[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 4653]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02049]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9973-33--Region 9]

Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection
to Proposed Permits for Linn Operating, Inc.--Fairfield Lease and Ethyl
D Lease, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final Order on petitions to object to air permit.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Administrator has responded to two citizen petitions
asking the EPA to object to the proposed issuance of two Authority to
Construct/Certificate of Conformity documents (Permits) issued by the
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD).
Specifically, the Administrator has denied the June 24, 2015 petitions
(Petitions) submitted by the Climate Change Law Foundation to object to
SJVUAPCD's proposed issuance of the Permits for the Linn Operating,
Inc.--Fairfield and Ethyl D Leases located in Kern County, California.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final Order, the Petitions, and
other supporting information at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
    The EPA requests that you contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view copies of the final Order,
Petitions, and other supporting information. You may view the hard
copies Monday through Friday, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays. If you wish to examine these documents, you should make an
appointment at least 24 hours before the visiting day. Additionally,
the final Order is available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-10/documents/linn_fairfield_and_ethyl_order_10-6-17.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972-3534, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SJVUAPCD Rule 2201 affords the EPA a 45-day
period to review and object to, as appropriate, a proposed permit. Rule
2201 Sec.  5.9.1. If the EPA does not object, Rule 2201 allows any
person to petition the EPA, within 60 days, to object to the proposed
permit. Petitions must be based only on objections to the permit that
were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment
period, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to
raise these issues during the comment period, or the grounds for the
issue arose after this period.
    The EPA received the Petitions dated June 24, 2015, requesting that
the EPA object to the proposed issuance of the Permits to Linn
Operating, Inc. for the addition of three new gas-fired steam
generators on its Fairfield lease, and one new gas-fired steam
generator on its Ethyl D lease, both located in Kern County,
California. The substantive claims raised in the two Petitions were
essentially identical. Therefore, the EPA responded to both Petitions
in a single order. In summary, the Petitions claimed that certain
emission reductions had not been included in an EPA-approved attainment
plan and thus could not be used, and that certain emission reduction
credits used in the permitting process were invalid.
    On October 6, 2017, the Administrator issued an order denying the
Petitions. The EPA's rationale for denying the claims raised in the
petitions are described in the Order.

    Dated: January 16, 2018.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018-02049 Filed 1-31-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 113)]
[Notices]
[Page 28293]
[DOCID:fr15jn09-138]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release Nos. 33-9037A; 34-60032A; IC-28757A; File No. 265-25]

Investor Advisory Committee; Notice of Federal Advisory Committee
Establishment; Correction

    In FR Doc. No. E9-13349, on page 27359 for Tuesday, June 9, 2009,
the link for sending electronic comments to the Commission was
incorrectly stated in two places. The correct link reads as follows:
(http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml).

    Dated: June 9, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-13934 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 18700-18701]
[DOCID:fr13ap07-87]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55595; File No. SR-CHX-2007-14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Participant Fees and Credits

April 6, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 23, 2007, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. CHX has filed the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of
the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the
proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    CHX proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to confirm that it will not
charge a fee or pay a credit in connection with the execution, in the
Matching System, of a single-sided order for 100 or more shares at a
price less than $1.00 per share. The text of the proposed rule change
is available at CHX, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and http://www.chx.com/rules/proposed_rules.htm
.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CHX 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. CHX 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 proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to confirm that it
will not charge a fee or pay a credit in connection with the execution,
in the Matching System, of a single-sided order for 100 or more shares
at a price less than $1.00 per share. This provision is designed, in
part, to confirm that the Exchange will not charge a fee that is
greater than the maximum access fee set out in Rule 610(c)(2) of
Regulation NMS.\5\ It also confirms that the Exchange has determined
that it would not be appropriate to provide a credit in connection with
these no-cost executions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 17 CFR 242.610(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    CHX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that the proposal provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder \9\ because it establishes or changes a due, fee, or other
charge applicable only to a member imposed by the self-regulatory
organization. Accordingly, the proposal is effective upon Commission
receipt of the filing. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-CHX-2007-14 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-2007-14. 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 the filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of CHX. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CHX-
2007-14 and should be submitted on or before May 4, 2007.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-6963 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 20, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27997-27999]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31137; Amdt. No. 3750]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight

operations under instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective June 20, 2017. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of June 20, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops--M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary.
    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies
the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective
dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 19, 2017.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114,
40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date          State         City             Airport        FDC No.      FDC date        Subject
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22-Jun-17.............  TX        Mineola.........  Mineola Wisener        7/1174       5/8/17  VOR-A, Amdt 6A.
                                                     Field.
22-Jun-17.............  NJ        Readington......  Solberg-               7/6466       5/4/17  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                     Hunterdon.                                  22, Orig-B.
22-Jun-17.............  NJ        Readington......  Solberg-               7/6467       5/4/17  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                     Hunterdon.                                  4, Orig-B.
22-Jun-17.............  NJ        Readington......  Solberg-               7/6468       5/4/17  VOR RWY 4, Amdt
                                                     Hunterdon.                                  1B.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-12465 Filed 6-19-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 118 (Friday, June 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 35345]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15101]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC15-155-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: Application of American Transmission Company LLC for
Authority to Acquire Transmission Facilities Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 6/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150611-5199.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER15-1813-001.
    Applicants: The Connecticut Light and Power Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to Joint
Market Based Tariff to be effective 5/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150612-5095.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1907-000.
    Applicants: Joliet Battery Storage LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 Application for Market-
Based Rate Authority to be effective 6/12/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150611-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1908-000.
    Applicants: West Chicago Battery Storage LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 Application for Market-
Based Rate Authority to be effective 6/12/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/11/15.
    Accession Number: 20150611-5193.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/2/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1909-000.
    Applicants: Kingfisher Wind, LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 Kingfisher Wind Rate
Schedule FERC No. 1 to be effective 6/30/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150612-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1910-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2014
Southwestern Power Administration Amendatory Agreement Extension to be
effective 5/31/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150612-5081.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1911-000.
    Applicants: Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, New York Independent
System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35: Compliance Revisions to
Wholesale TSC Formula Rate of National Grid to be effective 7/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 6/12/15.
    Accession Number: 20150612-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/6/15.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 12, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15101 Filed 6-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 235 (Tuesday, December 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76338-76343]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30867]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 31924; File No. 812-14258]

Nuveen Fund Advisors, LLC, et al.; Notice of Application

December 2, 2015.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order pursuant to sections 6(c)
and 17(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an
exemption from section 17(a) of the Act permitting certain
transactions.

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

Summary of the Application: Applicants request an order (the ``Order'')
that would permit certain registered management investment companies to
engage in certain primary and secondary market transactions in fixed
income instruments on a principal basis (the ``Transactions'') with a
USB Trading Entity (defined below).

