[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29682-29684]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13643]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0499]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; City of Erie Fourth of July Fireworks; Lake Erie,
Erie, PA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters within a 280-foot radius of the launch site located at
Dobbins Landing, Erie, PA. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from portions of Lake Erie during City of Erie Fourth of July
fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect
mariners and vessels from the navigational hazards associated with a
fireworks display. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is
prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:45 p.m. until 10:45 p.m. on July
3, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0499 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Michael Collet, Chief Waterways Management Division,
U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the event sponsor did not submit
notice to the Coast Guard with sufficient time remaining before the
event to publish an NPRM. Delaying the effective date of this rule to
wait for a comment period to run would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest by inhibiting the Coast Guard's ability to protect
spectators and vessels form the hazards associated with a fireworks
display.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register because doing so would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. Delaying the
effective date would be contrary to the rule's objectives of enhancing
safety of life on the navigable waters and protection of persons and
vessels in vicinity of the fireworks display.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) has determined that a
fireworks display presents significant risks to the public safety and
property. Such hazards include premature and accidental detonations,
dangerous projectiles, and falling or burning debris. This rule is
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the
navigable waters within the safety zone while the fireworks display
takes place.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone on July 3, 2018, from 9:45 p.m.
until 10:45 p.m. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Erie, Erie, NY contained within 280-foot radius of: 42[deg]08'17.13''
N, 080[deg]05'30.17'' W.
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the conclusion
that this rule is not a significant regulatory action. We anticipate
that it will have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere
with other agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant
or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy
issues. The safety zone created by this rule will be relatively small
and enforced for a relatively short time. Also, the safety zone has
been designed to allow vessels to transit around it. Thus, restrictions
on vessel movement within that particular

area are expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover,
vessels may still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the
Captain of the Port.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule
establishes a temporary safety zone. It is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0499 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0499  Safety Zone; City of Erie Fourth of July Fireworks;
Lake Erie, Erie, PA.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Erie, Erie, PA contained within a 280-foot radius of: 42[deg]08'17.13''
N, 80[deg]05'30.17'' W.
    (b) Enforcement period. This regulation will be enforced from 9:45
p.m. until 10:45 p.m. on July 3, 2018.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene

representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply
with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Buffalo,
or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 20, 2018.
Joseph S. Dufresne,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2018-13643 Filed 6-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 69683-69685]
[DOCID:fr19no08-121]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58923; File No. SR-Amex-2008-51]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, Related to Amendments to Rule 991 (Communications
to Customers) and Rule 921 (Opening of Accounts)

November 10, 2008.
    On June 25, 2008, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or the
``Exchange'') \1\ filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange Act'') \2\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\3\ Amex filed Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 to the proposed
rule change on August 22, 2008, and September 5, 2008, respectively.\4\
Notice of the proposal was published for comment in the Federal
Register on September 30, 2008.\5\ The Commission received no comments
on the proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On September 29, 2008, the Commission approved the merger of
The Amex Membership Corporation, Amex's parent, with NYSE Euronext.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58673 (September 29, 2008),
73 FR 57707 (October 3, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-60 and SR-Amex 2008-62)
(approving the Merger). As a result, Amex was renamed NYSE Alternext
US LLC. For the purposes of this order, we will still refer to Amex.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 modified certain definitions in and
made non-substantive corrections to proposed Rule 991.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58625 (Sept. 23,
2008), 73 FR 56869 (Sept. 30, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposed to amend Amex Rule 991 (``Communications to
Customers'') to delete references to certain provisions of the
Securities Act of 1933 (the ``Securities Act'') that no longer apply to
standardized options \6\ issued by registered clearing agencies and
update and reorganize the rule for greater clarity. In addition, the
proposal seeks to amend Amex Rule 921 (``Opening of Account'') in
connection with the information member organizations must obtain from
customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Standardized Option'' is defined in Rule 19b-1 under the
Exchange Act to mean options contracts trading on a registered
national securities exchange, an automated quotation system of a
registered national securities association, or a foreign exchange
which relate to options classes the terms of which are limited to
specific expiration dates and exercise prices, or such other
securities as the Commission may, by order, designate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Rule 991 (Communications to Customers)

