[Federal Register: March 12, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 49)]
[Notices]
[Page 13222-13224]
[DOCID:fr12mr08-74]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0015; FRL-8541-7]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund Program; EPA ICR
No. 1391.08, OMB Control No. 2040-0118

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on June 30, 2008. Before submitting the ICR to OMB
for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 12, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2004-0015 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund Program
(renewal), Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 4204M, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund
Program (renewal), Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Wastewater Management, Municipal Support Division, 1201 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2004-
0015. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment.

Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

ADDRESSES: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments to
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0015 at http://www.regulations.gov, by e-
mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and by mail: Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 4204M, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clifford Yee, Office of Wastewater
Management, Mail Code 4204M, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-
564-0598; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0015 which is available for online viewing at http:/
/www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Water Docket in the
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from
8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft
collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What Information is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does this Apply to?

[Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0015]

    Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
State and local governments; local communities and tribes.
    Title: Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund Program (renewal)
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 1391.08, OMB Control No. 2040-0118.
    ICR Status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on June 30,
2008. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The Clean Water Act, as amended by ``The Water Quality
Act of 1987'' (U.S.C. 1381-1387 et. seq.), created a Title VI which
authorizes grants to States for the establishment of State Water
Pollution Control Revolving Funds (SRFs). The information collection
activities will occur primarily at the program level through the State
``Intended Use Plan'' and ``Annual Report''. The information is needed
annually to implement section 606 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
    The 1987 Act declares that water pollution control revolving funds
shall be administered by an instrumentality of the State subject to the
requirements of the act. This means that each State has a general
responsibility for administering its revolving fund and must take on
certain specific responsibilities in carrying out its administrative
duties. The information collection activities will occur primarily at
the program level through the State Intended Use Plan and Annual
Report. The information is needed annually to implement section 606 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA). The Act requires the information to ensure
national accountability, adequate public comment and review, fiscal
integrity and consistent management directed to achieve environmental
benefits and results. The individual information collections are:
    (1) Capitalization Grant Application and Agreement/State Intended
Use Plan, (2) State Annual Report, (3) State Annual Audit, and (4)
Application for SRF Financial Assistance.
    (1) Capitalization Grant Application and Agreement/State Intended
Use Plan: The State will prepare a Capitalization Grant application
that includes an Intended Use Plan (IUP) outlining in detail how it
will use all the funds available to the fund. The grant agreement
contains or incorporates by reference the IUP, application materials,
payment schedule, and required assurances. The bulk of the information
is provided in the IUP, the legal agreement which commits the State and
EPA to execute their responsibilities under the Act.
    (2) State Annual Report: The State must agree to complete and
submit a State Annual Report that indicates how the State has met the
goals and

objectives of the previous fiscal year as stated in the IUP and grant
agreement. The report provides information on loan recipients, loan
amounts, loan terms, project categories, and similar data on other
forms of assistance. The report describes the extent to which the
existing SRF financial operating policies, alone or in combination with
other State financial assistance programs, will provide for the long
term fiscal health of the Fund and carry out other provisions specified
in the grant operating agreement.
    (3) State Annual Audit: Most States have agreed to conduct or have
conducted a separate financial audit of the Capitalization Grant which
will provide opinions on the financial statements, and a report on the
internal controls and compliance with program requirements. The
remaining States will be covered by audits conducted under the
requirements of the Single Audit Act and by EPA's Office of Inspector
General.
    (4) Application for SRF Financial Assistance: Local communities and
other eligible entities have to prepare and submit applications for SRF
assistance to their respective State Agency which manages the SRF
program. The State reviews the completed loan applications, and
verifies that the proposed projects will comply with applicable Federal
and State requirements.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average
108.73 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a
detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate, which is only briefly
summarized here:
    Estimated Total Number of Potential Respondents: 3,825.
    Frequency of Response: Annually.
    Estimated Total Average Number of Responses for Each Respondent:
1.0.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 415,905.
    Estimated Total Annual Costs: $11,118,000.

Are There Changes in the Estimates from the Last Approval?

    There is an increase of 76,500 hours in the total estimated
respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase reflects EPA's acceptance of additional
loan applicants for the State SRF loan program. The increase in burden
hours is the time needed to process and report on these loans on an
annual basis.

What is the Next Step in the Process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: March 5, 2008.
Judy Davis,
Acting Director, Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Management.
 [FR Doc. E8-4997 Filed 3-11-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 28, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12710-12713]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04033]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96966; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2023-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify the Fees the Exchange Charges Companies Seeking Review of a
Delisting Determination, Public Reprimand Letter, or Written Denial of
an Initial Listing Application

February 22, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 10, 2023, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify the fees the Exchange charges
companies seeking review of a delisting determination, public reprimand
letter, or written denial of an initial listing application.
* * * * *

The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC Rules

* * * * *

5815. Review of Staff Determinations by Hearings Panel

    When a Company receives a Staff Delisting Determination or a Public
Reprimand Letter issued by the Listing Qualifications Department, or
when its application for initial listing is denied, it may request in
writing that the Hearings Panel review the matter in a written or an
oral hearing. This section sets forth the procedures for requesting a
hearing before a Hearings Panel, describes the Hearings Panel and the
possible outcomes of a hearing, and sets forth Hearings Panel
procedures.
    (a) Procedures for Requesting and Preparing for a Hearing.
    (1)-(2) No changes.
    (3) Fees.
    Within 15 calendar days of the date of the Staff Delisting
Determination, Public Reprimand Letter, or written denial of an initial
listing application, the Company must submit a hearing fee of [$10,000]
$20,000. However, if the hearing request relates to a Staff Delisting
Determination dated on or before February 10, 2023, the Company must
submit a hearing fee of $10,000.
    (4)-(6) No changes.
    (b)-(d) No changes.

