[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63654-63657]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25302]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 31296; File No. 812-14296]

Tennenbaum Opportunities Fund V, LLC, et al.; Notice of
Application

October 20, 2014.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order pursuant to sections
6(c), 17(b), and 57(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the
``Act'') for an exemption from sections 17(a) and 57(a) of the Act
permitting certain transactions.

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

Summary of the Application: Applicants request a time-limited exemptive
order (the ``Order'') that would permit applicant investment companies
registered under the Act to sell certain assets to applicant business
development companies (``BDCs'') that share a common investment adviser
in transactions that would otherwise be prohibited by sections 17(a)(2)
and 57(a)(1) of the Act.

Applicants: Tennenbaum Opportunities Fund V, LLC (``TOF''); Tennenbaum
Opportunities Partners V, LP (``TOP,'' and, together with TOF, the
``Registered Fund''); TCP Capital Corp. (``TCPC''); Special Value
Continuation Partners, LP (``SVCP,'' and, together with TCPC, the ``BDC
Applicant''); and Tennenbaum Capital Partners, LLC (the ``Manager'')
(collectively, the ``Applicants'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on April 2, 2014, and amended
on May 16, 2014, June 9, 2014, July 11, 2014, August 8, 2014, October
14, 2014, and October 17, 2014.

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 November 14, 2014, 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: The Commission: Brent J. Fields, Secretary, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
Applicants: Howard M. Levkowitz, c/o Tennenbaum Capital Partners, LLC,
2951 28th Street, Suite 1000, Santa Monica, CA 90405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anil K. Abraham, Senior Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Daniele Marchesani, Branch Chief, at
(202) 551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's
Office).

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. TOF is a limited liability company organized in Delaware and
registered under the Act as a non-diversified closed-end management
investment company. TOP is a limited partnership organized in Delaware
and registered under the Act as a non-diversified closed-end management
investment company. TOF invests substantially all of its assets in, and
operates through, TOP. All of TOP's common limited partner interests
are owned by TOF. TOP also has preferred limited partner interests and
debt outstanding.
    2. TCPC is a Delaware corporation and a non-diversified closed-end
management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a BDC
under the Act.\1\ TCPC's common shares trade on the NASDAQ Global
Select Market. SVCP is a Delaware limited partnership and a non-
diversified closed-end management investment company that also has
elected to be regulated as a BDC under the Act. TCPC invests
substantially all of its assets in, and operates through, SVCP. All of
SVCP's common limited partner interests are owned by TCPC. SVCP also
has issued preferred limited partner interests under its leverage
program to the same institutions that acquired its debt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 2(a)(48) of the Act defines a BDC to be any closed-
end investment company that operates for the purpose of making
investments in securities described in sections 55(a)(1) through
55(a)(3) of the Act and makes available significant managerial
assistance with respect to the issuers of such securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The Manager is a Delaware limited liability company registered
as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
(``Advisers Act''). The Manager serves as investment adviser both to
the Registered Fund and the BDC Applicant (each, a ``Fund,'' and,
collectively, the ``Funds'') and manages both Funds in accordance with
their respective investment objectives and strategies. Each Fund is
governed by a board of directors (``Board'').
    4. The Registered Fund seeks to achieve high total returns while
minimizing losses and invests in high yielding debt, distressed debt,
equity

