deployed again in 2006, 2008, 2012,
2014, and 2016 (OMB Control No. 2120-0707). Across collections, minor
revisions have been made to the survey items and response options to
reflect changes in operational services and survey technology. In the
current collection, format changes have been made to accommodate
multiple administration modes (i.e., paper, desktop computer, and
mobile device), reduce the burden on the individual respondent, and
potentially improve the response rate.
    Respondents: Airmen.
    Frequency: Information is collected biennially.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 10-15 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 10-15 minutes per respondent, 1,226
total burden hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 28, 2019.
Barbara L. Hall,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy, and
Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2019-00722 Filed 1-31-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


entities that are business development companies that have a class of
securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act. We estimate
that there are approximately 28 business development companies that may
be considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \276\ 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
    \277\ 17 CFR 240.0-10(e).
    \278\ 17 CFR 242.601.
    \279\ 17 CFR 230.157.
    \280\ 17 CFR 240.0-10(a).
    \281\ 17 CFR 270.0-10(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements

    Under new Exchange Act Rule 10C-1, the exchanges will be directed
to prohibit the listing of an equity security of an issuer that is not
in compliance with Section 10C's compensation committee and
compensation adviser requirements. These requirements relate to:
     The independence of compensation committee members;
     The authority of the compensation committee to retain
compensation advisers;
     The compensation committee's responsibility to assess
factors that affect the independence of compensation advisers before
their selection by the compensation committee; and
     The compensation committee's responsibility for the
appointment, compensation, and oversight of the work of compensation
advisers retained by the compensation committee; and funding for
consultants and other advisers retained by the compensation committee.
    Rule 10C-1 will not impose any reporting or recordkeeping
obligations on the exchanges, or any issuers with equity securities
listed on an exchange. Furthermore, the rule does not require a listed
issuer to establish or maintain a compensation committee. As discussed
in more detail below, we have exempted smaller reporting companies from
the requirements of Rule 10C-1. We do not believe the new rule will
have a significant impact on small entities because the listing
requirements will apply only to issuers that have equity securities
listed on an exchange and that are not smaller reporting
companies.\282\ All of the exchanges generally impose a combination of
quantitative requirements such as market capitalization, minimum
revenue, and shareholder equity thresholds that an issuer must satisfy
in order to be listed on the exchange. Consequently, the substantial
majority of small entities are not listed on an exchange but are quoted
on the OTC Bulletin Board or the OTC Markets Group.\283\ Rule 10C-1
will not apply to the OTC Bulletin Board or the OTC Markets Group, and
therefore small entities whose securities are quoted on these
interdealer quotation systems would not need to comply with any listing
standards developed under the rule by the exchanges. Small entities
that are listed on an exchange and that are not smaller reporting
companies would generally need to comply with the standards adopted by
the exchange pursuant to Rule 10C-1 if they wish to have their equity
securities listed on the exchange. Small entities subject to these
listing standards may need to spend additional time and incur
additional costs to comply with these standards. Consistent with
Section 10C(f)(3), the final rule will allow the exchanges flexibility
to propose exemptions for small entities, subject to our review and
approval under the Exchange Act Section 19(b) rule filing process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \282\ Based on data obtained from the Thomson Financial's
Worldscope database, we estimate that as of December 31, 2010, there
were two exchange-listed small entities that would not qualify as a
smaller reporting company.
    \283\ Based on information retrieved from the Thomson
Financial's Worldscope database, we estimate that as of December 31,
2010, there were less than twelve issuers that had total assets of
$5 million or less listed on an exchange.
    In 2011, the Commission approved a proposal from NASDAQ OMX BX
to create a new listing market, the BX Venture Market, which allows
issuers meeting minimal quantitative requirements--including those
with fewer than $5 million in assets--to list on that exchange. A BX
Venture Market-listed company is required to meet qualitative
requirements that are, in many respects, similar to those required
for listing on Nasdaq or other exchanges, including a requirement to
have independent directors make decisions regarding the compensation
of executive officers. See Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX
BX, Inc.; Order Granting Approval of Proposed Rule Change and
Amendment No. 1 Thereto and Notice of Filing and Order Granting
Accelerated Approval to Amendment No. 2 Thereto to Create a Listing
Market on the Exchange, Release No. 34-64437 (May 6, 2011) [76 FR
27710]. We understand that this new market has not yet listed any
issuers or become operational. Small entities eligible to list on
this market that are not smaller reporting companies would be
subject to the listing standards required by Rule 10C-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments to Item 407(e)(3) of Regulation S-K will impose some
reporting and recordkeeping obligations on small entities. Under the
amendments, an issuer will be required to disclose whether the work of
any compensation consultant that has played a role in determining or
recommending the amount or form of executive and director compensation
has raised any conflict of interest and, if so, the nature of the
conflict and how the conflict is being addressed. This disclosure
requirement will apply equally to both large and small issuers. One
commentator has noted that many small entities do not use the services
of a compensation consultant,\284\ which should significantly minimize
the impact of the reporting and recordkeeping requirements under the
amendments on small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \284\ See letter from ABA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Agency Action to Minimize Effect on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act directs us to consider alternatives
that would accomplish our stated objectives, while minimizing any
significant adverse impact on small entities. In connection with the
proposals, we considered the following alternatives:
     Establishing different compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into account the resources
available to small entities;
     Clarifying, consolidating or simplifying compliance and
reporting requirements under the rules for small entities;
     Using performance rather than design standards; and
     Exempting small entities from all or part of the
requirements.
    In connection with Exchange Act Rule 10C-1, we considered, but did
not establish, different compliance requirements, or an exemption, for
small entities. As noted above, very few small entities list their
securities on an exchange. The substantial majority of small entities
with publicly held equity