Applicants: Nuveen Fund Advisors, LLC (the ``Adviser''), Nuveen
Investments, Inc. (``Nuveen''), Nuveen All Cap Energy MLP Opportunities
Fund, Nuveen AMT-Free Municipal Income Fund, Nuveen AMT-Free Municipal
Value Fund, Nuveen Arizona Premium Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen Build
America Bond Fund, Nuveen Build America Bond Opportunity Fund, Nuveen
California AMT-Free Municipal Income Fund, Nuveen California Dividend
Advantage Municipal Fund, Nuveen California Dividend Advantage
Municipal Fund 2, Nuveen California Dividend Advantage Municipal Fund
3, Nuveen California Municipal Value Fund 2, Nuveen California
Municipal Value Fund, Inc., Nuveen California Select Tax-Free Income
Portfolio, Nuveen Connecticut Premium Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen
Core Equity Alpha Fund, Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund, Nuveen
Diversified Dividend and Income Fund, Nuveen Dividend Advantage
Municipal Fund, Nuveen Dividend Advantage Municipal Fund 2, Nuveen
Dividend Advantage Municipal Fund 3, Nuveen Dividend Advantage
Municipal Income Fund, Nuveen Dow 30\SM\ Dynamic Overwrite Fund, Nuveen
Energy MLP Total Return Fund, Nuveen Enhanced Municipal Value Fund,
Nuveen Flexible Investment Income Fund, Nuveen Floating Rate Income
Fund, Nuveen Floating Rate Income Opportunity Fund, Nuveen Georgia
Dividend Advantage Municipal Fund 2, Nuveen Global High Income Fund,
Nuveen Global Equity Income Fund, Nuveen High Income 2020 Target Term
Fund, Nuveen High Income December 2018 Target Term Fund, Nuveen High
Income December 2020 Target Term Fund, Nuveen High Income December 2022
Target Term Fund, Nuveen Intermediate Duration Municipal Term Fund,
Nuveen Intermediate Duration Quality Municipal Term Fund, Nuveen
Investment Funds, Inc., Nuveen Investment Quality Municipal Fund, Inc.,
Nuveen Investment Trust, Nuveen Investment Trust II, Nuveen Investment
Trust III, Nuveen Investment Trust V, Nuveen Managed Accounts
Portfolios Trust, Nuveen Maryland Premium Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen
Massachusetts Premium Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen Michigan Quality
Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen Minnesota Municipal Income Fund, Nuveen
Missouri Premium Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen Mortgage Opportunity
Term Fund 2, Nuveen Mortgage Opportunity Term Fund, Nuveen Multi-Market
Income Fund, Nuveen Multistate Trust I, Nuveen Multistate Trust II,
Nuveen Multistate Trust III, Nuveen Multistate Trust IV, Nuveen
Municipal Advantage Fund, Inc., Nuveen Municipal High Income
Opportunity Fund, Nuveen Municipal Income Fund, Inc., Nuveen Municipal
Market Opportunity Fund, Inc., Nuveen Municipal Opportunity Fund, Inc.,
Nuveen Municipal Trust, Nuveen Municipal Value Fund, Inc., Nuveen
Nasdaq 100 Dynamic Overwrite Fund, Nuveen New Jersey Dividend Advantage
Municipal Fund, Nuveen New Jersey Municipal Value Fund, Nuveen New York
AMT-Free Municipal Income Fund, Nuveen New York Dividend Advantage
Municipal Fund, Nuveen New York Municipal Value

Fund 2, Nuveen New York Municipal Value Fund, Inc., Nuveen New York
Select Tax-Free Income Portfolio, Nuveen North Carolina Premium Income
Municipal Fund, Nuveen Ohio Quality Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen
Pennsylvania Investment Quality Municipal Fund, Nuveen Pennsylvania
Municipal Value Fund, Nuveen Performance Plus Municipal Fund, Inc.,
Nuveen Preferred and Income Term Fund, Nuveen Preferred Income
Opportunities Fund, Nuveen Premier Municipal Income Fund, Inc., Nuveen
Premium Income Municipal Fund 2, Inc., Nuveen Premium Income Municipal
Fund 4, Inc., Nuveen Premium Income Municipal Fund, Inc., Nuveen
Quality Income Municipal Fund, Inc., Nuveen Quality Municipal 2018 Term
Fund, Nuveen Quality Municipal Fund, Inc., Nuveen Quality Preferred
Income Fund, Nuveen Quality Preferred Income Fund 2, Nuveen Quality
Preferred Income Fund 3, Nuveen Real Asset Income and Growth Fund,
Nuveen Real Estate Income Fund, Nuveen S&P 500 Buy-Write Income Fund,
Nuveen S&P 500 Dynamic Overwrite Fund, Nuveen Select Maturities
Municipal Fund, Nuveen Select Quality Municipal Fund, Inc., Nuveen
Select Tax-Free Income Portfolio, Nuveen Select Tax-Free Income
Portfolio 2, Nuveen Select Tax-Free Income Portfolio 3, Nuveen Senior
Income Fund, Nuveen Short Duration Credit Opportunities Fund, Nuveen
Strategy Funds, Inc., Nuveen Tax-Advantaged Dividend Growth Fund,
Nuveen Tax-Advantaged Total Return Strategy Fund, Nuveen Texas Quality
Income Municipal Fund, Nuveen Virginia Premium Income Municipal Fund,
Diversified Real Asset Income Fund (each a ``Fund'', collectively, the
``Funds''), U.S. Bancorp (``USB''), U.S. Bank National Association
(``USBNA'') and U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc. (``USBI'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 27, 2013, and
amended on July 1, 2014, December 8, 2014, May 22, 2015, and October
22, 2015.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on December 28, 2015, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts
bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants, c/o Richard T.
Prins, Esq. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Four Times
Square, New York, NY 10036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6915, or Daniele Marchesani, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Chief Counsel's Office, Division of Investment Management).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. Each Fund is an open-end or closed-end management investment
company registered under the Act and is organized as a business trust
or corporation under the laws of Massachusetts, Maryland or Minnesota,
or is a series thereof. The Funds have a variety of investment
objectives, but each may invest a portion of its assets in fixed-income
instruments. ``Fixed-income instruments'' for purposes of the Order
means fixed-income securities and interests in syndicated loans,
convertible bonds and convertible preferred stock, as well as money
market instruments, such as treasury instruments, commercial paper and
certificates of deposit.
    2. The Adviser, a Delaware limited liability company, is a direct
wholly owned subsidiary of Nuveen, a Delaware corporation. The Adviser
is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act''). The Adviser acts as investment
adviser to the Funds and has oversight over one or more sub-advisers
engaged by the Funds.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Each Fund has (or may, in the future, have) one or more
affiliated or unaffiliated sub-advisers that provide sub-advisory
services (each, a ``Sub-Adviser,'' collectively, the ``Sub-
Advisers''). Applicants request the Order cover any such Sub-
Advisers, provided that any Sub-Adviser that relies on the Order
complies with the conditions of the Order as though it were an
Adviser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. USBNA is a national banking association and a wholly owned
subsidiary of USB. USBNA Dealer Division, an internal division of
USBNA, engages in bank permitted dealer activities and is exempt from
registering as a broker-dealer pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (``1934 Act''). USBI, a Delaware corporation, is also a wholly
owned subsidiary of USB that is registered as a broker-dealer with the
Commission under the 1934 Act. Each of USBI, USBNA, USBNA Dealer
Division, as well as other affiliates of USB that are controlled
(within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act) by USB and are
registered as broker-dealers or exempt from registration as such (each,
a ``USB Trading Entity,'' and, collectively, the ``USB Trading
Entities''), may seek to engage in Transactions with the Funds.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ No director, officer or employee of the Funds or the Adviser
is or will be a director, officer or employee of a USB Trading
Entity. The board of directors or board of trustees or other
governing body, as applicable (``Board'') of each Fund currently has
eleven members, of which nine members are currently not interested
persons of the Fund and the chair of the Board of each Fund is
currently not an interested person, as defined in section 2(a)(19)
of the Act, of the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. On December 31, 2010, Nuveen completed its acquisition of a
portion of the asset management business of FAF Advisors, Inc. (``FAF
Advisors''), a wholly owned subsidiary of USBNA (the ``FAF
Acquisition''). The open-end funds previously advised by FAF Advisors
entered into investment advisory agreements with the Adviser. The
Adviser continued to serve as investment adviser to the open-end funds
and closed-end funds that it advised prior to the FAF Acquisition.
    5. Certain fiduciary account investments maintained by USB
Fiduciary in certain of the Funds remain after the FAF acquisition. USB
Fiduciary has discretionary authority over, but no pecuniary interest
in, such investments. Because of these investments, there may be
affiliations between the USB Trading Entities and the Funds.
    6. Applicants state that, because of consolidation in the financial
services industry, a few major broker-dealers account for a large
percentage of the market share in trading in fixed income instruments.
Applicants state that the decline in the number of broker-dealers and
banks trading in the fixed-income instruments in which the Funds seek
to invest and the increasing significance of the few remaining
institutions demonstrate the importance to the Funds of their
relationships with such entities, including the USB Trading