    On December 23, 2002, the Commission published final rules that
exempt standardized options issued by registered clearing agencies and
traded on a registered national securities exchange or registered
national securities association from the Securities Act (other than the
anti-fraud provisions) and the registration requirements of the
Exchange Act.\7\

Since the Securities Act and the rules thereunder (other than the anti-
fraud provisions) are no longer applicable to such standardized
options, Amex proposed to remove elements of the Securities Act that
are embedded in Amex Rule 991. In particular, the Exchange proposed to
remove all references to a ``prospectus'' from Rule 991. Prospectuses
are no longer required for standardized options, and The Options
Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') has, in fact, ceased publication of a
prospectus.\8\ In addition, the proposed amendments would update and
reorganize Rule 991. The Commission has approved proposed rule
amendments implementing similar rule language and format changes by the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. and the Chicago Board
Options Exchange.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See ``Exemption for Standardized Options From Provisions of
the Securities Act of 1933 and From the Registration Requirements of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Final Rule,'' Securities Act
Release No. 8171 and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47082 (Dec.
23, 2002), 68 FR 188 (Jan. 2, 2003).
    \8\ The options disclosure document (the ``ODD'') prepared in
accordance with Rule 9b-1 under the Exchange Act is not deemed to be
a prospectus. 17 CFR 230.135b. See, e.g., Securities Act Release No.
8049 (Dec. 21, 2001), 67 FR 228 (Jan. 2, 2002).
    \9\ See Exchange Act Release No. 58738 (Oct. 6, 2008), 73 FR
60371 (Oct. 10, 2008) (SR-FINRA-2008-13) (approval order) and
Exchange Act Release No. 58823 (Oct. 21, 2008), 73 FR 63747 (Oct.
27, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2007-30) (approval order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Deletion of Certain Provisions of Rule 991
    Amex Rule 991 contains a number of references to a prospectus and
other Securities Act requirements. The Exchange proposed to delete the
following from Rule 991:
     Rule 991(a)(iv), which references the Securities Act
prospectus definition;
     Rule 991(d), which incorporates Securities Act principles
in that it prohibits written material concerning options (i.e., an
offering) from being furnished to any person who has not previously or
contemporaneously received the current ODD;
     Rule 991(e)(ii), which defines the term ``Educational
Material;'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ This paragraph essentially incorporates language of Rule
134a under the Securities Act. While this amendment would eliminate
the separate educational material category, as discussed below, the
Exchange also proposed to revise the definition of Sales Literature
to include educational material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Commentary .02A to Rule 991, which outlines what is
permitted in an ``Advertisement;'' \11\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This paragraph essentially incorporates language of Rule
134 under the Securities Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Commentary .03 to Rule 991, which concerns educational
material.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See note 9, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Re-designation of Rule 991(a) to Proposed Rule 991(d) and Related
Amendments
    Amex Rule 991(a) currently provides an outline of the ``General
Rule'' for options communications. The Exchange proposed to re-
designate paragraph (a) as paragraph (d), and to incorporate
limitations on the use of options communications contained in current
Commentary .01 to Rule 991 into proposed Rule 991(d). In addition,
proposed Rule 991(d)(iii) would amend Rule 991(a)(iii) by clarifying
the types of cautionary statements and caveats that are prohibited. As
previously noted, the Amex proposed to delete Rule 991(a)(iv).
3. Proposed Amendments to Rule 991(b)
    Amex proposed to amend Rule 991(b) to include the types of
communications proposed to be added to the definition of ``Options
Communications'' in proposed Rule 991(a). Proposed Rule 991(b)(ii) and
(b)(iii) would also amend the current requirement to obtain advanced
approval by a Registered Options Principal (``ROP'') for most options
communications by exempting certain options communications, defined as
``Correspondence'' and ``Institutional Sales Material.'' Specifically,
proposed Rule 991(b)(ii) would exempt Correspondence from the pre-
approval requirement unless the Correspondence is distributed to 25 or
more existing retail customers within any 30 calendar day period, and
makes any financial or investment recommendation or otherwise promotes
a product or service of the member. All correspondence would be subject
to the supervision and review requirements of Rule 922. Proposed Rule
991(b)(iii) would exempt Institutional Sales Material from the pre-
approval requirement if the material is distributed to ``qualified
investors'' as defined in Section 3(a)(54) of the Exchange Act.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(54).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pre-approval by a ROP would, however, be required with respect to
independently prepared reprints. In addition, proposed Rule 991(b)(iv)
would require that firms retain options communications in accordance
with the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 17a-4 under the Exchange
Act.\14\ The proposed rule would also require that firms retain other
related documents in the form and for the time periods required for
options communications by Rule 17a-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17a-4. More specifically, Rule 17a-4(b)(4)
requires that a broker-dealer retain ``originals of all
communications received and copies of all communications sent * * *
including all communications which are subject to rules of a self-
regulatory organization of which the member, broker or dealer is a
member regarding communications with the public.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Proposed Amendments to Rule 991(c)
    Amex Rule 991(c) currently requires members and member
organizations to obtain from the Exchange approval for every
advertisement and all educational material. This requirement applies
regardless of whether the options communications are used before or
after delivery of a current ODD. The Exchange proposed to amend this
provision to require approval by the Exchange only with respect to
communications used prior to the delivery of a current ODD. The
Exchange's pre-approval requirement for options communications used
subsequent to the delivery of the ODD would be eliminated because the
ODD should help alert the customer to the characteristics and risks
associated with trading in options and because Rule 991(b) requires the
ROP of a member organization to pre-approve options communications,
subject to exceptions for ``Correspondence'' and ``Institutional Sales
Material.'' Rule 991(c) would also be amended to include the types of
communications added to the definition of ``Options Communications'' in
proposed Rule 991(a).
5. Re-Designation of Rule 991(e) as Proposed Rule 991(a) and Related
Amendments
    Rule 991(e) currently defines the terms used in Rule 991. Amex
proposed to re-designate paragraph (e) as paragraph (a). The Exchange
also proposed to amend the definition of ``Options Communications'' in
proposed Rule 991(a) to expand the types of communications governed by
Rule 991 to include independently prepared reprints and other
communications between a member or member organization and a customer.
The Exchange proposed to amend the definitions of ``Advertisement'' and
``Sales Literature;'' and define ``Correspondence,'' ``Institutional
Sales Material,'' ``Public Appearances'' and ``Independently Prepared
Reprints'' to clarify the rule. In addition, as previously noted, Amex
proposed to delete the definition of ``Educational Material.''
6. Proposed Rule 991(e)
    Proposed Rule 991(e) would set forth (i) standards for options
communications that are not preceded or accompanied by an ODD and (ii)
standards for options communications used prior to delivery of an ODD.
These