securities are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board and the OTC Markets
Group. As these interdealer quotation systems are not affected by Rule
10C-1, the substantial majority of small entities will not be affected
by the requirements under the rule.
    In addition, we are providing an exemption from the requirements in
Rule 10C-1 for smaller reporting companies. We estimate that as of
December 31, 2010, the most recent data available, most of the small
entities that were listed on an exchange would qualify as a smaller
reporting company.\285\ Smaller reporting companies that are listed on
an exchange are already subject to listing standards requiring
directors on compensation committees or directors determining or
recommending executive compensation matters to be ``independent'' under
the exchanges' general independence standards. Accordingly, we do not
believe that the additional burdens of complying with Rule 10C-1 are
warranted for smaller reporting companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \285\ Based on data obtained from the Thomson Financial's
Worldscope database, we estimate that as of December 31, 2010, there
were two exchange-listed small entities that would not qualify as a
smaller reporting company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, under Rule 10C-1, the exchanges will be expressly
authorized to exempt particular categories of issuers from the
requirements of Section 10C and particular relationships from the
compensation committee membership requirements of Section 10C(a),
taking into account the potential impact of the requirements on smaller
reporting issuers. Because of the close relationship and frequent
interaction between the exchanges and their listed issuers, we believe
the exchanges will be in the best position to determine additional
types of issuers, including any small entities that are not smaller
reporting companies, that should be exempted from the listing
requirements under the rule.
    In connection with the amendments to Regulation S-K, we considered
alternatives, including establishing different compliance or reporting
requirements that take into account the resources available to small
entities, clarifying or simplifying compliance and reporting
requirements under the amendments for small entities, using performance
rather than design standards, and exempting small entities from all or
part of the amendments. We considered, but did not establish, different
compliance requirements, or an exemption, for small entities. Although
we believe it is appropriate to exempt smaller reporting companies from
Rule 10C-1 because we do not believe that the additional burdens of
complying with Rule 10C-1 are warranted for smaller reporting
companies, we are unable to reach the same conclusion with respect to
the disclosure requirements of amended Item 407(e)(3).
    In our view, mandating uniform and comparable disclosures for all
issuers subject to our proxy rules is consistent with the statute and
will promote investor protection. We believe that investors have an
interest in, and would benefit from disclosure regarding, conflicts of
interest involving compensation consultants, to the extent that they
are used by small entities. Several commentators opposed providing an
exemption to small issuers and noted that the required disclosure would
provide investors with additional information that would allow them to
make better informed investment and voting decisions.\286\ Different
compliance requirements or an exemption from the amendments to
Regulation S-K for small entities would interfere with achieving the
goal of enhancing the information provided to all investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \286\ See, e.g., letters from CalPERS, FLSBA and RailPen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments to Regulation S-K clarify, consolidate and simplify
the compliance and reporting requirements for all entities, including
small entities. Under the amendments, disclosure will only be required
if a compensation consultant plays a role in determining or
recommending the form or amount of executive and director compensation
and the compensation consultant's work raises a conflict of interest.
Although we believe the disclosure requirements are clear and
straightforward, we have attempted to further clarify, consolidate and
simplify the compliance and reporting requirements, by including an
instruction to the amendments to provide guidance to issuers as to when
a conflict of interest may be present that would require disclosure.
    Final Rule 10C-1 uses a mix of performance and design standards. We
are not specifying the procedures or arrangements an issuer or
compensation committee must develop to comply with the listing
standards required by Rule 10C-1, but compensation committees will be
required to consider the factors specified in Rule 10C-1(b)(4) when
conducting the required independence assessments. The amendments to
Regulation S-K employ design standards rather than performance
standards, as Section 10C(c)(2) mandates the specific disclosures that
must be provided. Moreover, based on our past experience, we believe
specific disclosure requirements will promote consistent and comparable
disclosure among all companies, and the amendments are intended to
result in more comprehensive and clear disclosure.