Entities. For example, Applicants further state that in the first half
of 2015, the USB Trading Entities were ranked 15th as a domestic book
running lead manager of U.S. investment grade corporate bonds by
volume, and ranked 6th as a lead and co-manager by number of
transactions. Applicants represent that the USB Trading Entities'
underwriting market share was 37% calculated as a percentage of the
total number of U.S. investment grade corporate bond transactions in
the marketplace. On the municipal securities side of the business, the
USB Trading Entities were ranked 66th in fixed rate lead managed
business, and 9th in variable rate demand note underwriting in 2014.
Applicants further represent that as a variable rate demand note
underwriter the USB Trading Entities achieved a 3% market share in
2014. Applicants state the USB Trading Entities ranked 5th in the
Overall Bookrunner League Tables by number of deals with a 3% market
share, 3rd in the Domestic League Tables and 5th in the Global League
Tables for private placements in 2014. Applicants assert that these
statistics demonstrate the growth in demand for its services and USB
expects continued growth on an ongoing basis in capital markets
transaction volumes for the USB Trading Entities.
    7. Applicants assert that prohibiting the Funds from engaging in
the Transactions with the USB Trading Entities would become
increasingly detrimental to the ongoing interests of Fund shareholders
by limiting the Funds' access to important trading counterparties that
have growing market share in many of the types of instruments that the
Funds purchase. Applicants submit that prohibiting the Funds from
engaging in Transactions with the USB Trading Entities unnecessarily
reduces the opportunities available to the Funds to obtain competitive
pricing and execution and to access the markets for particular fixed-
income instruments that are available from only a few dealers.
Applicants assert that precluding a Fund from trading with a USB
Trading Entity may harm the Fund by, among other things, preventing it
from obtaining the best pricing, terms and quality of services
otherwise available in the market.
    8. Applicants, therefore, request the Order, pursuant to sections
6(c) and 17(b) of the Act exempting from section 17(a) of the Act \3\
Transactions entered into in the ordinary course of business by a Fund
with USB Trading Entities, under the terms and conditions set forth in
the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Applicants are not seeking relief from the provisions of
sections 10(f), 17(d) or 17(e) of the Act or rules 17d-1 or 17e-1
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. The requested relief would include (i) the Funds and any
investment company registered under the Act or series thereof, whether
now existing or organized in the future, that is advised by the Adviser
or by any existing or future entity that is controlling, controlled by
or under common control with the Adviser or Nuveen and registered as an
investment adviser under the Advisers Act; (ii) the Adviser; and (iii)
the USB Trading Entities; \4\ provided that any entity that relies on
the Order complies with the terms and conditions of the Order as though
it were an applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ All existing entities that currently intend to rely on the
requested relief are either named as applicants or listed in
Schedule A to the application. Any other entity that relies on the
Order now or in the future will comply with the terms and conditions
set forth in the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. The Order would be available only in circumstances in which the
USB Trading Entity might be deemed to be (i) an affiliated person
(``first-tier affiliate''), or an affiliated person of a first-tier
affiliate (a ``second-tier affiliate'') of a Fund solely by reason of a
USB Fiduciary,\5\ being deemed to own, control or hold with power to
vote through non-proprietary, trust or other fiduciary account
investments five percent or more of the Fund's total outstanding voting
securities (each, a ``5% Fund''); (ii) a first-tier affiliate of a Fund
solely by reason of USB Fiduciary being deemed to beneficially own
through the fiduciary account investments more than twenty-five percent
of the Fund's total outstanding voting securities or, by virtue of such
fiduciary account investments, to control the Fund (each, a ``25%
Fund,'' together with the 5% Funds, the ``Owned Funds''); and/or (iii)
a second-tier affiliate of any Fund other than an Owned Fund (each, an
``Other Fund'') solely by reason of USB Fiduciary being considered to
own, control or hold with power to vote a 5% Fund's securities as
described in (i) or being deemed to beneficially own a 25% Fund's
securities as described in (ii), through fiduciary account
investments.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ USB Fiduciary includes USBNA, its trust bank subsidiaries,
U.S. Bank Trust National Association and U.S. Bank Trust National
Association SD, and any successors. The term ``successor'' is
limited to the entity that results from a reorganization into
another jurisdiction, a change in the type of business organization
or a combination, consolidation or reorganization of any of the
entities referred to in the previous sentence, including any such
combination, consolidation or reorganization effected through the
use of a ``shell'' entity controlled by any of the foregoing
entities, provided that such combination, consolidation or
reorganization does not result in a change of direct or indirect
control of such entities.
    \6\ Applicants note that there may be some instances in which
USB or an entity, including a division thereof, controlled by USB
(each, a ``USB Affiliate,'' collectively, the ``USB Affiliates'')
might be deemed to own, control or hold with power to vote less than
five percent of the outstanding voting securities of a Fund
otherwise than through fiduciary account investments (a ``<5%
holding''). References to potential affiliations arising ``solely by
reason of'' fiduciary account investments above certain levels may
include situations where fiduciary account investments exceed such
levels only when added to a <5% holding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. The requested relief would not extend to primary market
Transactions in fixed-income instruments, other than repurchase
agreements and variable rate demand notes, of which USB or any entity
controlled by USB, including any USB Trading Entity, is the primary
obligor.
    12. Neither USB nor any USB Affiliates control or will control
(within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act), directly or
indirectly, Nuveen or the Adviser or any other non-Fund entity under
the control of Nuveen (together, the ``Nuveen Affiliates''), and
neither USB nor any USB Affiliates will exercise, or attempt to
exercise, control over any Fund. Applicants state that only the
fiduciary account investments in the Owned Funds raise the affiliation
issues addressed by the requested relief. Additionally, Nuveen has no
beneficial interest in, and will not control (within the meaning of
section 2(a)(9) of the Act) directly or indirectly, USB, the USB
Trading Entities or any other USB Affiliate.
    13. Applicants state that the USB Affiliates will not have any
involvement in the Advisers' investment decisions or decisions to
engage in Transactions pursuant to the Order, and will not attempt to
influence or control in any way the placing by the Adviser of orders,
other than in the normal course of sales activities of the same nature
that are being carried out during the same time period with respect to
unaffiliated institutional clients of the USB Trading Entity, or that
existed between the USB Trading Entity and FAF Advisors, if any, prior
to the consummation of the FAF Acquisition.
    14. Applicants assert that there is substantial internal separation
and independent operation of the division of USBNA that maintains
fiduciary accounts (``USBNA Fiduciary Division'') and USBNA Dealer
Division. USBNA Fiduciary Division is subject to strict fiduciary laws
and regulations that require USBNA Fiduciary Division to act solely in
the interests of the principals or beneficiaries of the accounts.
Applicants represent that

there is not, and will not be, any express or implied understanding
between a USB Trading Entity and Nuveen or the Adviser that the Adviser
will cause a Fund to enter into Transactions or give preference to the
USB Trading Entity in effecting such Transactions between the Fund and
the USB Trading Entity.
    15. USB Fiduciary undertakes to not to exercise any voting power
with respect to shares that constitute five percent or more of a Fund's
total outstanding voting securities, including in connection with the
election of directors/trustees (the ``Non-Voting Undertaking'').