5820. Appeal to the Nasdaq Listing and Hearing Review Council

    A Company may appeal a Panel Decision to the Listing Council. The
Listing Council may also call for review a Panel Decision on its own
initiative. This Rule 5820 describes the procedures applicable to
appeals and calls for review.
    (a) Procedure for Requesting Appeal.
    A Company may appeal any Panel Decision to the Listing Council by
submitting a written request for appeal and a fee of [$10,000] $15,000
to the Nasdaq Office of Appeals and Review within 15 calendar days of
the date of the Panel Decision. However, if the appeal relates to a
Panel Decision dated

on or before February 10, 2023, the applicable fee is $10,000. An
appeal will not operate as a stay of the Panel Decision. Upon receipt
of the appeal request and the applicable fee, the Nasdaq Office of
Appeals and Review will acknowledge the Company's request and provide
deadlines for the Company to provide written submissions.
    (b)-(e) No changes.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Pursuant to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5815, companies may seek review of
a determination by the Nasdaq's Listing Qualifications Department (``LQ
Staff'') to deny initial listing or delist a company's securities or to
issue a Public Reprimand Letter, by requesting a hearing before an
independent Hearings Panel (the ``Hearings Panel''). Listing Rule
5815(a)(3) provides that to request a hearing, the company must, within
15 calendar days of the date of the LQ Staff delisting determination,
public reprimand letter, or written denial of an initial listing
application, submit a hearing fee in the amount of $10,000. Companies
may also appeal a Hearings Panel decision to the Nasdaq Listing and
Hearing Review Council (the ``NLHRC''). Listing Rule 5820(a) requires a
company seeking such an appeal to submit a fee of $10,000. Nasdaq last
changed these fees in 2013.\3\ Nasdaq now proposes to increase the fee
for review by a Hearings Panel to $20,000 and the fee to appeal a
Hearings Panel decision to the NLHRC to $15,000. Nasdaq is increasing
the fees because the costs incurred in preparing for and conducting
hearings and appeals have increased since the fees were last changed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68676 (January 16, 2013)
78 FR 4914 (January 23, 2013) (approving [sic] SR-NASDAQ-2013-004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The costs of the review process include significant time and
resources to maintain the infrastructure for the processes and to
prepare for and conduct individual hearings and appeals. For example,
with respect to review by the Hearings Panels, Nasdaq incurs expenses
related to the Nasdaq staff that facilitates the hearings and provides
legal counsel and support to the independent Hearings Panel members,
the honorarium paid to the Hearings Panel members, and the cost of
maintaining a transcript of the hearing. LQ Staff reviews each
company's submissions to the Hearings Panel and provides the Hearings
Panel with its analysis of the company's plans; LQ Staff also provides
written submissions in support of the delisting, listing denial, or
Public Reprimand determination. In addition, in some matters LQ Staff
attends hearings to respond to presentations by the company and answer
questions from the Hearings Panel members. Where hearings are held in
person, Nasdaq also incurs expenses related to securing and maintaining
a location for the hearings and travel expenses for Hearings Panel
members. Staff also must manage and coordinate the Hearings Panel
dockets, maintain the systems that track hearing matters, draft initial
decisions for review by the Hearings Panel members, and monitor post-
hearing compliance efforts in matters where the Hearings Panel has
granted the company a period of time to cure a deficiency.
    There are also additional costs associated with the NLHRC review of
every Hearings Panel decision, in determining whether to call that
decision for review as described in Rule 5820(b). In that regard,
Nasdaq incurs expenses related to the Nasdaq staff that facilitates the
call for review process and that provides legal counsel and support to
the NLHRC members, as well as the honorarium paid to the NLHRC members.
When a matter is called for review, Nasdaq also incurs costs related to
the staff in the Listing Qualifications Department, which reviews the
company's submissions to the NLHRC and provides the NLHRC with LQ
Staff's analysis of the company's plans and any issues identified by
the NLHRC in its call for review. Nasdaq staff also must manage and
coordinate the NLHRC docket, maintain the systems that track call for
review matters, and draft initial decisions for review by NLHRC
members. Nasdaq believes that these additional costs for the call for
review process are appropriately considered as part of the cost of the
Hearings Panel review, since every Hearings Panel decision is subject
to review by the NLHRC and the decision as to whether to call a matter
for review rests with the NLHRC.
    Where a company appeals a matter to the NLHRC, there are similar
additional costs as well, which Nasdaq believes should be borne by the
company through the appeal fee. Specifically, like where a decision is
called for review, when a company appeals a decision Nasdaq incurs
expenses related to the Nasdaq staff that facilitates the process and
that provides legal counsel and support to the NLHRC members, the
honorarium paid to the NLHRC members, LQ Staff review and analysis of
the company's submissions to the NLHRC, management of the docket,
maintaining the systems that track NLHRC appellate matters and drafting
the initial decisions for review by NLHRC members.
    Throughout the hearing and NLHRC process, the Exchange incurs costs
to maintain and upgrade its electronic systems for tracking companies
and maintaining a clear record, as required by Nasdaq and SEC rules.\4\
It also maintains lists on its website, updated every business day,
that reflect the status of all companies in the deficiency process \5\
and frequently asked questions providing transparency to companies and
investors about the delisting and deficiency process, as well as the
initial listing process.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Nasdaq Rule 5840(a). See also Rule 420(e) of the SEC
Rules of Practice, 17 CFR 201.420(e) which requires Nasdaq to
certify and file a copy of the record upon which a delisting or
denial was based where the company requests Commission review of
Nasdaq's action.
    \5\ See https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/IssuersPendingSuspensionDelisting.aspx and https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/NonCompliantCompanyList.aspx.
    \6\  See https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/Material_Search.aspx?mcd=LQ. Users can view more than 30 Frequently
Asked Questions about the hearings and appeals processes and
hundreds more about the processes associated with specific listing
rule deficiencies. In addition, there are summaries of over 100
prior NLHRC decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All of these expenses have increased in the ten years since the
fees were last changed in 2013. In addition, due to changes in
procedures over time, Nasdaq devotes more staff time and resources to
certain matters.\7\