VI. Statutory Authority and Text of the Amendments

    The amendments contained in this release are being adopted under
the authority set forth in Sections 6, 7, 10, and 19(a) of the
Securities Act and Sections 3(b), 10C, 12, 14, 23(a) and 36 of the
Exchange Act.

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 229 and 240

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

Text of the Amendments

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Commission amends
title 17, chapter II, of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 229--STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING FORMS UNDER SECURITIES
ACT OF 1933, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND ENERGY POLICY AND
CONSERVATION ACT OF 1975--REGULATION S-K

0
1. The general authority citation for part 229 is revised and the
sectional authorities are removed to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 77e, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77k, 77s, 77z-2,
77z-3, 77aa(25), 77aa(26), 77ddd, 77eee, 77ggg, 77hhh, 77iii, 77jjj,
77nnn, 77sss, 78c, 78i, 78j, 78j-3, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78n-1, 78o, 78u-
5, 78w, 78ll, 78mm, 80a-8, 80a-9, 80a-20, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-31(c),
80a-37, 80a-38(a), 80a-39, 80b-11, and 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C.
1350, unless otherwise noted.

0
2. Section 229.407 is amended by adding paragraph (e)(3)(iv) and an
instruction to paragraph (e)(3)(iv) to read as follows:

Sec.  229.407  (Item 407) Corporate governance.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) With regard to any compensation consultant identified in
response to Item 407(e)(3)(iii) whose work has raised any conflict of
interest, disclose the nature of the conflict and how the conflict is
being addressed.
    Instruction to Item 407(e)(3)(iv).
    For purposes of this paragraph (e)(3)(iv), the factors listed in
Sec.  240.10C-1(b)(4)(i) through (vi) of this chapter are

among the factors that should be considered in determining whether a
conflict of interest exists.
* * * * *

PART 240--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934

0
3. The general authority citation for Part 240 is revised to read as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77c, 77d, 77g, 77j, 77s, 77z-2, 77z-3,
77eee, 77ggg, 77nnn, 77sss, 77ttt, 78c, 78d, 78e, 78f, 78g, 78i,
78j, 78j-1, 78j-3, 78k, 78k-1, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78n-1, 78o, 78o-4,
78p, 78q, 78s, 78u-5, 78w, 78x, 78ll, 78mm, 80a-20, 80a-23, 80a-29,
80a-37, 80b-3, 80b-4, 80b-11, and 7201 et seq.; and 18 U.S.C. 1350,
and 12 U.S.C. 5221(e)(3), unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *

0
4. Add an undesignated center heading following Sec.  240.10A-3 to read
as follows:

Requirements Under Section 10C

0
5. Add Sec.  240.10C-1 immediately following the new undesignated
center heading to read as follows:

Sec.  240.10C-1  Listing standards relating to compensation committees.