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 17(a) of the Act, in relevant part, prohibits an
affiliated person of a registered investment company, or any affiliated
person of such person, acting as principal, from selling to or
purchasing from such company any security or other property and from
borrowing money or other property from such company. Section 17(b) of
the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a transaction from section
17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that the terms of the proposed
transaction, including the consideration to be paid or received, are
reasonable and fair and do not involve overreaching on the part of any
person concerned and the proposed transaction is consistent with the
policy of each registered investment company concerned and with the
general purposes of the Act.
    2. Section 6(c) of the Act, in relevant part, authorizes the
Commission to exempt any person or transaction, or any class or classes
of persons or transactions, from any provision or provisions of the
Act, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act.
    3. Section 2(a)(3) of the Act, in relevant part, defines
``affiliated person'' of another person to include: (a) Any person
directly or indirectly owning, controlling, or holding with power to
vote, 5% or more of the outstanding voting securities of such other
person; (b) any person 5% or more of whose outstanding voting
securities are directly or indirectly owned by, controlled, or held
with power to vote, by such person; and (c) any person directly or
indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common control with,
such other person.
    4. Section 2(a)(9) of the Act, in relevant part, defines
``control'' as ``the power to exercise a controlling influence over the
management or policies of a company, unless such power is solely the
result of an official position with such company.'' Section 2(a)(9)
also provides that any person who owns beneficially, either directly or
through one or more controlled companies, more than 25% of the voting
securities of a company shall be presumed to control such company, and
that any person who does not so own more than 25% of the voting
securities of any company shall be presumed not to control such
company.
    5. Applicants state that a USB Trading Entity could be deemed to be
a first-tier affiliate or a second-tier affiliate of a 5% Fund insofar
as fiduciary account investments of five percent or more of an Owned
Fund's outstanding voting securities could cause USB Fiduciary to be
viewed as owning, controlling or holding with power to vote ``voting
securities.'' Were a USB Fiduciary deemed to be a first-tier affiliate
of a 5% Fund, the USB Trading Entities (except for USBNA Dealer
Division) would then be deemed to be second-tier affiliates of the 5%
Fund. USBNA Dealer Division, on the other hand, could be deemed to be a
first-tier affiliate of the 5% Fund. Additionally, a USB Trading Entity
could be deemed a first-tier affiliate of a 25% Fund and a second-tier
affiliate of the Other Funds.\7\ Applicants submit that, due to the
fiduciary account investments, any Transaction involving a Fund and a
USB Trading Entity that is a first-tier affiliate or a second-tier
affiliate thereof, would be subject to the prohibition of section 17(a)
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As discussed in the application, this conclusion could be
reached if, on account of the fiduciary account investments, USB
Fiduciary ``beneficially owned'' greater than twenty-five percent of
the 25% Fund's total outstanding voting securities. The Owned Fund
could then be presumed to be under the control of USB Fiduciary, and
thus of USB. As wholly owned subsidiaries of USB, the USB Trading
Entities may also be presumed to be under the control of USB.
Accordingly, the 25% Fund and the USB Trading Entities could be
presumed to be under the common control of USB and thus first-tier
affiliates of each other. If the 25% Fund and the Other Funds are
deemed to be under the control of their Adviser(s), then the 25%
Fund and the Other Funds could be deemed to be first-tier affiliates
of each other by virtue of being under common control. Therefore, if
the USB Trading Entities are deemed to be first-tier affiliates of
the 25% Fund, they could be deemed to be second-tier affiliates of
the Other Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Applicants submit that the primary purpose of section 17(a) is
to prevent a person with the power to control or influence a registered
investment company from engaging in self-dealing or overreaching, to
the detriment of the investment company's shareholders. Applicants
submit that the policies which section 17(a) of the Act was meant to
further are not implicated in the context of the requested Order
because USB and USB Trading Entities are not able to cause a Fund to
enter into a Transaction or otherwise influence portfolio decisions by
the Adviser on behalf of the Funds. Applicants state that, as a result,
no USB Trading Entity is in a position to cause a Fund to enter into
Transactions that are not in the best interests of the Fund and its
shareholders. Applicants also state that there will be no conflict of
interest associated with the Adviser's decision to engage in a
Transaction with a USB Trading Entity on behalf of a Fund. Applicants
further submit that the conditions to the requested Order provide
further protections against any possibility of self-dealing or
overreaching by the USB Trading Entities. Therefore, Applicants submit
that the Order satisfies the statutory standards for relief.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that the Order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:

A. Structural

    (1) Neither USB nor any USB Affiliates will control any Adviser or
any principal underwriters or promoters for the Funds, directly or
indirectly, within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act, and
neither USB nor any USB Affiliates will exercise, or attempt to
exercise, control over any Fund. The Order will remain in effect only
so long as Nuveen, or another entity not controlling, controlled by or
under common control with USB, primarily controls the Adviser. In this
regard, pursuant to the Non-Voting Undertaking, USB Fiduciary will not
exercise any voting authority that it possesses with respect to shares
that constitute five percent or more of any Fund's total outstanding
voting securities. Instead, it will delegate to an independent third
party that is not affiliated with either USB or any USB Affiliate the
voting of such shares.
    (2) Neither USB nor any USB Affiliates will directly or indirectly
consult with Nuveen or any Nuveen Affiliate, including the Adviser, or
any portfolio manager of the Adviser concerning purchase or sale
Transactions, or the selection of a broker or dealer for any
Transactions placed or to be placed on behalf of a Fund, or otherwise
seek to influence the choice of broker or dealer for any Transaction by
a Fund, other than in the normal course of sales activities of the same
nature that are being carried out during the same time period with
respect to unaffiliated institutional clients of the

USB Trading Entity, or that existed between the USB Trading Entity and
the Adviser and the Nuveen Sub-Advisers, if any, prior to the
consummation of the FAF Acquisition.
    (3) No officer, director or employee of an Owned Fund will directly
or indirectly seek to influence in any way the terms of any Transaction
covered by the Order, other than in the normal course of investment
activities of the same nature that are being carried out during the
same time period with respect to unaffiliated broker-dealers, or that
existed between the USB Trading Entity and the Adviser and the Nuveen
Sub-Advisers, if any, prior to the consummation of the FAF Acquisition.
    (4) Each USB Trading Entity will adopt and implement policies that
prohibit the USB Trading Entity from (a) linking any approval or action
relating to an Owned Fund to any action by any Fund or by the Adviser
relating to any Fund, or (b) using the fiduciary account investments in
an Owned Fund as a basis for seeking to persuade any Fund or the
Adviser to engage in business with the USB Trading Entity.
    (5) The Adviser and the USB Trading Entities, with the assistance
of their respective legal/compliance departments, will prepare
guidelines for their respective personnel to make certain that
Transactions effected pursuant to the Order comply with its terms and
conditions, and that the Adviser and the USB Trading Entities maintain
an arm's-length relationship. The respective legal/compliance
departments of the Adviser and the USB Trading Entities will monitor
periodically the activities of the Adviser and the USB Trading
Entities, respectively, to make certain that the terms and conditions
of the Order are met.