Accordingly, Nasdaq proposes to increase the fee to request review by a
Hearings Panel to $20,000 and the fee for an appeal to the NLRHC to
$15,000. Nasdaq believes that this is an equitable allocation based on
the expenses incurred in connection with each portion of the overall
appellate process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For example, in October 2020 the Commission approved changes
to the procedures governing the introduction of information during
the hearing process. As a result, whereas previously companies
typically provided a single submission to the Hearings Panel,
companies now typically submit both a Written Submission and a
Written Update to the Hearings Panel, and LQ Staff must review and
react to each. See Rule 5815(a)(5) and Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 90201 (October 15, 2020) 85 FR 67024 (October 21, 2020)
(approving SR-NASDAQ-2020-002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The revised fees for a hearing will be applicable to issuers that
are sent a delisting determination, public reprimand letter, or written
denial of an initial listing application after February 10, 2023, the
date of filing of this proposed rule change. Similarly, the revised
fees for an appeal of a Hearings Panel decision to the NLHRC will be
applicable to issuers that receive a Hearings Panel decision after
February 10, 2023. The current fees will remain in effect for any
company that received a Staff delisting determination, denial of a
listing application, or public reprimand letter, or a Hearings Panel
decision on or before February 10, 2023.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Companies are notified about their ability to request a
hearing, and the fees associated with such a hearing, in the Staff
determination letter. They are notified of the fees associated with
an appeal in the Hearings Panel decision, which also includes a
notice of the right to appeal. As proposed, Nasdaq would only charge
the new fee to companies that were not already advised of the prior
fee in the applicable decision letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The revised fees will allow Nasdaq to recoup a portion of the
expenses it incurs in the review and appeal processes that will more
closely approximate its actual costs associated with those processes.
The Exchange has reviewed all costs associated with delisting appeals
and does not expect or intend that the fees will exceed the costs.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A precise cost-per-hearing analysis is not possible given
the need to maintain an infrastructure for which the Exchange incurs
expenses irrespective of the number of hearings or appeals requested
in a given year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the proposed fee increase is reasonable because it
will better reflect Nasdaq's costs related to hearings and appeals.
Nasdaq has not increased these fees since 2013,\12\ but its costs have
increased since that time. The fees will help offset the costs of
conducting hearings and appeals, which serve to ensure that Nasdaq's
listing standards are properly enforced for the protection of
investors. The proposed changes are equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because they would apply equally to all companies that
choose to request a hearing for review of a delisting determination,
public reprimand letter or denial of initial listing, or to appeal a
Hearings Panel decision. In addition, aligning the fees for hearings
with the underlying costs of the review process is equitable because
doing so will help minimize the extent that companies that are
compliant with all listing standards may subsidize the costs of review
for companies that are non-compliant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68676, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq also believes that the proposed fees are consistent with the
investor protection objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \13\ in
that they are designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to remove impediments to a free and open market and national
market systems, and in general to protect investors and the public
interest. Specifically, the fees are designed to provide adequate
resources for appropriate preparation to conduct reviews of Nasdaq
Listing Qualifications' staff determinations and appeals of Hearings
Panel decisions, which help to assure that the Exchanges' listing
standards are properly enforced and investors are protected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq also believes that the proposed changes are consistent with
Section 6(b)(7) of the Act,\14\ in that the proposed fees are
consistent with the provision by the Exchange of a fair procedures for
the prohibition or limitation by the Exchange of any person with
respect to access to services offered by the Exchange. In particular,
the Exchange believes that the proposed amended fees should not deter
listed issuers from availing themselves of the right to appeal because
the fees will still be set at a level that will be affordable for
listed companies. Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed fee is
unduly burdensome or would discourage any company from seeking a
hearing or appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15. U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. As discussed above,
this proposed fee is based on the increase in costs to the Exchange to
provide a delisting review process, which is in turn necessary to
ensure investor protection as well as a transparent process for
issuers. Moreover, the market for listing services is extremely
competitive and listed companies may freely choose alternative venues
based on the aggregate fees assessed, and the value provided by each
listing. This rule proposal does not burden competition with other
listing venues, which are similarly free to align their fees on the
costs incurred by the process they offer. For this reason, and the
reasons discussed in connection with the statutory basis for the
proposed rule change, Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule
change will result in any burden on competition for listings.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\16\ 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:
(i) necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

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

     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2023-004 on the subject line.

Paper Comments:

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2023-004. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2023-004, and should be submitted
on or before March 21, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-04033 Filed 2-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 160 (Friday, August 17, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41076-41077]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17732]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-0001]

Science and Regulation of Live Microbiome-Based Products Used To
Prevent, Treat, or Cure Diseases in Humans; Public Workshop

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research and the National Institutes of Health, National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) are announcing a
public workshop entitled ``Science and Regulation of Live Microbiome-
Based Products Used to Prevent, Treat, or Cure Diseases in Humans.''
The purpose of the public workshop is to exchange information with the
scientific community about the clinical, manufacturing, and regulatory
considerations associated with live microbiome-based products, when
administered to prevent, treat, or cure a disease or condition in
humans. The public workshop will bring together government Agencies,
academia, industry, and other stakeholders involved in research,
development, and regulation of live microbiome-based products for such
uses.

DATES: The public workshop will be held on September 17, 2018, from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
registration date and information.

ADDRESSES: The public workshop will be held at the NIAID Conference
Center, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1D13, Rockville, MD 20852. Entrance for
public workshop participants is through the lobby, where routine
security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security
information, please refer to https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/visitor-information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Loni Warren Henderson or Sherri
Revell, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 1118, Silver
Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email: [email protected]
(subject

line: Live Microbiome-Based Products Workshop).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Live microbiome-based products used to prevent, treat, or cure a
disease or condition in humans are biological products. There is
increasing interest in the use of such products for the treatment and/
or prevention of conditions such as necrotizing enterocolitis and
diarrhea. Historically, these products have presented with unique
scientific and regulatory challenges.

II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Workshop

    The topics for discussion at the public workshop include the
clinical, manufacturing, and regulatory considerations for live
microbiome-based products to prevent, treat, or cure a disease or
condition in humans, and the objective is to provide a forum for the
exchange of information and perspectives on these topics.