    (a) Pursuant to section 10C(a) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78j-3(a)) and
section 952 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1900):
    (1) National securities exchanges. The rules of each national
securities exchange registered pursuant to section 6 of the Act (15
U.S.C. 78f), to the extent such national securities exchange lists
equity securities, must, in accordance with the provisions of this
section, prohibit the initial or continued listing of any equity
security of an issuer that is not in compliance with the requirements
of any portion of paragraph (b) or (c) of this section.
    (2) National securities associations. The rules of each national
securities association registered pursuant to section 15A of the Act
(15 U.S.C. 78o-3), to the extent such national securities association
lists equity securities in an automated inter-dealer quotation system,
must, in accordance with the provisions of this section, prohibit the
initial or continued listing in an automated inter-dealer quotation
system of any equity security of an issuer that is not in compliance
with the requirements of any portion of paragraph (b) or (c) of this
section.
    (3) Opportunity to cure defects. The rules required by paragraphs
(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section must provide for appropriate
procedures for a listed issuer to have a reasonable opportunity to cure
any defects that would be the basis for a prohibition under paragraph
(a) of this section, before the imposition of such prohibition. Such
rules may provide that if a member of a compensation committee ceases
to be independent in accordance with the requirements of this section
for reasons outside the member's reasonable control, that person, with
notice by the issuer to the applicable national securities exchange or
national securities association, may remain a compensation committee
member of the listed issuer until the earlier of the next annual
shareholders meeting of the listed issuer or one year from the
occurrence of the event that caused the member to be no longer
independent.
    (4) Implementation. (i) Each national securities exchange and
national securities association that lists equity securities must
provide to the Commission, no later than 90 days after publication of
this section in the Federal Register, proposed rules or rule amendments
that comply with this section. Each submission must include, in
addition to any other information required under section 19(b) of the
Act (15 U.S.C. 78s(b)) and the rules thereunder, a review of whether
and how existing or proposed listing standards satisfy the requirements
of this rule, a discussion of the consideration of factors relevant to
compensation committee independence conducted by the national
securities exchange or national securities association, and the
definition of independence applicable to compensation committee members
that the national securities exchange or national securities
association proposes to adopt or retain in light of such review.
    (ii) Each national securities exchange and national securities
association that lists equity securities must have rules or rule
amendments that comply with this section approved by the Commission no
later than one year after publication of this section in the Federal
Register.
    (b) Required standards. The requirements of this section apply to
the compensation committees of listed issuers.
    (1) Independence. (i) Each member of the compensation committee
must be a member of the board of directors of the listed issuer, and
must otherwise be independent.
    (ii) Independence requirements. In determining independence
requirements for members of compensation committees, the national
securities exchanges and national securities associations shall
consider relevant factors, including, but not limited to:
    (A) The source of compensation of a member of the board of
directors of an issuer, including any consulting, advisory or other
compensatory fee paid by the issuer to such member of the board of
directors; and
    (B) Whether a member of the board of directors of an issuer is
affiliated with the issuer, a subsidiary of the issuer or an affiliate
of a subsidiary of the issuer.
    (iii) Exemptions from the independence requirements. (A) The
listing of equity securities of the following categories of listed
issuers is not subject to the requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this
section:
    (1) Limited partnerships;
    (2) Companies in bankruptcy proceedings;
    (3) Open-end management investment companies registered under the
Investment Company Act of 1940; and
    (4) Any foreign private issuer that discloses in its annual report
the reasons that the foreign private issuer does not have an
independent compensation committee.
    (B) In addition to the issuer exemptions set forth in paragraph
(b)(1)(iii)(A) of this section, a national securities exchange or a
national securities association, pursuant to section 19(b) of the Act
(15 U.S.C. 78s(b)) and the rules thereunder, may exempt from the
requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this section a particular
relationship with respect to members of the compensation committee, as
each national securities exchange or national securities association
determines is appropriate, taking into consideration the size of an
issuer and any other relevant factors.
    (2) Authority to retain compensation consultants, independent legal
counsel and other compensation advisers. (i) The compensation committee
of a listed issuer, in its capacity as a committee of the board of
directors, may, in its sole discretion, retain or obtain the advice of
a compensation consultant, independent legal counsel or other adviser.
    (ii) The compensation committee shall be directly responsible for
the appointment, compensation and oversight of the work of any
compensation consultant, independent legal counsel and other adviser
retained by the compensation committee.
    (iii) Nothing in this paragraph (b)(2) shall be construed:
    (A) To require the compensation committee to implement or act
consistently with the advice or recommendations of the compensation
consultant, independent legal counsel