securities and mezzanine investments of all kinds (the Registered
Fund's investment objectives, strategies, and limitations, as stated in
its registration statement and periodic shareholder reports, are the
``Registered Fund Objectives and Strategies''). The BDC Applicant's
investment objective is to achieve high total returns through current
income and capital appreciation, with an emphasis on principal
protection. It seeks to achieve this investment objective primarily
through investments in debt securities of middle-market companies, and
its primary investment focus is investing in and originating leveraged
loans to performing middle-market companies (the BDC Applicant's
investment objectives, strategies, and limitations, as stated in its
registration statement and periodic shareholder reports, are the ``BDC
Applicant Objectives and Strategies'').
    5. The BDC Applicant expects to continue to grow as attractive
investment opportunities arise and as additional capital becomes
available on attractive terms. However, both TOF and TOP are scheduled
to terminate their existence in October 2016. TOF may extend its
existence for up to two one-year extensions if requested by the Manager
and approved by the holders of a majority of its common shares, and TOP
may do so if requested by the Manager and approved by the holders of a
majority of its common and preferred limited partner interests.
    6. The Registered Fund is considering how best to conduct its
remaining operations and plan for the unwinding of its leverage and its
scheduled termination, including the disposition of its portfolio
assets. The Applicants seek the requested relief to permit the
Registered Fund to sell to the BDC Applicant certain portfolio assets
that are consistent with the BDC Applicant Objectives and
Strategies.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Registered Fund and the BDC Applicant have co-invested
in various Eligible Assets (defined below) in reliance on a prior
Commission order pursuant to rule 17d-1 under the Act (the ``Co-
Investment Order'') permitting certain joint transactions among
themselves and certain other entities. Special Value Opportunities
Fund, LLC, et al., Investment Company Act Release Nos. IC-27287
(April 11, 2006) (notice) and 27316 (May 9, 2006) (order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. As of September 30, 2014, the Registered Fund's portfolio
included 52 assets with a fair value of $460,735,948 that were
consistent with the BDC Applicant Objectives and Strategies (``Eligible
Assets''). As of that date, the Eligible Assets were composed of: (1)
$289.1 million of floating rate fully performing commercial loans; (2)
$127.5 million of fixed rate fully performing commercial debt maturing
between 2015 and 2021; (3) $12.8 million in equity received in
connection with the foregoing debt investments; and (4) $31.3 million
in aircraft mortgage and lease interests.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All of the Eligible Assets are securities under the Act
except for the aircraft lease interests, which, as of September 30,
2014, comprised approximately 7% of the value of the Eligible
Assets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Any follow-on investments in the securities of issuers of
Eligible Assets owned by the Registered Fund that may be made
subsequent to the issuance of the requested Order (``follow-on
investments'') also would be considered Eligible Assets for purposes of
the requested relief. The Applicants represent that the Registered Fund
might undertake such follow-on investments to protect or enhance
existing investments by, for example, enhancing the Registered Fund's
legal rights in a bankruptcy of the issuer.
    9. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Order, the Registered
Fund would seek to sell to the BDC Applicant all of the Eligible Assets
owned by the Registered Fund prior to the expiration of the requested
Order. The only Eligible Assets held by the Registered Fund that would
not be sold to the BDC Applicant would be those that are sold in Bona