requirements generally clarify and restate the requirements contained
in current Commentary .02 to Rule 991.
7. Related Commentaries
    Proposed Rule 991(e)(i)(B) would require options communications to
contain contact information for obtaining a copy of the ODD. Proposed
Commentary .01 to Rule 991 would include the provisions found in
current Commentary .02A to Rule 991 regarding how this requirement may
be satisfied. In addition, as noted above, the provisions of current
Commentary .01 to Rule 991 regarding limitations on the use of options
communications would be incorporated into proposed Rule 991(d).
    As previously noted, the provisions of current Commentary .02 to
Rule 991 that outline what is permitted in an advertisement would be
deleted, and the provisions relating to standards for options
communications used prior to delivery of the ODD would be incorporated
into proposed Rule 991(e)(ii).
    Current Commentary .03 to Rule 991 regarding educational materials
also would be deleted, as noted above.
    Current Commentary .04 to Rule 991 sets forth the standards
applicable to Sales Literature. Current Commentary .04A sets forth the
requirement that Sales Literature shall state that supporting
documentation for any claims, comparisons, recommendations, statistics
or other technical data will be supplied upon request. The Exchange
proposed to re-designate current Commentary .04A as proposed Rule
991(d)(vii).
    Current Commentary .04B to Rule 991 relates to standards for Sales
Literature that contain projected performance figures. Current
Commentary .04C relates to standards for Sales Literature that contains
historical performance figures. The Exchange proposed to re-designate
current Commentary .04B as proposed Commentary .02 to Rule 991 and
current Commentary .04C as proposed Commentary .03 to Rule 991.
    Rule 991 currently requires that a copy of the ODD precede or
accompany options related sales literature. The Exchange proposed to
modify the ODD delivery requirement applicable to sales literature to
provide that an ODD must precede or accompany any communication that
conveys past or projected performance figures involving options or
constitutes a recommendation pertaining to options.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See proposed Rule 991(e)(i)(C) and proposed Commentaries
.02 and .03 to Rule 991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A notice providing the name and address of a person from whom the
ODD may be obtained would be required in sales literature that does not
contain a recommendation of past or projected performance figures.
Because Amex is proposing to merge educational material into the sales
literature category,\16\ this amendment would continue to allow
communications that are educational in nature to be disseminated
without being preceded or accompanied by a copy of the ODD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See proposed Rule 991(a)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposed to re-designate current Commentary .04D to
Rule 991 as proposed Commentary .04 to Rule 991. The Exchange proposed
to delete current Commentaries .04E, F and G to Rule 991. The Exchange
believes Commentaries .04E and F are unnecessary because worksheets are
included in the definition of Sales Literature. In addition, the
Exchange believes Commentary .04G is no longer necessary because the
Exchange is proposing to clarify the recordkeeping requirements
applicable to options communications in proposed Rule 991(b)(iv).