III. Participating in the Public Workshop

    Registration: To register for the public workshop, please visit the
following website: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/science-and-regulation-of-live-microbiome-based-products-used-to-prevent-treat-or-cure-diseases-in-tickets-44649072578. Please provide complete contact
information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation,
address, email, and telephone.
    Registration is free and based on space availability, with priority
given to early registrants. Persons interested in attending this public
workshop must register by August 28, 2018, midnight Eastern Time. Early
registration is recommended because seating is limited; therefore, FDA
may limit the number of participants from each organization. There will
be no onsite registration.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Loni Warren Henderson or Sherri Revell no later than September
10, 2018 (See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Dated: August 13, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-17732 Filed 8-16-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 134 (Friday, July 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32601-32602]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14808]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2017-0036]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this
document provides the public notice that on May 2, 2017, the Steelton
and Highspire Railroad (SH) petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) for a waiver of compliance from certain provisions
of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR 229.123,
Pilots snowplows, and end plates. FRA assigned the petition Docket
Number FRA-2017-0036.
    SH requests relief from the requirement to equip locomotives with a
pilot, snowplow, or end plate that measures 3 to 6 inches above the
rail per the requirements of 49 CFR 229.123. SH is a terminal and
switching railroad serving the ArcelorMittal steel plant located in
Steelton, PA, performing yard switching service and interchange service
with Norfolk Southern (NS) Railway. SH operates within the confines of
the steel plant except for the interchange of cars with NS in a yard
immediately adjacent to the plant boundary. Locomotive movements are
limited to a maximum speed of 10 mph. SH operates six switcher
locomotives, and has operated with such a waiver since February 1981.
During that time, there have been no incidents related to the absence
of end plates.
    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 parties
desire an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, 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 August 28, 2017 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered if practicable.
    Anyone can 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.).
Under 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 https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-14808 Filed 7-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47328-47330]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19335]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86858; File No. SR-LCH SA-2019-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; LCH SA; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Extension of Weekly Backloading Cycle
to Index Swaptions

September 3, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder \2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 20, 2019, Banque Centrale de Compensation, which conducts
business under the name LCH SA (``LCH SA''), filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
primarily by LCH SA. 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. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    Banque Centrale de Compensation, which conducts business under the
name LCH SA (``LCH SA''), is proposing to amend its (i) CDS Clearing
Rule Book (``Rule Book'') and (ii) CDS Clearing Procedures
(``Procedures'') (collectively the ``CDS Clearing Rules'') to make
conforming, clarifying, and clean-up changes intended to: (1) Extend
the weekly backloading process to Index Swaptions; and (2) amend the
structure of the documentation in respect of the backloading process.
Capitalized terms not defined or modified in this rule proposal will
have the same meaning as in LCH SA's existing Rule Book or Procedures.
    The text of the proposed rule change has been annexed as Exhibit
5.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All capitalized terms not defined herein have the same
definition as the Rule Book, Supplement or Procedures, as
applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The implementation of the updated Rule Book and Procedures will be
contingent on LCH SA's receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, LCH SA 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. LCH SA has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.

A. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change.