B. Transactional

    With respect to each Transaction entered into or effected pursuant
to the Order on behalf of a Fund:
    (1) Each Fund's Board, including a majority of its disinterested
directors or trustees, as applicable (``Necessary Majority''), will
approve, and the Fund will implement, procedures governing all
Transactions pursuant to the Order and the Fund's Board will no less
frequently than quarterly review all Transactions conducted pursuant to
the Order and receive and review a report (the ``Report''), of those
Transactions. The Report which will be prepared by the Adviser and
reviewed and approved by the Fund's Chief Compliance Officer, will
indicate for each Transaction that the terms and conditions of the
Order have been satisfied, and will include a discussion of any
significant changes in the volume, type or terms of Transactions
between the relevant Funds and the USB Trading Entity, the reasons for
these changes, and a determination that such changes are appropriate.
In addition, annually and prior to entering into a Transaction with a
USB Trading Entity that no Fund has previously traded with, the Board
will consider (i) whether the level of Transactions with USB Trading
Entities is appropriate and (ii) whether continued reliance on the
Order in any applicable category of fixed-income instruments is
appropriate in light of the need of the Funds to have the USB Trading
Entities available as trading counterparties, as evidenced by, among
other things, the aggregate market share of the USB Trading Entities in
each such category.
    (2) For each Transaction, the Adviser will adhere to a ``best
execution'' standard, will consider only the interests of the Fund and
will not take into account the impact of the Fund's investment decision
on the USB Trading Entity. Before entering into any Transaction, the
Adviser will determine that the Transaction is consistent with the
investment objective(s) and policies of the Fund and is in the best
interests of the Fund and its shareholders.
    (3) Each Fund will (a) for so long as the Order is relied upon,
maintain and preserve in an easily accessible place a written copy of
the procedures and conditions (and any modifications thereto) that are
described herein, and (b) maintain and preserve for a period of not
less than six years from the end of the fiscal year in which any
Transaction in which the Adviser knows that both a USB Trading Entity
and a Fund directly or indirectly have an interest occurs, the first
two years in an easily accessible place, a written record of each such
Transaction setting forth a description of the security purchased or
sold by the Fund, a description of the USB Trading Entity's, or
affiliated person of the USB Trading Entity's interest or role in the
Transaction, the terms of the Transaction, and the information or
materials upon which the determination was made that such Transaction
was made in accordance with the procedures and conditions set forth in
the application.
    (4) Except for Transactions involving repurchase agreements and
variable rate demand notes, before any secondary market principal
Transaction in fixed-income instruments is entered into between a Fund
and a USB Trading Entity, the Adviser will obtain a competitive
quotation for the same instruments (or in the case of instruments for
which quotations for the same instruments are not available, a
competitive quotation for Comparable Instruments)\8\ from at least two
unaffiliated market counterparties that are in a position to quote
favorable market prices, except that if, after reasonable efforts by
the Adviser, quotations are unavailable from two such market
counterparties, only one other competitive quotation is required. For
each such Transaction, the Adviser will determine, based upon the
quotations and such other relevant information reasonably available to
the Adviser (such as available transaction prices and any other
information regarding the value of the instruments), that the price
available from the USB Trading Entity is at least as favorable as that
available from other sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The term ``Comparable Instruments'' refers to instruments
with substantially identical maturities, credit risk and repayment
terms (including floating or fixed-rate coupons, attached options,
or any other provisions that affect the expected size or timing of
the payments from the instruments) as the instruments to be
purchased or sold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Repurchase Agreements. With respect to Transactions involving
repurchase agreements, a Fund will enter into such agreements only
where the Adviser has determined, based upon information reasonably
available to the Adviser, that the income to be earned from the
repurchase agreement is at least equal to that available from other
sources. Before any repurchase agreements are entered into pursuant to
the Order, the Fund or the Adviser will obtain competitive quotations
from at least two unaffiliated market counterparties with respect to
repurchase agreements comparable to the type of repurchase agreement
involved, except that if, after reasonable efforts by the Adviser,
quotations are unavailable from two such market counterparties, only
one other competitive quotation is required.
    (b) Variable Rate Demand Notes. With respect to each Transaction
involving variable rate demand notes for which dealer quotes are not
ordinarily available, a Fund will only undertake purchases and sales
where the Adviser has determined, based on relevant information
reasonably available to the Adviser that the income earned from the
variable rate demand note is at least equal to that of variable rate
demand notes of comparable quality that are available from other
sources.
    (5) With respect to instruments offered in a primary market
underwritten, or other primary market, Transaction, the Fund will
undertake such purchase from a USB Trading

Entity only where the Adviser has determined, based upon relevant
information reasonably available to the Adviser that the instruments
will be purchased at a price that is not more than the price paid by
each other purchaser of the instruments from, as relevant, the USB
Trading Entity or other members of an underwriting syndicate in that
offering or in any concurrent offering of instruments, and on the same
terms as such other purchasers (except in the case of an offering
conducted under the laws of a country other than the United States, for
any rights to purchase that are required by law to be granted to
existing holders of the issuer). If no information regarding concurrent
purchasers of the instruments is reasonably available to the Adviser,
the Fund may undertake such purchase from a USB Trading Entity when the
Adviser has determined, based upon information reasonably available to
the Adviser, that the yield on the instruments to be purchased is at
least equal to that available on Comparable Instruments from other
sources at that time.
    (6) The commission, fee, spread, or other remuneration to be
received by the USB Trading Entities must be reasonable and fair
compared to the commission, fee, spread, or other remuneration received
by others in connection with comparable transactions involving similar
instruments being purchased or sold during a comparable period of time.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-30867 Filed 12-7-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5557-5560]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02953]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0141]

Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application
for an Exemption From Stoneridge, Inc.

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
announces its decision to grant Stoneridge, Inc.'s (Stoneridge)
application for a limited 5-year exemption to allow motor carriers to
operate commercial motor vehicles (CMV) with the company's
MirrorEyeTM Camera Monitor System (CMS) installed as an
alternative to the two rear-vision mirrors required by the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR). The Agency has determined
that granting the exemption to allow use of the MirrorEyeTM
system in lieu of mirrors would likely achieve a level of safety
equivalent to or greater than the level of safety provided by the
regulation.