B. Rule 921 (Opening of Accounts)

    The proposal would also amend Rule 921 in connection with the
opening of options accounts. Currently, Commentary .01 to Rule 921
requires a member organization to obtain certain information about its
options customers in order to comply with the due diligence requirement
in opening a new account under Rule 921(c). In order to conform to the
requirements of Rule 17a-3(a)(17) under the Exchange Act, the proposed
amendments would require that in addition to all the essential
information to determine suitability, a member organization must also
obtain the customer's name, Tax Identification Number, address, and
telephone number.

II. Comments

    As noted above, the Commission received no comments on the proposed
rule change.

III. Discussion and Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6 of the
Act,\17\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\18\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade and to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities. The Commission also finds that, consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\19\ the proposed rule change is designed to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest, by providing the investing public with options
communications rules that are designed to provide appropriate
safeguards and greater clarity by promoting harmonization between the
Amex and other SRO options communications rules and conforming Rule 921
to the requirements of Rule 17a-3(a)(17) under the Exchange Act.\20\
The Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \21\ because the proposed amendments to Amex Rule
991 reflect amendments to the Securities Act that generally exempt
standardized options, and will update and reorganize the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposal, the
Commission has considered the impact of the proposed rule change on
efficiency, competition and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.17a-3(a)(17).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act, that the proposed rule change (SR-Amex-2008-51), as
modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, be, and hereby is, approved.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-27420 Filed 11-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 47396]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20402]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC); Renewal

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA announces the charter renewal of the Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), a Federal Advisory Committee that
works with industry and the public to improve the development of the
FAA's regulations.