1. Purpose
    LCH SA is proposing to amend its CDS Clearing Rules to allow
clearing

process of Index Swaptions through the CDSClear Weekly Backloading
Cycle, in addition to the CDS that are already in the scope of this
process today.
    Further, this proposed rule change will also amend the CDS Clearing
Rules in order to review the structure of the rule book documentation
in respect of the Weekly Backloading Cycle and the Daily Backloading
Cycle and make consistency changes.
(a) Amendments To Extend the Weekly Backloading Cycle to Index
Swaptions
    The updated CDS Clearing Rules will permit Clearing Members to
submit Index Swaptions to LCH SA for clearing through the Weekly
Backloading Cycle. For the purpose of this extension, existing defined
terms and provisions in the Rule Book and Sections 4 and 5 of the
Procedures have been amended as described below.
i. Rule Book
    With respect to the Rule Book, LCH SA proposes to make amendments
to the existing defined term ''Weekly Backloading Transaction''
contained within Title I, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1. by adding a
reference to ``Index Swaption''.
ii. Procedures
(A) Section 4
    Section 4 of the Procedures will be updated to make the relevant
eligibility requirements applicable to Index Swaptions to be submitted
to LCH SA for clearing through the Weekly Backloading Cycle where
necessary.
    Thus, the reference to an ``Index Swaption Intraday Transaction''
in Section 4.1(c)(i)(V) will be replaced by a reference to an ``Index
Swaption''. In addition, the reference to an ``Index Swaption Intraday
Transaction'' in Section 4.1(c)(iii)(C) will be replaced by a reference
to an ``Index Swaption that is an Index Swaption Intraday Transaction
or a Weekly Backloading Transaction''.
(B) Section 5
    LCH SA proposes to update Section 5 of the Procedures by adding a
reference to ``Index Swaptions'' in Section 5.2(b) so that Index
Swaptions are eligible for the Weekly Backloading Cycle.
(b) Technical Amendments
    The amendments to the Rule Book and Procedures also contain
typographical corrections and changes made for consistency purpose.
Specifically, information on the Daily Backloading Cycle and the Weekly
Backloading Cycle will be moved from the Rule Book and Section 5 of the
Procedures to new Clearing Notices (i.e. a Clearing Notice named
``Daily Backloading Cycle'' and a Clearing Notice named ``Weekly
Backloading Cycle'') for consistency purpose as this is operational
information that does not need to be part of the CDS Clearing Rules. No
amendment will be made to the content of the provisions moved to these
new Clearing Notices.
    Therefore, Section 5.2(b) and (c) of the Procedures will refer to a
Clearing Notice and the timetable applicable to each of the Daily
Backloading Cycle and Weekly Backloading Cycle is proposed to be
removed from these paragraphs. In the Rule Book, defined terms of
``Eligible Weekly Backloading Transaction'' and ``Irrevocable Weekly
Backloading Transaction'' will therefore refer to a Clearing Notice
instead of Section 5 of the Procedures, as well as Sections 3.1.1 and
3.1.2 of the Rule Book.
    In addition, the definitions of ``Weekly Backloading Start Day''
and ``Weekly Backloading Novation Day'' in the Rule Book are proposed
to be amended in order to make a general reference to a day as
determined by LCH SA in accordance with Article <IP_ADDRESS> of the Rule
Book as these days will be provided for in the new Clearing Notice
named ``Weekly Backloading Cycle''. Article <IP_ADDRESS> will be amended to
remove the publication date of this Clearing Notice as the provisional
calendar, which specifies the Weekly Backloading Cycle will not change
each year.
    Finally, typographical corrections will be made to the definition
of ``Converting Clearing Member'' in the Rule Book and Section
4.1(c)(vii)(B) of the Procedures. The reference to Section 3 in Article
<IP_ADDRESS> of the Rule Book is also proposed to be deleted as it is
redundant with the provisions of the previous sentence of this Article.
2. Statutory Basis.
    As more discussed below, LCH SA believes that the Proposed Rule
Change is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 \4\ (the ``Exchange Act'') and the
regulations thereunder, including the standards under Exchange Act Rule
17Ad-22.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Exchange Act \6\ requires, among other
things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    By offering Clearing Members the possibility to submit Index
Swaptions to LCH SA for clearing through the CDSClear Weekly
Backloading Cycle, the Proposed Rule Change will extend the backloading
to Index Swaptions and therefore permit cross instruments netting that
can yield more cost effective margins and would promote the clearance
process of credit derivatives transactions so that LCH SA believes that
the proposed amendments are consistent with the requirements of Section
17A of the Exchange Act.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    These proposed rule changes will also provide additional security
to members who will choose to perform intraday clearing as it will
enable the capture of trades that would normally be sent as part of
intraday clearing but that are sent for clearing beyond the current one
day deadline. This, therefore, will be consistent and align with the
requirements of Exchange Act Rule 17Ad-22(e)(8) which requires each
covered clearing agency to establish, implement, maintain and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to ``define the
point at which settlement is final to be no later than the end of the
day on which the payment or obligation is due and, where necessary or
appropriate, intraday or in real time.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\9\ LCH SA does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose burdens on
competition that are not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LCH SA is only extending the CDSClear weekly Backloading cycle to
Index Swaptions.
    Specifically, the proposed rule changes would apply equally to all
Clearing Members and would generally improve the ability of such market
participants to engage in cleared transactions and clearing services.
    Therefore, LCH SA does not believe that the proposed rule change
would impose a burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. LCH SA will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by LCH SA.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-LCH SA-2019-006 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-LCH SA-2019-006. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of LCH SA and on LCH SA's website
at: https://www.lch.com/resources/rules-and-regulations/proposed-rule-changes-0. All comments received will be posted without change. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-LCH SA-2019-006 and
should be submitted on or before September 30, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[FR Doc. 2019-19335 Filed 9-6-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 396-397]
[FR Doc No: 2022-28541]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-496, OMB Control No. 3235-0554]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Rule 6a-4,
Form 1-N

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

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information provided for in Rule 6a-4 and Form 1-N, as
discussed below. The Code of Federal Regulation citation to this
collection of information is 17 CFR 240.6a-4 and 17 CFR 249.10 under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) (the
``Act'').
    Section 6 of the Act \1\ sets out a framework for the registration
and regulation of national securities exchanges. Under the Commodity
Futures Modernization Act of 2000, a futures market may trade security
futures products by registering as a national securities exchange. Rule
6a-4 \2\ sets forth these registration procedures and directs futures
markets to submit a notice registration on Form 1-N.\3\ Form 1-N calls
for information regarding how the futures market operates, its rules
and procedures, corporate governance, its criteria for membership, its
subsidiaries and affiliates, and the security futures products it
intends to trade. Rule 6a-4 also requires entities that have submitted
an initial Form 1-N to file: (1) amendments to Form 1-N in the event of
material changes to the information provided in the initial Form 1-N;
(2) periodic updates of certain information provided in the initial
Form 1-N; (3) certain information that is provided to the futures
market's members; and (4) a monthly report summarizing the futures
market's trading of security futures products. The information required
to be filed with the Commission pursuant to Rule 6a-4 is designed to
enable the Commission to carry out its statutorily mandated oversight
functions and to ensure that registered and exempt exchanges continue
to be in compliance with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.6a-4.
    \3\ 17 CFR 249.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The respondents to the collection of information are futures
markets.
    The Commission estimates that the total annual burden for all
respondents to provide periodic amendments \4\ to keep the Form 1-N
accurate and up to date as required under Rule 6a-4(b)(1) would be 30
hours (15 hours/respondent per year x 2 respondents \5\) and $200 of
miscellaneous clerical expenses. The Commission estimates that the
total annual burden for all

respondents to provide annual amendments under Rule 6a-4(b)(3) would be
30 hours (15 hours/respondent/year x 2 respondents) and $200 of
miscellaneous clerical expenses. The Commission estimates that the
total annual burden for all respondents to provide three-year
amendments \6\ under Rule 6a-4(b)(4) would be 14 hours (20 hours/
respondent x 0.67 respondents per year) and $88 in miscellaneous
clerical expenses. The Commission estimates that the total annual
burden for the filing of the supplemental information \7\ and the
monthly reports required under Rule 6a-4(c) would be 12 hours (6 hours/
respondent per year x 2 respondents \8\) and $120 of miscellaneous
clerical expenses. Thus, the Commission estimates the total annual
burden for complying with Rule 6a-4 is 86 hours and $608 in
miscellaneous clerical expenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 240.6a-4(b)(1).
    \5\ The Commission estimates that four exchanges will file
amendments with the Commission in order to keep their Form 1-N
current.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.6a-4(b)(3) and (4).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.6a-4(c)
    \8\ See supra footnote 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Compliance with Rule 6a-4 is mandatory. Information received in
response to Rule 6a-4 shall not be kept confidential; the information
collected is public information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
    The public may view background documentation for this information
collection at the following website: >www.reginfo.gov<. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information
collection should be sent by February 3, 2023 to (i)
>[email protected]< and (ii) David Bottom,
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or by sending
an email to: [email protected].