or other adviser to the compensation committee; or
    (B) To affect the ability or obligation of a compensation committee
to exercise its own judgment in fulfillment of the duties of the
compensation committee.
    (3) Funding. Each listed issuer must provide for appropriate
funding, as determined by the compensation committee, in its capacity
as a committee of the board of directors, for payment of reasonable
compensation to a compensation consultant, independent legal counsel or
any other adviser retained by the compensation committee.
    (4) Independence of compensation consultants and other advisers.
The compensation committee of a listed issuer may select a compensation
consultant, legal counsel or other adviser to the compensation
committee only after taking into consideration the following factors,
as well as any other factors identified by the relevant national
securities exchange or national securities association in its listing
standards:
    (i) The provision of other services to the issuer by the person
that employs the compensation consultant, legal counsel or other
adviser;
    (ii) The amount of fees received from the issuer by the person that
employs the compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser, as
a percentage of the total revenue of the person that employs the
compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser;
    (iii) The policies and procedures of the person that employs the
compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser that are
designed to prevent conflicts of interest;
    (iv) Any business or personal relationship of the compensation
consultant, legal counsel or other adviser with a member of the
compensation committee;
    (v) Any stock of the issuer owned by the compensation consultant,
legal counsel or other adviser; and
    (vi) Any business or personal relationship of the compensation
consultant, legal counsel, other adviser or the person employing the
adviser with an executive officer of the issuer.
    Instruction to paragraph (b)(4) of this section: A listed issuer's
compensation committee is required to conduct the independence
assessment outlined in paragraph (b)(4) of this section with respect to
any compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser that
provides advice to the compensation committee, other than in-house
legal counsel.
    (5) General exemptions. (i) The national securities exchanges and
national securities associations, pursuant to section 19(b) of the Act
(15 U.S.C. 78s(b)) and the rules thereunder, may exempt from the
requirements of this section certain categories of issuers, as the
national securities exchange or national securities association
determines is appropriate, taking into consideration, among other
relevant factors, the potential impact of such requirements on smaller
reporting issuers.
    (ii) The requirements of this section shall not apply to any
controlled company or to any smaller reporting company.
    (iii) The listing of a security futures product cleared by a
clearing agency that is registered pursuant to section 17A of the Act
(15 U.S.C. 78q-1) or that is exempt from the registration requirements
of section 17A(b)(7)(A) (15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(7)(A)) is not subject to
the requirements of this section.
    (iv) The listing of a standardized option, as defined in Sec.
240.9b-1(a)(4), issued by a clearing agency that is registered pursuant
to section 17A of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78q-1) is not subject to the
requirements of this section.
    (c) Definitions. Unless the context otherwise requires, all terms
used in this section have the same meaning as in the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder. In addition, unless the context otherwise
requires, the following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
    (1) In the case of foreign private issuers with a two-tier board
system, the term board of directors means the supervisory or non-
management board.
    (2) The term compensation committee means:
    (i) A committee of the board of directors that is designated as the
compensation committee; or
    (ii) In the absence of a committee of the board of directors that
is designated as the compensation committee, a committee of the board
of directors performing functions typically performed by a compensation
committee, including oversight of executive compensation, even if it is
not designated as the compensation committee or also performs other
functions; or
    (iii) For purposes of this section other than paragraphs (b)(2)(i)
and (b)(3), in the absence of a committee as described in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section, the members of the board of
directors who oversee executive compensation matters on behalf of the
board of directors.
    (3) The term controlled company means an issuer:
    (i) That is listed on a national securities exchange or by a
national securities association; and
    (ii) Of which more than 50 percent of the voting power for the
election of directors is held by an individual, a group or another
company.
    (4) The terms listed and listing refer to equity securities listed
on a national securities exchange or listed in an automated inter-
dealer quotation system of a national securities association or to
issuers of such securities.
    (5) The term open-end management investment company means an open-
end company, as defined by Section 5(a)(1) of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-5(a)(1)), that is registered under that Act.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: June 20, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-15408 Filed 6-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29323-29324]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11116]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Submission Deadline for Schedule Information for Chicago O'Hare
International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, Los
Angeles International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport,
and San Francisco International Airport for the Winter 2016 Scheduling
Season

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation.

ACTION: Notice, Schedule submission deadline.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA announces the submission deadline of May 19, 2016, for
winter 2016 flight schedules at Chicago O'Hare International Airport
(ORD), John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX), Newark Liberty International Airport
(EWR), and San Francisco International Airport (SFO) in accordance with
the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Worldwide Slot
Guidelines (WSG) and FAA airport level designations. The deadline
coincides with the schedule submission deadline for the IATA Slot
Conference for the winter 2016 scheduling season.