DATES: This exemption is effective February 21, 2019 and ending
February 13, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Luke Loy, Vehicle and Roadside
Operations Division, Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC-
PSV,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments submitted to notice requesting public comments on the
exemption application, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit
Room W12-140 on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. The on-line Federal document
management system is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
The docket number is listed at the beginning of this notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

Stoneridge Application for Exemption

    Stoneridge applied for an exemption from 49 CFR 393.80(a) to allow
its MirrorEyeTM CMS to be installed as an alternative to the
two rear-vision mirrors required on CMVs. A copy of the application is
included in the docket referenced at the beginning of this notice.
    Section 393.80(a) of the FMCSRs requires that each bus, truck, and
truck-tractor be equipped with two rear-vision mirrors, one at each
side. The mirrors must be positioned to reflect to the driver a view of
the highway to the rear, and the area along both sides of the CMV.
Section 393.80(a) cross-references

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) standard
for mirrors on motor vehicles, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 111. Paragraph S7.1 of FMVSS No. 111 provides requirements
for mirrors on multipurpose passenger vehicles and trucks with a gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 4,536 kg and less than 11,340
kg and each bus, other than a school bus, with a GVWR of more than
4,536 kg. Paragraph S8.1 provides requirements for mirrors on
multipurpose passenger vehicles and trucks with a GVWR of 11,340 kg or
more.
    The MirrorEyeTM CMS consists of multiple digital cameras
mounted on the exterior of the CMV and enclosed in an aerodynamic
package that provides both environmental protection for the cameras and
a mounting location for optimal visibility. Each camera has video
processing software that presents a clear, high-definition image to the
driver by means of a monitor mounted to each A-pillar of the CMV, i.e.,
the structural member between the windshield and door of the cab. The
company explains that attaching the monitors to the A-pillars avoids
the creation of incremental blind spots while eliminating the blind
spots associated with conventional mirrors. Stoneridge states that its
CMS meets or exceeds the visibility requirements provided in FMVSS No.
111 based on several factors:
     Greater field of view (FOV) than conventional mirrors--
Mirrors are replaced by wide angle, narrow angle and look-down cameras
expanding the FOV by an estimated 25 percent.
     Fail-safe design--The CMS has independent video processing
of multiple camera images so that in the unlikely event of an
individual camera failure, the other camera images continue to be
displayed. This ensures that real-time images are continuously
displayed without interruption.
     Augmented and enhanced vision quality--The use of high-
definition digital cameras provides for color night vision, low light
sensitivity and trailer panning capabilities. This assists with night
driving, operating under other low lighting conditions, and provides
for glare reduction.
     Trailer panning--The CMS automatically tracks the end of
the trailer to keep it in view while the vehicle is moving forward.
Stoneridge believes this feature could eliminate collisions associated
with the CMV driver making a right-hand turn, and incidents where the
CMV strikes a pedestrian or bicyclist while making right hand turns.
    Stoneridge also believes use of its CMS may help to reduce driver
fatigue by requiring less head movement by drivers compared to the
number of head movement needed to use conventional mirrors. The company
claims that use of its CMS provides improved fuel economy because the
housing for the system is more aerodynamic than the conventional
mirrors required by Sec.  393.80(a).
    The exemption would apply to all CMV operators driving vehicles
with the MirrorEyeTM CMS. Stoneridge believes that mounting
the system as described would maintain a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved without
the exemption.

Comments

    FMCSA published a notice of the application in the Federal Register
on April 5, 2018, and asked for public comment (83 FR 14716). The
Agency received 31 comments from: The American Trucking Associations
(ATA); two motor carriers (Schneider National, Inc. (Schneider) and
J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. (J.B. Hunt)); the Trucking Alliance;
the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA); Advocates for Highway
and Auto Safety (Advocates); and 25 individuals.
    ATA supports granting the application to allow use of the CMS as an
alternative to the two rear-view mirrors required by the FMCSRs. ATA
stated ``Granting this and similar petitions for exemption from FMCSR
393.80 requirements that currently are barriers to mirrorless
technology will provide valuable real-world experience and data to
inform future regulatory action to allow CMS technology as an
alternative to rear view mirrors for all vehicle types.''
    Further, ATA stated:

. . . motor carriers and truck manufacturers recognize the potential
of CMS for improving both safe operations and fuel efficiency when
compared with traditional exterior mirrors. For example, CMS can
provide the following functions beyond what traditional mirrors
offer: Trailer swing video panning view capabilities; wider viewing
angles of driver blind spots encompassing multiple mirror locations
(i.e., hood spot mirrors) to one vantage point; direct solar glare
resistance, and night vision capabilities. It should also be noted
that CMS can be designed and placed in a way that reduces the
chances of damage compared with traditional mirrors, which can
improve vehicle uptime and reduce maintenance and operational costs
by eliminating traditional mirror repair/replacement and allowing
faster driver pre/post trip inspections and technician/officer
inspections.

    Schneider and J.B. Hunt stated that they have been using the
MirrorEyeTM CMS, in addition to the required mirrors, in a
select number of vehicles, and both motor carriers support granting
Stoneridge's application. Schneider states that its drivers using the
MirrorEyeTM CMS have (1) ``had an overwhelmingly positive
experience,'' and (2) confirmed some of the benefits touted by
Stoneridge in its application, including improved visibility in night
driving and low light conditions, improved visibility due to auto
tracking of the trailer, and reduced driver distraction due to light
and glare reduction. J.B. Hunt states that ``we have not been involved
in any collisions and have received overwhelming positive feedback from
our test drivers.'' J. B. Hunt also states that its drivers noted
benefits such as ``real time, excellent monitor image clarity with
improved field of vision around their tractor and trailing units and
elimination of the tractor's problematic front passenger side blind
spot.''
    The Trucking Alliance, a coalition of freight and logistics
companies that are working together to increase safety for commercial
truck drivers, reduce the number of large truck accidents, and improve
highway safety for the general public throughout the United States,
also supports granting the Stoneridge application. The Trucking
Alliance notes that some of its member carriers have been testing the
technologies offered by Stoneridge that are the subject of the
exemption application. The Trucking Alliance states:

    Carriers report that this Stoneridge technology is performing at
better than acceptable levels of performance. Carriers have reported
no collisions. Drivers report that the technology works and benefits
them in eliminating many of the problems associated with
conventional side mirrors. For example, one Trucking Alliance member
carrier has reported driver feedback includes such observations as a
`greater field of vision, color night vision images, and the trailer
panning feature which tracks the end of the trailer during turning
and backing maneuvers.'

    Thirteen individuals commented in support of granting the temporary
exemption, and noted various advantages of the Stoneridge CMS as
compared to the rear vision mirrors required by the FMCSRs including
(1) economic benefits related to fuel economy gains and carbon emission
reductions from reduced drag forces, (2) superior total field-of-view
around a CMV, including reduction/elimination of blind spots (3)
increased visibility when driving at night and during inclement
weather, (4) enhanced vehicle