    Dated: December 28, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-28541 Filed 1-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: February 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 28)]
[Notices]
[Page 7106-7108]
[DOCID:fr10fe06-133]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53228; File No. SR-Phlx-2005-91]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
and Amendment No. 1 Thereto To Amend the Equity Option Specialist
Deficit (Shortfall) Fee

February 6, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on December 29, 2005, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. On February
1, 2006, the Phlx filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\
The Phlx filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the
Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\5\ which renders the proposal
effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as
amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange made additional changes to
the proposed rule text to clarify the assessment of the shortfall
fee and the application of the shortfall credit.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx proposes to amend its Specialist Deficit (Shortfall) Fee
(``shortfall fee'') in two ways: (1) Eliminate the DROT Exemption (as
defined herein), so that a specialist \6\ will be assessed a shortfall
fee, subject to the maximum caps currently in effect,\7\ even when one
or more Streaming Quote Traders (``SQTs'') \8\ or Remote Streaming
Quote Traders (``RSQTs'') \9\ trading on the Exchange's electronic
options trading platform, Phlx XL,\10\ have been designated to receive
Directed Orders \11\ from Order Flow Providers \12\ for the same top
120 equity option\13\ in which that specialist unit is acting as the
specialist; and (2) establish a shortfall credit of $0.35 per contract
in any top 120 equity option for each specialist unit whose trading
volume for such equity option effected on the Exchange in one month
exceeds 15% of the total national monthly contract volume for such
equity option in that same month, up to the total amount of the
shortfall fee, if any, that is incurred in connection with the trading
of other top 120 equity options that has not met the volume threshold,
which is currently set at 12% of the total national monthly contract
volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange uses the terms ``specialist'' and ``specialist
unit'' interchangeably herein.
    \7\ Certain shortfall fee caps apply to transactions in any of
the top 120 equity options pursuant to the following: (1) If Phlx
volume in any top 120 equity option, except options on Nasdaq-100
Index Tracking StockSM (traded under the symbol
``QQQQ''), is less than or equal to 50 percent of the current
threshold volume (presently 6 percent), a cap of $10,000 will apply;
(2) If Phlx volume in any top 120 equity option, except options on
QQQQ, is greater than 50 percent of the current threshold volume
(presently 6 percent) and less than 12 percent of the total national
monthly contract volume, a cap of $5,000 will apply; (3) If Phlx
volume in options on QQQQ is less than or equal to 50 percent of the
current threshold volume (presently 6 percent), a cap of $20,000
will apply; and (4) If Phlx volume in options on QQQQ is greater
than 50 percent of the current threshold volume (presently 6
percent) and less than 12 percent of the total national monthly
contract volume, a cap of $10,000 will apply. The Nasdaq-
100[supreg], Nasdaq-100 Index[supreg], Nasdaq[supreg], The Nasdaq
Stock Market[supreg], Nasdaq-100 SharesSM, Nasdaq-100
Trust SM, Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking StockSM,
and QQQSM are trademarks or service marks of The Nasdaq
Stock Market, Inc. (``Nasdaq'') and have been licensed for use for
certain purposes by the Phlx pursuant to a License Agreement with
Nasdaq. The Nasdaq-100 Index[supreg] (the ``Index'') is determined,
composed, and calculated by Nasdaq without regard to the Licensee,
the Nasdaq-100 TrustSM, or the beneficial owners of
Nasdaq-100 SharesSM. Nasdaq has complete control and sole
discretion in determining, comprising, or calculating the Index or
in modifying in any way its method for determining, comprising, or
calculating the Index in the future.
    \8\ An SQT is an Exchange Registered Options Trader (``ROT'')
who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit
option quotations electronically through an electronic interface
with AUTOM via an Exchange approved proprietary electronic quoting
device in eligible options to which such SQT is assigned. See Phlx
Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A). AUTOM is the Exchange's electronic order
delivery, routing, execution and reporting system, which provides
for the automatic entry and routing of equity option and index
option orders to the Exchange trading floor. See Phlx Rule 1080(a).
    \9\ An RSQT is a ROT that is a member or member organization of
the Exchange with no physical trading floor presence who has
received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit option
quotations electronically through AUTOM in eligible options to which
such RSQT has been assigned. An RSQT may only submit such quotations
electronically from off the floor of the Exchange. An RSQT may only
trade in a market making capacity in classes of options in which he
is assigned. See Phlx Rule 1014(b)(ii)(B). See generally Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 51126 (February 2, 2005), 70 FR 6915
(February 9, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2004-90) and 51428 (March 24, 2005), 70
FR 16325 (March 30, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-12).
    \10\ In July 2004, the Exchange began trading equity options on
Phlx XL, followed by index options in December 2004. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 50100 (July 27, 2004), 69 FR 46612 (August
3, 2004) (SR-Phlx-2003-59).
    \11\ The term ``Directed Order'' means any customer order to buy
or sell which has been directed to a particular specialist, RSQT, or
SQT by an Order Flow Provider (as defined herein). See Phlx Rule
1080(l)(i)(A). The provisions of Phlx Rule 1080(l) are in effect for
a one-year pilot period to expire on May 27, 2006. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 51759 (May 27, 2005), 70 FR 32860 (June 6,
2005) (SR-Phlx-2004-91).
    \12\ The term ``Order Flow Provider'' means any member or member
organization that submits, as agent, customer orders to the
Exchange. See Phlx Rule 1080(l)(i)(B).
    \13\ The Exchange defines a top 120 equity option as one of the
120 most actively traded equity options in terms of the total number
of contracts in that option that were traded nationally for a
specified month, based on volume reflected by The Options Clearing
Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to make a minor, technical change to the
shortfall fee section in its Summary of Equity Option Charges by
inserting the word ``equity'' in the phrase ``top 120 options'' to
clarify the type of options to which the Exchange is referring in the
shortfall fee section. In addition, the Exchange proposes to clarify
that the reference to ``transition period'' in the first paragraph of
the shortfall fee