DATES: Schedules must be submitted no later than May 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Schedules may be submitted by mail to the Slot
Administration Office, AGC-200, Office of the Chief Counsel, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Pfingstler, System Operations
Services, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration,
600 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone number:
202-267-6462; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has designated EWR, LAX, ORD, and
SFO as IATA Level 2, schedule facilitated airports.\1\ JFK is
designated as an IATA Level 3, slot controlled airport.\2\ At the Level
2 airports, proposed schedules are reviewed by the FAA to address
significant, potential congestion before schedules are final. A runway
slot is required from the FAA at JFK, a Level 3 airport, before a
carrier operates during the slot controlled hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The FAA's designation of EWR as Level 2 takes effect on
October 30, 2016. 81 FR 19861 (Apr. 6, 2016). Through the Summer
2016 scheduling season, the FAA has designated EWR as Level 3 by
Order, Operating Limitations at Newark Liberty International
Airport, 73 FR 29550 (May 21, 2008) as amended 79 FR 16857 (March
26, 2014).
    \2\ The FAA limits flights at JFK during peak hours by Order,
Operating Limitations at John F. Kennedy International Airport, 73
FR 3510 (Jan. 18, 2008) as amended. The FAA intends to extend the
effective date of the Order to October 27, 2018. The extension will
be published in a separate notice in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is primarily concerned about scheduled and other regularly
conducted commercial operations during peak hours, but carriers may
submit schedule plans for the entire day. At ORD, the peak hours are
0700 to 2100 Central Time (1300 to 0300 UTC), at LAX and SFO from 0600
to 2300 Pacific Time (1400 to 0700 UTC), and at EWR and JFK from 0600
to 2300 Eastern Time (1100 to 0400 UTC). The FAA prefers schedule
messages with the format and data elements in IATA Standard Schedules
Information Manual (SSIM), Chapter 6, as recommended in the WSG. The
FAA will also accept other mutually agreed schedule information
formats; however, carriers should submit schedule information in
sufficient detail including, at minimum, the operating carrier, flight
number, scheduled time of operation, frequency, and effective dates.
    The winter scheduling season is from October 30, 2016, through
March 25, 2017, consistent with the IATA northern winter season. The
FAA understands there may be differences in schedule times due to U.S.
daylight saving time dates and will accommodate these differences to
the extent possible.
    Carriers operating at JFK or LAX should consider the potential
impacts of runway construction projects as they develop schedules,
block times and other factors. The FAA has been working with the
airport operators, airlines, and other stakeholders to develop plans to
utilize available capacity and mitigate delays during construction.
    JFK will have construction in 2017 on Runway 4R/22L. The Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), the airport operator, is
currently considering the scope and staging plans for rehabilitation of
the runway and expects to soon finalize plans. Depending on the final
construction schedule, the runway may be closed beginning approximately
February 27. The closure and other construction impacts could affect
operations during the last few weeks of the winter 2016 scheduling
season and into the summer 2017 and winter 2017 scheduling seasons.
    LAX will undergo construction on Runway 7L/25R for runway safety
areas and rehabilitation beginning in October 2016. Los Angeles World
Airports (LAWA), the airport operator, expects to shorten the runway in
October for approximately 3.5 months followed by a four month closure
from January to May 2017.
    On April 6, the FAA announced in the Federal Register (81 FR 19861)
that the EWR airport level designation will change from Level 3 to
Level 2 effective with the winter 2016 scheduling season. Although
there is available runway capacity throughout the day, the FAA strongly
encourages carriers to propose reasonable schedules, recognizing there
is limited runway and airport capacity available for new flights or
existing flights retimed to certain hours. Carriers will be asked to
consider alternative schedule times if proposed demand exceeds
capacity, which is likely to occur during the busiest early morning,
late afternoon, and evening hours.
    The PANYNJ is considering the process for reviewing EWR gate and
terminal availability. This is in addition to its previously
established review under the IATA WSG process for Terminal B
international passenger flights. The FAA expects to work with the
PANYNJ as it considers gate and terminal availability and how that
might impact the FAA's review of schedules for runway availability.
Carriers should submit information directly to the PANYNJ for airport
terminal or gate issues.
    The FAA reviewed the historical airport runway capacity levels over
several years of operations including hourly data for each weekday.
This analysis considered the actual air traffic control (ATC)
established arrival and departure rates, the number of actual
operations in an hour if it exceeded the projected ATC rate for that
particular hour, runway configurations, weather, aircraft fleet mix,
and other operating conditions. For the winter months, the data show
the average hourly runway adjusted capacity for the previous similar
winter seasons is approximately 79 total operations. The limit FAA
established in the EWR Order in 2007, which was derived using peak
summer

data, was intended to prevent delays from getting worse than 2007
levels. Although the adjusted capacity for winter 2016 is below the
previously established limit it is reflective of recent operational
data in the similar previous season and would allow the FAA to approve
additional operations over the number operated in winter 2015.
    The FAA will use the following EWR capacities for scheduled flights
during the winter 2016 season, reflecting average airport runway
statistics during the recent winter scheduling seasons.\3\ The limits
for purposes of Level 2 review are 79 scheduled operations per hour, 43
in a half-hour, 79 in consecutive half-hours, and 231 in rolling three-
hour periods. The FAA believes that a transition from Level 3 to Level
2 should consider the need for air traffic control facilities and the
airport terminal and gate infrastructure to adapt to the expected
increase in operations. The three hour limitation will allow a higher
number of flights in some hours while also allowing for system
recovery. In reviewing proposed schedules, the FAA will also consider
the distribution of scheduled arrivals and departures within a half-
hour or hour and whether there is significant peaking due to the
distribution of flights within the period. The FAA may seek adjustments
to proposed schedules to address congestion issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Unscheduled flights are not included in the FAA Level 2
schedule review process or hourly scheduling limits. Unscheduled
flights include general aviation, business aviation, military,
public aircraft, ferry and positioning flights, and ad hoc charter
operations. Regularly conducted commercial services, including
public charters, are considered scheduled operations for the
purposes of FAA's Level 2 review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As it has in prior scheduling seasons, the FAA will use the average
hourly runway capacities at LAX, ORD, and SFO. The FAA may include
particular emphasis or review for time periods with current or
projected operational impacts and discuss the reasons for any proposed
schedule adjustments directly with affected carriers. LAX capacity
estimates for the runway construction phases in later 2016 and 2017
have been presented to carriers during LAX construction meetings. These
rates have not been finalized and will be reviewed with carriers on a
local level during upcoming meetings.
    The FAA intends to deny approval for carrier schedules that exceed
capacity with limited exceptions. These exceptions may include flights
operated only a relatively short time period in the prior season, ad
hoc or limited term cargo flights such as those operated in past years
prior to the Christmas holidays, and flights to meet high demand such
as Thanksgiving, Christmas, or similar periods. The FAA will primarily
review schedules for runway capacity on a half-hourly basis, allowing
flexibility for carrier schedules within those windows without the need
for additional FAA schedule review.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 6, 2016.
Daniel E. Smiley,
Vice President, System Operations Services.
[FR Doc. 2016-11116 Filed 5-10-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48889-48891]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22841]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0406]