DATES: This charter renewal will take effect on September 14, 2018, and
will expire after 2 years.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thuy H. Cooper, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 14 (a)(2)(A) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the FAA is giving
notice of the charter renewal for the ARAC. The ARAC was established to
provide advice and recommendations to FAA on regulatory matters. The
ARAC is composed of representatives from member organizations and
associations that represent the various aviation industry segments. The
diversity of the Committee ensures the requisite range of views and
expertise necessary to discharge its responsibilities. See the ARAC
website for details on pending tasks at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 14, 2018.
Lirio Liu,
Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2018-20402 Filed 9-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29259-29260]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11839]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

Andalusian Resorts and Spas, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading

May 19, 2014.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Andalusian Resorts and Spas, Inc. (``Andalusian'') because of questions
concerning the adequacy and accuracy of assertions by Andalusian, and
by others, in press releases and other public statements to investors
concerning, among other things, the company's business combinations.
Andalusian is a Nevada corporation based in Las Vegas. Its stock is
quoted on OTC Link, operated by OTC Markets Group Inc., under the
ticker symbol ``ARSP.''
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, on
May 19, 2014, through 11:59 p.m. EDT, on June 2, 2014.

    By the Commission.
Lynn M. Powalski,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-11839 Filed 5-19-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72490-72492]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30197]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65773; File No. SR-BX-2011-075]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the BOX Rules To Expand the Short Term Option Series Program

November 17, 2011.
    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 November 10, 2011, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange has designated the
proposed rule change as constituting a non-controversial rule change
under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\3\ 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Rules of the Boston Options
Exchange Group, LLC (``BOX'') to expand the Short Term Option Series
Program.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend Supplementary
Material .07 to Chapter IV, Section 6 (Series of Options Open for
Trading) and Supplementary Material .02 to Chapter XIV, Section 10
(Terms of Index Options Contracts) to expand the Short Term Option
Series Program (``Weeklys Program'') \4\ so that BOX may select twenty-
five option classes to participate in the Weeklys Program \5\ and list
a total of 30 Short Term Option Series (``Weekly Series'') for each
option class that participates in the Weeklys Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange adopted the Weeklys Program on July 15, 2010.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62505 (July 15, 2010), 75 FR
42792 (July 22, 2010) (SR-BX-2010-047).
    \5\ The Exchange previously increased the total number of option
classes that may participate in the Weeklys Program from 5 to
fifteen (15). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64009 (March
2, 2011), 76 FR 12771 (March 8, 2011) (SR-BX-2011-014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Weeklys Program is codified in Supplementary Material .07 to
Chapter IV, Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02 to Chapter XIV,
Section 10. These rules state that after an option class has been
approved for listing and trading on BOX, BOX may open for trading on
any Thursday or Friday that is a business day series of options on no
more than fifteen option classes that expire on the Friday of the
following business week that is a business day. In addition to the
fifteen-option class limitation, there is also a limitation that