Fide Third-Party Transactions to a third party pursuant to Conditions 3
and 4 below, those that do not satisfy the Conditions below, and those
that the Manager believes would not be appropriate for the BDC
Applicant to acquire based on investment considerations, such as
concerns about credit quality or overconcentration in a particular
industry sector.
    10. The Manager's determination to sell any particular Eligible
Asset of the Registered Fund to the BDC Applicant would be required to
be approved by a ``Required Majority'' \4\ of the Board of each
Fund.\5\ The Applicants note that there is no overlap among the
directors of the Registered Fund and the BDC Applicant who are not
``interested persons,'' as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act, of
their respective Funds (``Independent Directors''), so that both sets
of Independent Directors would have no conflict of interest in
reviewing and determining whether to approve each Proposed Transaction
(defined below) undertaken in reliance on the requested relief. The
Eligible Assets that the Manager determines to sell from the Registered
Fund to the BDC Applicant, that satisfy the Conditions below, and that
are approved for such sale by a Required Majority of each Fund are
referred to hereinafter as the ``Qualifying Assets,'' and the proposed
sales of the Qualifying Assets by the Registered Fund to the BDC
Applicant are referred to hereinafter as the ``Proposed Transactions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In the case of the Registered Fund, the Board members that
make up the Required Majority will be determined as if the
Registered Fund were a BDC subject to section 57(o) of the Act.
    \5\ In approving any Proposed Transaction, as defined below, the
Required Majority of each Fund will be required specifically to
consider the effect that such transaction, and the Proposed
Transactions taken together, would have on the investment advisory
fees paid by the relevant Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. The Applicants believe that the Proposed Transactions would be
in the best interests of both Funds. The Registered Fund earns income
on those assets that may be Qualifying Assets at a rate in excess of
the expense associated with its outstanding debt and preferred stock,
and in excess of the rate at which it expects it could prudently
reinvest the proceeds of a sale of Qualifying Assets, in light of its
scheduled termination. As a result, the Applicants believe that it
would be beneficial to the Registered Fund and its shareholders to own
its assets, including Qualifying Assets, for as long as practicable
before needing to sell them in order to repay its debt and wind down
its operations. The Applicants believe that having a known potential
buyer--the BDC Applicant--for substantially all of the Eligible Assets
would permit the Registered Fund to hold and earn a favorable return on
such assets for a longer period of time than if the requested relief
was not granted. Additionally, a sale of such assets directly from the
Registered Fund to the BDC Applicant would permit the Registered Fund
to conduct the transactions without paying intermediary compensation,
such as a sales commission or a known spread.
    12. The Applicants also believe that the BDC Applicant's
acquisition of the Qualifying Assets directly from the Registered Fund
would be in the best interests of the BDC Applicant and its
shareholders. The Manager believes that the Proposed Transactions would
benefit the BDC Applicant and its shareholders because the BDC
Applicant is growing, is familiar with the assets held in the
Registered Fund's portfolio,\6\ would have an interest in acquiring all
or a portion of the Registered Fund's Eligible Assets, and could do so
without paying any commission or spread.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See note 2, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. As of September 30, 2014, approximately 97.8% by value of the
Eligible Assets were owned by both Funds and were valued identically.
Each of the Funds employs the same valuation methods, policies, and