Commercial Driver's License Standards: Application for Exemption;
C.R. England

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant of application for
exemption.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to re-affirm renewal of an
exemption granted to C.R. England from the regulation that requires a
commercial learner's permit (CLP) holder to be accompanied by a
commercial driver's license (CDL) holder with the proper CDL class and
endorsements, seated in the front seat of the vehicle while the CLP
holder performs behind-the-wheel training on public roads or highways.
Under this exemption, a CLP holder who has documentation of passing the
CDL skills test may drive a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) for C.R.
England without being accompanied by a CDL holder in the front seat of
the vehicle. The exemption enables CLP holders to drive as part of a
team like other C.R. England team drivers. FMCSA has analyzed the
public comments in response to the exemption renewal and has determined
that the renewed exemption, subject to the terms and conditions
imposed, will likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption.

DATES: The exemption is effective from June 13, 2017, through June 12,
2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Thomas Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver
and Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. FMCSA
must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal Register
(49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an opportunity
to inspect the information relevant to the application, including any
safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must also provide
an opportunity for public comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments, and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reason for the grant or denial, and, if granted,
the specific person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and
the regulatory provision or provisions from which exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the effective period of the exemption (up
to 5 years), and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).

Request for Exemption Renewal

    C.R. England's initial exemption application from the provisions of
49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) was submitted in 2014; a copy is in the docket
identified at the beginning of this notice. The 2014 application
described fully the nature of the C.R. England operations and CMV
drivers. The exemption was granted on June 11, 2015 (80 FR 33329) and
renewed for 5 years on June 12, 2017 (82 FR 26975).
    The exemption excuses C.R. England from the requirement that a
driver accompanying a CLP holder must be physically present at all
times in the front seat of a CMV, on the condition that the CLP holder
has successfully passed an approved CDL skills test. C.R. England's
2014 application argued that the existing requirement is inefficient
and unproductive, as the company must incur added expense to send the
driver to his or her home State to collect a CDL document. C.R. England
believed that FMCSA should renew the exemption for an additional 5-year
period because it results in safer drivers. It allows C.R. England to
foster a more productive and efficient training environment by allowing
CLP holders to hone their recently acquired driving skills through on-
the-job training and to begin earning an income right away, producing
immediate benefits for the driver, the carrier, and the economy as a
whole.

Public Comments

    In response to the notice renewing the exemption, the Agency
received six docket comments from truck drivers, driver-trainers, and
other individuals, all opposing that decision. These respondents do not
believe that it is safe for a CLP holder to operate a CMV without the
supervision of a CDL driver-trainer in the front seat of the vehicle.

FMCSA Response and Decision

    The premise of respondents opposing the exemption is that CLP
holders lack experience and are safer drivers when observed by a CDL
driver-trainer who is on duty and in the front seat of the vehicle. The
fact is that CLP holders who have passed the CDL skills test are
qualified and eligible to obtain a CDL. If these CLP holders had
obtained their CLPs and training in their State of domicile, they could
immediately receive their CDL at the State driver licensing agency and
begin driving a CMV without any on-board supervision. There is no
evidence that having a CDL holder accompany a CLP holder who has passed
the skills test improves safety. Because these drivers have passed the
CDL skills test, the only thing necessary to obtain the CDL is to visit
the Department of Motor Vehicles in their State of domicile.
    C.R. England's overall safety performance is reflected in its
``satisfactory'' safety rating. The exemption is restricted to C.R.
England's CLP holders who have documentation that they have passed the
CDL skills test. The exemption will enable these drivers to operate a
CMV as a team driver without requiring the accompanying CDL holder be
on duty and in the front seat while the vehicle is moving. FMCSA
therefore reaffirms its decision to renew the exemption because it will
likely enable C.R. England drivers to achieve a level of safety
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved without
the exemption (49 CFR 381.305(a)).

Terms and Conditions of the Exemption

Period of the Exemption

    This exemption from the requirements of 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) is
effective during the period from June 13, 2017 through June 12, 2022.

Extent of the Exemption

    The exemption is contingent upon C.R. England maintaining USDOT
registration, minimum levels of public liability insurance, and not
being subject to any ``imminent hazard'' or other out-of- service (OOS)
order issued by FMCSA. Each driver covered by the exemption must
maintain a valid driver's license and CLP with the required
endorsements, not be subject to any OOS order or suspension of driving
privileges, and meet all physical qualifications required by 49 CFR
part 391.