no more than twenty series for each expiration date in those classes
that may be opened for trading.\6\ Furthermore, the strike price of
each short term option has to be fixed with approximately the same
number of strike prices being opened above and below the value of the
underlying security at about the time that the Weekly options are
initially opened for trading on BOX, and with strike prices being
within thirty percent (30%) above or below the closing price of the
underlying security from the preceding day. BOX does not propose any
changes to the Weeklys Program limitations other than to increase from
fifteen to twenty-five the number of option classes that may be opened
pursuant to the Weeklys Program and increase from 20 to 30 the number
of Weekly Series that may be opened for each class of option selected
to participate in the Weeklys Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ However, if BOX opens less than twenty (20) short term
options for a Short Term Option Expiration Date, additional series
may be opened for trading on BOX when the Exchange deems it
necessary to maintain an orderly market, to meet customer demand or
when the market price of the underlying security moves substantially
from the exercise price or prices of the series already opened. Any
additional strike prices listed by BOX shall be within thirty
percent (30%) above or below the current price of the underlying
security. BOX may also open additional strike prices of Short Term
Option Series that are more than 30% above or below the current
price of the underlying security provided that demonstrated customer
interest exists for such series, as expressed by institutional,
corporate or individual customers or their brokers (market-makers
trading for their own account shall not be considered when
determining customer interest under this provision). Supplementary
Material .07 to Chapter IV, Section 6 and Supplementary Material .02
to Chapter XIV, Section 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The principal reason for the proposed expansion to the number of
classes is customer demand for adding, or not removing, short term
option classes from the Weeklys Program. BOX understands that other
options exchanges, in order to not exceed the fifteen-option class
restriction, from time to time, have had to discontinue trading one
short term option class before beginning to trade other option classes
within their Weeklys Program. BOX believes this has negatively impacted
investors and traders, particularly retail public customers. BOX
understands that market participants have also requested that other
options exchanges add additional classes to the Weeklys Program. BOX
notes that the Weeklys Program has been well received by market
participants, in particular by retail investors. BOX believes a modest
increase to the number of classes that may participate in the Weeklys
Program, such as the one proposed herein, will permit the options
exchanges to meet increased customer demand and provide market
participants with the ability to hedge in a greater number of option
classes.
    The principal reason for the proposed expansion to the number of
series is market demand for additional series in Weeklys Options
classes in which the maximum number of series (20) has already been
reached. Specifically, BOX has observed increased demand for more
series when market moving events, such as corporate events and large
price swings, have occurred during the life span of an affected Weeklys
Program class. Currently, in order to be able to respond to market
demand, BOX is forced to delete or delist certain series in order to
make room for more in demand series.\7\ BOX finds this method to be
problematic for two reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ BOX deletes series with no open interest and delists series
with open interest if those series are open for trading on another
exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, BOX has received requests to keep series that it intends to
delete/delist to make room for more in demand series. While market
participants may access other markets for the deleted/delisted series,
BOX would prefer that market participants trade these series at BOX.
Second, this method can lead to competitive disadvantages among
exchanges. If one exchange is actively responding to market demand by
deleting/delisting and adding series, and another exchange is the last
to list the less desirable series with open interest, this last
exchange is stuck with those series and unable to list the in demand
series (because to do so would result in more than 20 series being
listed on that exchange). As a result, the maximum number of series per
class of options that participates in the Program should be increased
to 30 so that exchanges can list the full panoply of series that other
exchange list and which the market demands.
    To affect[sic] this change, the Exchange is proposing to amend the
BOX rules to limit the initial number of series that may be opened for
trading to 20 series and to limit the number of additional series that
may be opened for trading to 10 series.
    With regard to the impact of this proposal on system capacity, BOX
has analyzed its capacity and represents that it and the Options Price
Reporting Authority (``OPRA'') have the necessary systems capacity to
handle the potential additional traffic associated with trading of an
expanded number of classes and series in the Weeklys Program.
    BOX believes that the Weeklys Program has provided investors with
greater trading opportunities and flexibility and the ability to more
closely tailor their investment and risk management strategies and
decisions. BOX further believes this proposed rule change will provide
investors with additional short term option classes and series for
investment, trading, and risk management purposes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 \8\ (the
``Act'') in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act \9\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
believes that expanding the current short term options program will
result in a continuing benefit to investors by giving them more
flexibility to closely tailor their investment decisions and hedging
decisions in greater number of securities. The Exchange believes that
expanding the current program would provide the investing public and
other market participants increased opportunities because an expanded
program would provide market participants additional opportunities to
hedge their investment thus allowing these investors to better manage
their risk exposure. While the expansion of the Weeklys Program will
generate additional quote traffic, the Exchange does not believe that
this increased traffic will become unmanageable since the proposal
remains limited to a fixed number of classes. Further, the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in a
material proliferation of additional series because it is limited to a
fixed number of series per class and the Exchange does not believe that
the additional price points will result in fractured liquidity.
Moreover, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change would benefit
investors by giving them more flexibility to closely tailor their
investment decisions in a greater number of securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition 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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest, does not
impose any significant burden on competition, and, by its terms, does
not become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed,
or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section
    19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission believes that waiver of the operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest because the proposal is substantially similar to that of
another exchange that has been approved by the Commission.\12\
Therefore, the Commission designates the proposal operative upon
filing.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65771 (November 17,
2011) (SR-ISE-2011-60) (order approving expansion of Short Term
Option Program).
    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2011-075 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2011-075. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2011-075 and should be
submitted on or before December 14, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-30197 Filed 11-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P