section refers to the transition period set forth for any top 120
equity option listed after February 1, 2004 and for any top 120 equity
option acquired by a new specialist unit within the first 60 days of
operations and which is described at the end of the shortfall fee
section. The Exchange considers these changes to be minor, technical
changes because they are consistent with current Exchange practice and
should help to clarify the assessment of the shortfall fee.
    The proposed rule change is scheduled to become effective for
transactions settling on or after January 2, 2006. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Phlx's Internet Web site
(http://www.phlx.com), at the Phlx's Office of the Secretary, and at

the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Phlx 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 Phlx 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 Exchange currently charges specialist units a shortfall fee of
$0.35 per contract, to be paid monthly in connection with transactions
in any top 120 equity option, in most cases, if at least 12% of the
total national monthly contract volume in that equity option is not
effected by that specialist unit on the Exchange in that month.\14\
Effective for trades settling on or after June 6, 2005, the Exchange
amended its shortfall fee to no longer charge the shortfall fee when
one or more SQTs or RSQTs trading on Phlx XL have been designated to
receive Directed Orders from Order Flow Providers (``Directed Order
Flow Program'') for the same option in which that specialist unit is
acting as the specialist (collectively, the ``DROT Exemption'').\15\ At
that time, the Exchange believed that it would not be reasonable to
impose a shortfall fee on specialists when SQTs and RSQTs would be
competing for market share with respect to the same equity options on a
relatively equal basis, as the shortfall fee was designed, in part, to
create an incentive for specialists to promote the equity options they
have been allocated. Thus, given that the Directed Order Flow Program
was a new program, the Exchange believed it was important to see how
such program would affect the specialists' market share, as well as how
the Directed Order Flow Program might influence order routing decisions
by Order Flow Providers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ An exception to the 12% volume threshold amount relates to
a transition period for newly listed top 120 equity options or for
any top 120 equity option (including those equity options listed on
the Exchange before February 1, 2004) acquired by a new specialist
unit. These transition periods are not affected by the current
proposal. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49324 (February
26, 2004), 69 FR 10089 (March 3, 2004) (SR-Phlx-2004-08).
    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51947 (June 30,
2005), 70 FR 39542 (July 8, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-39).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, the specialists' market share in certain top 120 equity
options currently remains well below the targeted shortfall fee volume
threshold of 12% of the total national monthly contract volume effected
on the Exchange. Although the Exchange recognizes that the specialists
are competing for market share with the SQTs and RSQTs, it believes
that obtaining 12% market share, which would include SQT and RSQT
volume, is not unreasonable and wants to encourage specialists to
compete in garnering greater market share. Thus, the purpose of this
proposal is to encourage equity option specialist units to increase
their respective market shares and create an incentive, by way of a
credit, for such specialists to trade on the Exchange in any top 120
equity option in excess of 15% of the total national monthly contract
volume for such top 120 equity option in one month.
    Under the proposal, when a specialist unit's trading volume in any
top 120 equity option effected on the Exchange in one month exceeds 15%
of the total national contract volume for such top 120 equity option in
that same month, a shortfall credit of $0.35 per contract would be
applied to such specialist unit's invoice, the dollar amount of which
would (i) directly correspond to the number of contracts of such top
120 equity option in excess of 15% of the total national contract
volume for such top 120 equity option, and (ii) offset any shortfall
fee charged to such specialist unit with respect to any other top 120
equity option traded in that same month. However, the amount of any
shortfall credit may not (a) exceed the total amount of any shortfall
fee charged to such specialist unit with respect to any other top 120
equity option traded in that same month, and (b) be applied against any
other Exchange charges on the invoice(s) of such specialist unit or
subsidiary of such specialist unit. Finally, any excess shortfall
credit would not be carried over to subsequent months. Should the total
amount of the shortfall credit exceed the total amount of the shortfall
fee due, no shortfall fee would be due to the Exchange.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For example, if the total national monthly contract volume
was 8,000,000 contracts for one equity option, and the Exchange's
market share in that option was 18% or 1,440,000 contracts, the
specialist unit would receive a credit based on the number of
contracts in excess of the 15% threshold, up to the total amount of
the shortfall fee that was incurred in connection with the trading
of other top 120 equity options that did not meet the current 12%
volume threshold. In this example, the amount of 1,200,000 contracts
represents 15% of the total national monthly contract volume of
8,000,000. Thus, a shortfall credit of $84,000 (derived from the
product of the difference between 1,200,000 contracts and 1,440,000
contracts and $0.35) would be applied against any other shortfall
fees incurred by that specialist unit in that month. If the amount
of the shortfall fees totaled less than the amount of the shortfall
credit (e.g., the shortfall fees totaled $25,000 and the shortfall
credit was $84,000), no shortfall fee would be due the Exchange that
month. The excess credit of $59,000 would not carry over to
subsequent months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the Exchange, the purpose of making the minor,
technical changes to the proposed text of the shortfall fee, including
the addition of the caption ``Transition Period,'' is to more clearly
describe current Exchange practice, which should, in turn, help to
avoid confusion regarding the implementation of the shortfall fee.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\17\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\18\ in
particular, because it is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among members of
the Exchange. All specialist units competing in the top 120 equity
options would be assessed the same shortfall fee and would be given the
same shortfall fee credit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Phlx has neither solicited nor received written comments on the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
    The foregoing proposed rule change has been designated as a fee
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \19\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(2) \20\ thereunder. Accordingly, the proposed rule change is
effective upon filing with the Commission. At any time within 60 days
of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily
abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \20\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
    \21\ The effective date of the original proposed rule change is
December 29, 2005, and the effective date of Amendment No. 1 is
February 1, 2006. For purposes of calculating the 60-day period
within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule
change under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the Commission
considers such period to commence on February 1, 2006, the date on
which the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1. See 15 U.S.C.
78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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 No. SR-Phlx-2005-91 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to
File No. SR-Phlx-2005-91. This file number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and
review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The
Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site
(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all

subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the
proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all
written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public
Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Phlx. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2005-91 and should be
submitted on or before March 3, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E6-1835 Filed 2-9-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 140 (Thursday, July 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42735-42736]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17909]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