maneuverability in backing, turning, and lane changes through use of
trailer scanning, (5) and reduced driver fatigue.
    CVSA stated that while it recognizes there may be potential safety
benefits of the proposed technology, it does not have data to support
or refute the efficacy of CMS technology. However, CVSA noted that its
associate member companies that have some experience with the
Stoneridge technology reported that ``drivers responded favorably when
testing the MirrorEyeTM technology and preferred them in
place of traditional side mirrors.'' Additionally, CVSA noted that
granting the exemption may have impacts on roadside enforcement
personnel, as inspectors use the mirrors for purposes beyond the intent
of the FMVSS and the FMCSRs. Specifically, CVSA states that roadside
inspectors use the mirrors to see what is happening inside the cab, and
to identify when CMV drivers are operating a vehicle in an unsafe
manner, such as illegally using a handheld electronic device, or not
wearing a safety belt. Additionally, roadside inspectors frequently use
mirrors to visually communicate with drivers during roadside
inspections, when at the side or rear of the inspection vehicle. CVSA
stated that it is unclear whether the technology has a proven safety
benefit, and noted concern that exemptions from safety regulations have
the potential to undermine consistency and uniformity in compliance
enforcement, and encouraged FMCSA to consider the roadside enforcement
and inspection aspects of rear vision mirror usage in the evaluation of
the application.
    Advocates opposes the Stoneridge application ``on the basis that
the application is overly broad. The regulations governing requests for
exemption requires applications to include `an estimate of the number
of drivers and commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) that would be operated
under the terms and conditions of the exemption', which in this case
could encompass every CMV and driver presently on the U.S. roads. . .we
must oppose such an overly broad exemption which would apply for at
least five years.'' While Advocates opposes the application, it
recognized the potential benefits of the technology, and instead urged
NHTSA and FMCSA ``to establish a pilot program study the benefits of
using cameras to enhance commercial vehicle driver visibility as this
technology has the potential to reduce or eliminate the large and
dangerous blind zones around CMVs.'' Advocates states that the rear-
vision mirror regulations are, by definition, minimum safety standards,
and any exemption granted by FMCSA ``could deny both the driver(s) and
the public the minimum required safety protections intended under the
FMCSRs and, in this case, the pertinent FMVSS as well.''
    Twelve individuals commented opposing the application. Many of
these commenters cited concerns regarding the ability of the CMS system
to function properly in the event of a system failure (i.e., an
electronic malfunction). These commenters also noted concerns about
road debris creating partial or complete obstruction of the camera,
sunlight and glare on monitor screens causing them to be not visible,
and the possibility of increased driver distraction. Some commenters
recommended that the CMS system could be used as a secondary, backup
system, but that the rear-vision mirrors required by the FMCSRs should
be retained in addition to the camera system.

FMCSA Decision

    The FMCSA has evaluated the Stoneridge exemption application, and
the comments received. For the reasons discussed below, FMCSA believes
that granting the exemption to allow motor carriers to operate CMVs
with the Stoneridge MirrorEyeTM CMS installed as an
alternative to the two rear-vision mirrors required by the FMCSRs is
likely to achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the
level of safety provided by the regulation.
    Use of the MirrorEyeTM CMS provides CMV drivers with an
enhanced field of view when compared to the required rear-vision
mirrors because (1) it eliminates the blind spots on both sides of the
vehicle created by the required rear-vision mirrors, (2) the multi-
camera system expands the field of view compared to the required rear-
vision mirrors by an estimated 25 percent, and (3) the trailer panning
feature automatically tracks the end of the trailer to keep it in view
in forward motion. Additionally, the MirrorEyeTM CMS uses
high definition cameras and monitors that include features such as
color night vision, low light sensitivity, and light and glare
reduction that together help provide drivers with improved vision in
the field of view when compared to traditional rear-vision mirrors. The
MirrorEyeTM CMS includes features such as self-cleaning
lenses/cameras to eliminate problems with rain and dirt, a feature that
is not required for traditional rear-vision mirrors, and an advanced
defrosting system for winter driving.
    In response to commenters' concerns about the possibility of
electronic malfunctions that may compromise operation of the system,
Stoneridge notes in its application:

    The MirrorEyeTM CMS is a fail-safe operating system
by design due to its independent video processing of multiple camera
images. In the unlikely event of an individual camera failure, the
other camera images continue to be displayed. Proprietary software
ensures that real-time images are continuously displayed without
interruption. In addition to the MirrorEyeTM CMS multi-
camera redundant design, mounting the camera housing high on the
vehicle and providing both a power-fold and breakaway feature
further reduces the potential damage that is possible in normal
operating environments.

Importantly, neither of the motor carriers that provided comments and
that are currently using the MirrorEyeTM CMS cited any
concerns or problems with system functionality.
    In response to concerns about the possibility of increased driver
distraction, FMCSA notes that the monitors will be located over the A-
pillars to maintain the same approximate direction of glance as
conventional mirrors, minimizing any possible concerns about increased
distraction. And, as Stoneridge notes in its application, the monitor's
mounting location ``requires less lateral head movement resulting in an
ergonomic benefit and less driver fatigue.''
    FMCSA acknowledges Advocates' concerns about the possible breadth
of the exemption if granted. However, part 381 of the FMCSRs does not
impose any specific limitations on the number of vehicles that may be
covered by a temporary exemption; rather, it requires FMCSA to make a
determination that any exemption that is granted is likely to maintain
a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level of
safety that would be obtained by complying with the regulation. FMCSA
believes that the Stoneridge MirrorEyeTM CMS meets this
burden.
    FMCSA also acknowledges CVSA's concerns regarding the inability of
roadside inspectors and law enforcement officers to use rear-vision
mirrors for the other uses described in its comments if the exemption
is granted to permit use of the MirrorEyeTM CMS in lieu of
the mirrors. However, use of the rear-vision mirrors for purposes other
than driver visibility is beyond the scope of the FMCSR requirements.
FMCSA notes that inspectors may still communicate with drivers by means
of hand signals/gestures if the system is on, and the driver will
continue to see everything that would have been in view with the
mirrors.
    The FMCSRs impose several operational controls that will help

ensure that the MirrorEyeTM CMS is functioning properly at
all times. Section 396.7 of the FMCSRs, ``Unsafe operations
forbidden,'' prohibits any vehicle from being operated in such a
condition as to likely cause an accident or breakdown of the vehicle.
Section 392.7(a) requires each CMV driver to satisfy himself/herself
that a vehicle is in safe condition before operating the vehicle, which
would include ensuring that the rear-vision mirrors (or in this case,
the MirrorEyeTM CMS)--are in good working order. Similarly,
section 396.13(a) of the FMCSRs requires that, before driving a
vehicle, a driver must be satisfied that the vehicle is in safe
operating condition. If the MirrorEyeTM CMS (effectively
functioning as the rear vision mirrors) fails during operation, the
driver must complete a driver vehicle inspection report at the
completion of the work day as required by section 396.11 of the FMCSRs,
and the motor carrier must ensure that the defect is corrected.

Terms and Conditions for the Exemption

    The Agency hereby grants the exemption for a 5-year period,
beginning February 21, 2019 and ending February 13, 2024. During the
temporary exemption period, motor carriers operating CMVs may utilize
the Stoneridge MirrorEyeTM CMS installed in lieu of the two
rear-vision mirrors required by section 393.80 of the FMCSRs. FMCSA
emphasizes that this exemption is limited to the Stoneridge
MirrorEyeTM CMS, and does not apply to any other camera-
based mirror replacement system/technology. Section 396.7 of the
FMCSRs, ``Unsafe operations forbidden,'' prohibits any vehicle from
being operated in such a condition as to likely cause an accident or a
breakdown of the vehicle. If the camera or monitor system fails during
normal vehicle operation on the highway, continued operation of the
vehicle shall be forbidden until (1) the MirrorEyeTM CMS can
be repaired, or (2) conventional rear-vision mirrors that are compliant
with section 393.80 are installed on the vehicle.
    The exemption will be valid for 5 years unless rescinded earlier by
FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) Motor carriers and/or
CMVs fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2)
the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was
maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315(b).
    Interested parties possessing information that would demonstrate
that motor carriers operating commercial motor vehicles utilizing the
Stoneridge MirrorEyeTM CMS installed as an alternative to
the two rear-vision mirrors required by section 393.80 of the FMCSRs
are not achieving the requisite statutory level of safety should
immediately notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any such information
and, if safety is being compromised or if the continuation of the
exemption is not consistent with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), will
take immediate steps to revoke the exemption.

Preemption

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31313(d), as implemented by 49 CFR
381.600, during the period this exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation applicable to interstate commerce that
conflicts with or is inconsistent with this exemption with respect to a
firm or person operating under the exemption. States may, but are not
required to, adopt the same exemption with respect to operations in
intrastate commerce.