procedures, which have been reviewed and approved by each Fund's
Board.\7\ Each Fund's Independent Directors review and approve the
valuations quarterly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Funds' valuation policies and procedures differ with
respect to the procedures to obtain approvals from their respective
Boards, but those differences are immaterial for purposes of the
requested relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. Before selling a Qualifying Asset to the BDC Applicant in
reliance on the requested relief, the Registered Fund would establish a
bona fide market price by selling an institutional-sized portion of the
Qualifying Asset, as prescribed in Conditions 3 and 6 below, to an
independent third-party buyer at arm's-length. Such third-party
transactions are defined in the application as ``Bona Fide Third-Party
Transactions.'' Applicants will be able to enter into a Proposed
Transaction in reliance on the requested Order only if the price of the
related Bona Fide Third-Party Transaction falls within a certain range
above or below the Registered Fund's valuation of the relevant
Qualifying Asset, as described in Condition 4.\8\ In such cases, the
BDC Applicant would contemporaneously pay the same price in the
Proposed Transaction for the balance of the asset held by the
Registered Fund (less any intermediary compensation, such as a sales
commission or known spread, paid by the Registered Fund on the Bona
Fide Third-Party Transaction).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As described in the application, the Applicants proposed the
ranges specified in Condition 4 below based on the results of
forensic testing that compared the sale prices of assets to their
most recent valuations over a period of several years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. Finally, the Manager would be required to represent to the
Independent Directors of each Fund that it has no reason to believe
that the sale price of the Qualifying Asset in each Bona Fide Third-
Party Transaction does not reasonably approximate (on a pro rata basis)
the sale price of such Qualifying Asset--had the Registered Fund's
entire interest been sold--and that, in the Manager's judgment, the
Proposed Transaction would not preclude the BDC Applicant from
acquiring an asset more beneficial to its shareholders' interests.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. The Applicants request an Order under sections 6(c), 17(b), and
57(c) of the Act granting them exemptive relief from sections 17(a) and
57(a) of the Act in order to permit the Registered Fund to sell to the
BDC Applicant the Qualifying Assets.
    2. Section 17(a)(2) of the Act generally prohibits an affiliated
person of a registered investment company, acting as principal, from
purchasing from such company any security or other property. Section
2(a)(3)(C) of the Act defines an ``affiliated person'' of another
person to include any person directly or indirectly controlling,
controlled by, or under common control with, the other person. Section
57(a)(1) of the Act generally prohibits a person related to the BDC in
a manner described in section 57(b) from selling any security or other
property to such BDC. Section 57(b) includes, among others, any person
directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with the BDC. By virtue of being under the common control of
the Manager or common executive officers, the BDC Applicant could be
viewed as an affiliated person of the Registered Fund within the
meaning of section 2(a)(3)(C), and the Registered Fund could be viewed
as a person related to the BDC Applicant within the meaning of section
57(b). Consequently, section 17(a)(2) would prohibit the BDC Applicant
from purchasing the Qualifying Assets from the Registered Fund, and
section 57(a)(1) would prohibit the Registered Fund from selling the
Qualifying Assets to the BDC Applicant.
    3. Sections 17(b) and 57(c) of the Act authorize the Commission
upon application to exempt a transaction from the prohibitions of
sections 17(a)(2) and 57(a)(1), respectively, if the evidence
establishes that (1) 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; (2)
the proposed transaction is consistent with the policy of each
registered investment company or business development company involved;
and (3) the proposed transaction is consistent with the general
purposes of the Act. Section 6(c) authorizes the Commission upon
application to conditionally or unconditionally exempt any person or
transaction or any class or classes of persons or transactions from any
provision or provisions of the Act or of any rule or regulation
thereunder, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act.
    4. Applicants state that the Proposed Transactions satisfy the
standards of sections 6(c), 17(b), and 57(c) of the Act. Applicants
believe that the proposed safeguards described in the application
provide a basis for the Commission to conclude that the Proposed
Transactions will satisfy such standards.
    5. The Applicants believe the terms of the Proposed Transactions
would benefit both Funds and are in the best interests of their
respective shareholders. The Applicants also believe that the fact that
the Proposed Transactions would involve substantially all of the
Eligible Assets held by the Registered Fund would serve to reduce any
potential for overreaching. The Applicants further point to the fact
that both Funds already own many of the same Eligible Assets and have
the same valuation methods, policies, and procedures, which have been
approved by each Fund's Board.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See note 7, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Applicants also state that, before selling any Qualifying
Assets to the BDC Applicant in reliance on the requested Order, the
Registered Fund would be required to establish a bona fide market price
for the Qualifying Asset by executing a Bona Fide Third-Party
Transaction in that asset, as prescribed in Conditions 3 and 6
below.\10\ The price for such Bona Fide Third-Party Transaction would
be required to fall within a certain range above or below the
Registered Fund's valuation of the relevant Qualifying Asset, as
described in Condition 4 below, in order for a Proposed Transaction to
occur in reliance on the requested Order. The Applicants believe that
these price range constraints will help to ensure that the sale is fair
and approximates the appropriate price of each Qualifying Asset, while
recognizing that it is unlikely that the sale price of each Qualifying
Asset will be exactly the same as the value assigned by the Registered
Fund to such Qualifying Asset.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Applicants note that the asset sale amounts set forth
in Condition 3 below seek to balance the interest of the Funds in
transacting with each other for as much of the Qualifying Assets as
possible against the interest of ensuring that the Bona Fide Third-
Party Transactions are executed at a genuine and current market
price. The Applicants believe that the Bona Fide Third-Party
Transactions would achieve an appropriate balance by providing for a
sale of a portion of the Qualifying Asset in an amount approximating
what the Manager believes is, for this type of asset, a bid size
that will attract sufficient attention from the institutional debt
market. The Manager believes that the dollar and percentage amounts
set forth in Condition 3 below will result in the sale of a
sufficiently large amount of each Qualifying Asset to obtain a
representative market price for the asset.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Finally, the Proposed Transactions will be presented to the
Required Majority of each Fund and must be approved by such Required
Majority in order to be consummated. The Required Majority of each Fund
will be required specifically to consider the effect that each such
transaction, and such transactions taken together, would have