July 14, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP10-957-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
Fourth Revised Sheet 686 of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume
1.
    Filed Date: 07/09/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100712-0205.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 21, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-959-000.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits tariff filing
per 154.601: CVH Negotiated Rate to be effective 6/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 07/12/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100712-5127.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-960-000.
    Applicants: B-R Pipeline Company.
    Description: B-R Pipeline Company submits tariff filing per
154.203: Baseline Resubmission to be effective 7/12/2010.
    Filed Date: 07/12/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100712-5129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-961-000.
    Applicants: USG Pipeline Company.
    Description: USG Pipeline Company submits tariff filing per
154.203: Baseline Resubmission to be effective 7/12/2010.
    Filed Date: 07/12/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100712-5141.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-962-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Kern River Gas Transmission Company submits Third
Revised Sheet 1 et al of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1,
to be effective 8/13/10.
    Filed Date: 07/13/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100713-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 26, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-963-000.
    Applicants: Granite State Gas Transmission, Inc.

    Description: Granite State Gas Transmission, Inc. submits tariff
filing per 154.203: Baseline Filing for Granite State Gas Transmission,
Inc. to be effective 7/13/2010.
    Filed Date: 07/13/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100713-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 26, 2010.

    Docket Number: CP10-467-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Application for order permitting and approving
abandonment of service re Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/30/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100701-0243.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 20, 2010.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-17909 Filed 7-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79559-79560]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27277]

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

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Advisory Committee;
Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: ITS Joint Program Office, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Research and Technology, U.S. Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program Advisory
Committee (ITSPAC) will hold a meeting on December 7, 2016, from 8:30
a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (EST) in the Doubletree Crystal City Hotel, 300 Army
Navy Drive, Arlington, VA 22202.
    The ITSPAC, established under Section 5305 of Public Law 109-59,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, August 10, 2005, and re-
established under Section 6007 of Public Law 114-94, Fixing America's
Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, December 4, 2015, was created to
advise the Secretary of Transportation on all matters relating to the
study, development, and implementation of intelligent transportation
systems. Through its sponsor, the ITS Joint Program Office (JPO), the
ITSPAC makes recommendations to the Secretary regarding ITS Program
needs, objectives, plans, approaches, content, and progress.
    The following is a summary of the meeting tentative agenda: (1)
Welcome, (2) Discussion of Potential Advice Memorandum Topics, (3)
Summary and Adjourn.
    The meeting will be open to the public, but limited space will be
available on a first-come, first-served basis. Members of the public
who wish to present oral statements at the meeting must submit a
request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>not later than November 28, 2016.
    Questions about the agenda or written comments may be submitted by
U.S. Mail to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, ITS Joint Program
Office, Attention: Stephen Glasscock, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., HOIT,
Washington, DC 20590 or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>. The ITS JPO requests
that written comments be submitted not later than November 28, 2016.
    Notice of this conference is provided in accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act and the General Services Administration
regulations (41 CFR part 102-3) covering management of Federal advisory
committees.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 8th day of November 2016.
Stephen Glasscock,
Designated Federal Officer, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2016-27277 Filed 11-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-22-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 34877]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12369]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-N-0618]

Advisory Committee; Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory
Committee; Renewal

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; renewal of Federal advisory committee.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
renewal of the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee by
the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner). The Commissioner
has determined that it is in the public interest to renew the Drug
Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee for an additional 2 years
beyond the charter expiration date. The new charter will be in effect
until the May 31, 2024, expiration date.

DATES: Authority for the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory
Committee will expire on May 31, 2024, unless the Commissioner formally
determines that renewal is in the public interest.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Bautista, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
762-8729, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.65 and approval by
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and by the General
Services Administration, FDA is announcing the renewal of the Drug
Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee (the Committee). The
Committee is a discretionary Federal advisory committee established to
provide advice to the Commissioner. The Committee advises the
Commissioner or designee in discharging responsibilities as they relate
to helping to ensure safe and effective drugs for human use and, as
required, any other product for which FDA has regulatory
responsibility.
    The Committee reviews and evaluates information on risk management,
risk communication, and quantitative evaluation of spontaneous reports
for drugs for human use and for any other product for which FDA has
regulatory responsibility. The Committee also advises the Commissioner
regarding the scientific and medical evaluation of all information
gathered by HHS and the Department of Justice with regard to safety,
efficacy, and abuse potential of drugs or other substances, and
recommends actions to be taken by HHS with regard to the marketing,
investigation, and control of such drugs or other substances.
    The Committee shall consist of a core of 11 voting members
including the Chair. Members and the Chair are selected by the
Commissioner or designee from among authorities knowledgeable in the
fields of risk communication, risk management, drug safety, medical,
behavioral, and biological sciences as they apply to risk management,
and drug abuse. Members will be invited to serve for overlapping terms
of up to 4 years. Non-Federal members of this committee will serve as
Special Government Employees, representatives, or Ex-Officio members.
Federal members will serve as Regular Government Employees or Ex-
Officios. The core of voting members may include one technically
qualified member, selected by the Commissioner or designee, who is
identified with consumer interests and is recommended by either a
consortium of consumer-oriented organizations or other interested
persons. In addition to the voting members, the Committee may include
one non-voting representative member who is identified with industry
interests. There may also be an alternate industry representative.
    Further information regarding the most recent charter and other
information can be found at https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/drug-safety-and-risk-management-advisory-committee/drug-safety-and-risk-management-advisory-committee-charter or by contacting the
Designated Federal Officer (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In
light of the fact that no change has been made to the committee name or
description of duties, no amendment will be made to 21 CFR 14.100.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app.). For general information related to FDA advisory
committees, please visit us at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    Dated: June 3, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-12369 Filed 6-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P