    Issued on: February 13, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-02953 Filed 2-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: April 26, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 80)]
[Notices]
[Page 24765-24766]
[DOCID:fr26ap06-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Release No. 53684]

Order Extending Term of Short Sale Pilot

April 20, 2006.
    On June 23, 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') approved new and amended short sale regulations in
Regulation SHO under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act'').\1\ On July 28, 2004, the Commission issued an order (``First
Pilot Order'') creating a one year Pilot (``Pilot'') suspending the
provisions of Rule 10a-1(a) under the Act \2\ and any short sale price
test of any exchange or national securities association for short sales
\3\ of certain securities.\4\ The Pilot was created pursuant to Rule
202T of Regulation SHO, which established procedures to allow the
Commission to temporarily suspend short sale price tests so that the
Commission could study the effectiveness of short sale price tests.\5\
The First Pilot Order provided that the Pilot would commence on January
3, 2005 and terminate on December 31, 2005, and that we might issue
further orders affecting the operation of the First Pilot Order.\6\ On
November 29, 2004, we issued an order (``Second Pilot Order'')
resetting the Pilot to commence on May 2, 2005 and end on April 28,
2006 to give market participants additional time to make system changes
necessary to comply with the Pilot.\7\ We are issuing this Order
(``Third Pilot Order'') to extend the termination date of the Pilot to
August 6, 2007, the date on which temporary Rule 202T expires.
Extension of the Pilot termination date will maintain the status quo
with regard to price tests for Pilot securities and system designs of
market participants while the staff completes its analysis of the Pilot
results and the Commission conducts any additional short sale
rulemaking. All other terms of the First Pilot Order remain unchanged.
We may issue further orders affecting the operation of the Pilot. For
the reasons discussed below, the Commission finds that extension of the
Pilot is necessary and appropriate in the public interest and
consistent with the protection of investors.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50103 (July 28, 2004),
69 FR 48008 (August 6, 2004) (``Adopting Release'').
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.10a-1.
    \3\ ``Short sale'' is defined in Rule 200 of Regulation SHO, 17
CFR 242.200.
    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50104 (July 28, 2004),
69 FR 48032 (August 6, 2004). Specifically, the First Pilot Order
suspended price tests for the following: (1) Short sales in the
securities identified in Appendix A to the First Pilot Order; (2)
short sales in the securities included in the Russell 1000 index
effected between 4:15 p.m. EST and the open of the effective
transaction reporting plan of the Consolidated Tape Association
(``consolidated tape'') on the following day; and (3) short sales in
any security not included in paragraphs (1) and (2) effected in the
period between the close of the consolidated tape and the open of
the consolidated tape on the following day.
    \5\ 69 FR at 48012-13. We stated in the Adopting Release that
conducting a pilot pursuant to Rule 202T would ``allow us to obtain
data on the impact of short selling in the absence of a price test
to assist in determining, among other things, the extent to which a
price test is necessary to further the objectives of short sale
regulation, to study the effects of relatively unrestricted short
selling on market volatility, price efficiency, and liquidity, and
to obtain empirical data to help assess whether a short sale price
test should be removed, in part or in whole, for some or all
securities, or if retained, should be applied to additional
securities.'' Id. at 48009.
    \6\ 69 FR at 48033.
    \7\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50747 (November 29,
2004), 69 FR 70480 (December 6, 2004).
    \8\ See Section 36 of the Act. In addition, pursuant to Section
3(f) of the Act, we considered the impact of this extension on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

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

I. New Pilot Termination Date

    We established the Pilot as part of our review of short sale
regulation in conjunction with the adoption of Regulation SHO.\9\ The
Pilot is designed to assist us in assessing whether changes to short
sale regulation are necessary in light of current market practices and
the purposes underlying short sale regulation.\10\ The Pilot is
currently set to terminate on April 28, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 69 FR at 48032; See Adopting Release at 48013.
    \10\ 69 FR at 48032.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To determine whether additional rulemaking is necessary, our staff
will evaluate the results of the Pilot. Although we do not plan to
extend the period being studied beyond April 28, 2006, our staff's
analysis will help them determine whether to recommend changes to the
current short sale regulatory scheme. If we determine that any new or
amended rules are necessary, we will commence the rulemaking process.
This customarily involves issuing a proposing release soliciting
comments on the proposed changes, analyzing such comments and, finally,
adopting any final rules. The process of reviewing the data and
completing any rulemaking will necessarily continue beyond the study
period.
    We believe that it is in the interest of the markets and investors
to maintain the price test scheme established by the Pilot until any
rulemaking resulting from our analysis of the data is complete. Market
participants made significant changes in their systems and practices to
comply with the Pilot. Absent an extension of the Pilot's end date of
April 28, 2006, the pre-Pilot short sale price tests would be restored,
and market participants would be required to make changes to their
systems and practices to ensure that they comply with these rules. If
the Commission thereafter adopts rules that remove or change the nature
of price tests for some or all securities, market participants would be
required to change their systems and procedures again, which could
result in substantial additional costs. Extending the Pilot ending date
would keep the costs of changes to a minimum and help avoid market
disruption.
     Prior to commencement of the Pilot, some market participants
expressed concern about the duration of the Pilot.\11\ We do not
believe that this concern has borne out. The Second Pilot Order delayed
the start of the Pilot period because market participants were not
ready to begin the Pilot during the period specified in the First Pilot
Order. The Pilot will be in place for slightly more than two years,
with this extension. Based on our experience with the Pilot for nearly
a year, the concerns regarding a prolonged time span have proven
unfounded. Indeed, it would be more disruptive to end the Pilot prior
to any Commission action rather than to continue it. Market
participants have already undertaken the costs and burdens of systems
changes, and have informed us that they would not face any additional
burdens or costs from continuing the Pilot. The staff has found no
evidence of market disruption during the Pilot thus far, and we do not
anticipate that continuing the Pilot will trigger any problems in the
future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Adopting Release, 69 FR at 48012 (discussing comment
letters regarding the Pilot's duration from the Nasdaq, the NYSE,
and the STA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Regulation SHO adopting release, the Commission stated that
it ``expects to make information obtained during the pilot publicly
available.'' \12\ Correspondingly, the Commission's staff arranged for
the appropriate self-regulatory organizations to make transactional
short selling data public on a monthly basis on their internet Web
sites.\13\ To promote the best quality studies and to encourage
transparency, the Commission expects the SROs to continue releasing
this transactional data until the end of the Pilot on August 6, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id. at n. 9.
    \13\ A list of the internet Web sites making the monthly trading
data public is available at http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/shopilot.htm
.

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

    Based on the forgoing, we believe that it is necessary and
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors to extend the termination date of the Pilot to August 6,
2007. Accordingly, the Pilot will now terminate on August 6, 2007,
unless otherwise ordered by the Commission.

 II. Conclusion

    We find that extending the termination date of the Pilot to August
6, 2007, for the reasons stated above, is necessary and appropriate in
the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors.
    Accordingly,
    It is hereby ordered that the suspension of the provisions of Rule
10a-1(a) and any short sale price test of any exchange or national
securities association for certain securities and time periods, as set
forth in the First and Second Pilot Orders, shall terminate on August
6, 2007, instead of April 28, 2006. The Commission from time to time
may issue further orders affecting the operation of the Pilot.
    All other provisions of the First Pilot Order and Second Pilot
Order shall remain in effect.

    By the Commission.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-6250 Filed 4-25-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P