Preemption

    During the period this exemption is in effect, no State may enforce
any law or regulation that conflicts with or is inconsistent with the
exemption with respect to a person or entity operating under the
exemption (49 U.S.C. 31315(d)).

FMCSA Accident Notification

    C.R. England must notify FMCSA within 5 business days of any
accidents (as defined by 49 CFR 390.5) involving the operation of any
of its CMVs while utilizing this exemption. The notification must be by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and include the following information:
    a. Exemption Identifier: ``C.R. England''
    b. Date of the accident,
    c. City or town, and State, in which the accident occurred, or
which is closest to the scene of the accident,
    d. Driver's name and driver's license number,
    e. Vehicle number and State license number,
    f. Number of individuals suffering physical injury,
    g. Number of fatalities,
    h. The police-reported cause of the accident,
    i. Whether the driver was cited for violation of any traffic laws,
or motor carrier safety regulations, and
    j. The total driving time and the total on-duty time of the CMV
driver at the time of the accident.

Termination

    The FMCSA does not believe the CLP-holders covered by the exemption
will experience any deterioration of their safety record. However,
should this

occur, FMCSA will take all steps necessary to protect the public
interest, including revocation of the exemption. The FMCSA will
immediately revoke the exemption for failure to comply with its terms
and conditions.

    Issued on: September 29, 2017.
Daphne Y. Jefferson,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-22841 Filed 10-19-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 22 (Monday, February 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6246-6247]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02138]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71422; File No. SR-OCC-2013-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Options Clearing Corporation;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Make a Non-Material
Housekeeping Rule Change So That OCC's Membership Qualifications
Accurately Reflect Current Operational Practices

January 28, 2014.

I. Introduction

    On December 6, 2013, the Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
proposed rule change SR-OCC-2013-22 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on December 23, 2013.\3\ 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71090 (Dec. 17, 2013),
78 FR 77525 (Dec. 23, 2013) (SR-FOCC-2013-22).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The rule change modifies OCC's membership standards to reflect
current operational practices. Prior to electronic trading, clearing
members were required to have the operational capacity to manually
compare trades and reconcile unconfirmed and advisory trades, in
accordance with applicable exchange rules and procedures, on a timely
and efficient basis so that financial markets, and specifically
clearing operations, functioned in a prompt and accurate manner.
Accordingly, Article V, Section 1, Interpretations and Policies .02(b)
of OCC's By-Laws required clearing member applicants to have such
operational capacity as a condition to admission as a clearing member.
However, OCC only receives matched trades from exchanges so manual
trade comparison and reconciliation by clearing members no longer
occurs.

III. Discussion

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act \4\ directs the Commission to
approve a self-regulatory organization's proposed rule change if the
Commission 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 \5\
requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency
registered with the Commission foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of securities
transactions and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
national system for the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\6\ The Commission believes that
these clarifications will foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of securities
transactions and remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
national system for the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions by ensuring that OCC's By-Laws and membership
standards reference only necessary requirements for operational
capacity and current applicable industry standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(B) and (F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act, particularly
the requirements of Section 17A of the Act,\7\ and the rules and
regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-OCC-2013-22) be and
hereby is approved.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \9\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

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

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-02138 Filed 1-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 198 (Thursday, October 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70738-70739]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24678]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2016-0045]

Petition for Special Approval of Alternate Standard

    In accordance with part 238 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this provides the public notice that by a document dated
February 18, 2015, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a Special
Approval of an alternate standard for 49 CFR 238.311(a), Single car
test, as prescribed in 49 CFR 238.21(b), Special approval procedure.
FRA assigned the request Docket Number FRA-2016-0045.

    Amtrak requests consideration for Special Approval of the submitted
alternate standard identified as ``Brakes Single Car Test LXFB-10-
0008'' for single car testing of auto carrier cars used on its Auto
Train service between Lorton, VA, and Sanford, FL. Amtrak states that
its Auto Train has a freight brake system. Amtrak, however, runs brake
pipe pressure at 110 pounds per square inch (psi) and not 90 psi like
the freight railroads. Under FRA's rules, these cars would need to have
a single car test per 49 CFR 232.305 following the procedure of
Association of American Railroads' (AAR) Standard S-486-04. The 49 CFR
238.311 referenced procedure of American Public Transportation
Association Standard SS-M-005-98 does not apply. The proposed alternate
standard, while still based on AAR S-486-04, incorporates modifications
to the single car test device and procedures to allow for the higher
110 psi brake pressure.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by November 14, 2016 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its processes. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the privacy
notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 2016.
Karl Alexy,
Director, Office of Safety Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2016-24678 Filed 10-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P