on the investment advisory fees paid by the relevant Fund.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that the Order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following Conditions:
    1. The Registered Fund will sell to the BDC Applicant, prior to the
expiration of the requested Order, all of the Qualifying Assets owned
by the Registered Fund. In approving any Proposed Transaction under the
requested Order, the Required Majority of each Fund will be required
specifically to consider the effect that such transaction, and the
Proposed Transactions taken together, would have on the investment
advisory fees paid by the relevant Fund. If any Eligible Assets are
acquired in follow-on investments made after the date the Order was
granted, the Manager will document contemporaneously why it believes
each follow-on investment helps protect the assets previously owned by
the Registered Fund to which the follow-on investment relates.
    2. Each of the Eligible Assets shall have been subject to periodic
valuation in accordance with methods adopted and reviewed at least
annually by the independent directors, as defined in section 2(a)(19)
of the 1940 Act, of each Fund in accordance with rule 38a-1 under the
1940 Act.
    3. The Registered Fund shall have sold in Bona Fide Third-Party
Transactions subject to broad market exposure or competitive bidding to
independent third-party buyers (none of whom are the issuer of the
respective asset to the knowledge of the Applicants or are affiliated
persons of the Applicants under the 1940 Act) (i) for each Qualifying
Asset valued at greater than $10 million, at least the greater of (A)
10% of the holdings by the Registered Fund of each Qualifying Asset or
(B) $5,000,000 in proceeds of such Qualifying Asset or (ii) for each
Qualifying Asset valued at $10,000,000 or less, at least 30% of the
holdings by the Registered Fund of each Qualifying Asset.
    4. In any transaction between the Funds under the requested Order,
(i) the trade date for sale to the BDC Applicant shall be the same as
the trade date for the independent sale of a portion of the Qualifying
Asset under Condition 3, (ii) the transaction price shall be such
independent sale price less any intermediary compensation, such as a
sales commission or known spread, paid by the Registered Fund in the
open market sale, (iii) 66.7%, or two-thirds, of the transactions will
have a sale price within 1.5% of the fair value most recently assigned
by the Registered Fund pursuant to its valuation methods, policies, and
procedures, and 100% of the transactions will have a sale price in the
market within 2.5% of the fair value most recently assigned by the
Registered Fund pursuant to its valuation methods, policies, and
procedures (iv) the Manager shall represent to the Independent
Directors of the Registered Fund and the BDC Applicant that it has no
reason to believe that the sale price received by the Registered Fund
pursuant to Condition 3 above does not reasonably approximate (on a pro
rata basis) the sale price that would have been received by the
Registered Fund had the Registered Fund's entire interest been sold in
such transaction and that, in the Manager's judgment, the Proposed
Transaction between the Funds would not, at the time of such
transaction, preclude the BDC Applicant from acquiring an asset more
beneficial to its shareholders' interests, and (v) the price shall be
payable in cash at settlement.
    5. Any transaction under the requested Order involving Eligible
Assets jointly owned under the Co-Investment Order (including a
decision not to include an Eligible Asset as a Qualifying Asset) shall
comply with the terms and conditions of the Co-Investment Order, as
applicable.
    6. No Proposed Transaction or Bona Fide Third-Party Transaction
shall involve any consideration other than cash payment against prompt
delivery of Qualifying Assets. No brokerage commission, fee, or other
remuneration shall be paid in connection with any Proposed Transaction.
A Bona Fide Third-Party Transaction may include customary transaction
expenses paid to persons who are not affiliated persons of the
Applicants, but no Bona Fide Third-Party Transaction will involve any
arrangement, understanding, or any direct or indirect quid pro quo that
goes beyond the market terms of such transaction. No Bona Fide Third-
Party Transaction shall involve any arrangement or understanding
directed at facilitating the Applicants' reliance on the requested
Order. For any Bona Fide Third-Party Transaction, the Registered Fund
will not knowingly sell any Qualifying Asset to the issuer of such
asset. The Applicants will not attempt to circumvent the above
restrictions by entering into any arrangements or understandings that
are economically similar to the ones proscribed by the above
restrictions.
    7. The Registered Fund and the BDC Applicant shall maintain records
demonstrating satisfaction of each of the foregoing Conditions in the
manner and for the periods set forth in rule 17a-7(g) under the 1940
Act.
    8. The requested Order, if granted, shall expire upon the earlier
of the date of termination of TOF or October 10, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-25302 Filed 10-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80083-80084]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27432]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0262]

Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management
and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0066

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the
U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR),
abstracted below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting approval for
reinstatement with change of the following collection of information:
1625-0066, Vessel and Facility Response Plans (Domestic and
International), and Additional Response Requirements for Prince William
Sound, Alaska. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect
from the public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose
paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before
December 15, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2016-0262] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Alternatively, you
may submit comments to OIRA using one of the following means:

    (1) Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,
attention Desk Officer for the Coast Guard.
    (3) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
Commandant (CG-612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S. Coast
Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7710, Washington, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection. The Coast Guard invites comments on whether
this ICR should be granted based on the Collection being necessary for
the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the
Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical
utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of
the Collection; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of information subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the Collection on respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. These
comments will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICR referred
to in this Notice.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the
OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number
of this request, [USCG-2016-0262], and must be received by December 15,
2016.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each ICR. An OMB Notice
of Action on each ICR will become available via a hyperlink in the OMB
Control Number: 1625-0066.

Previous Request for Comments

    This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The
Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (81 FR 28089, May 9, 2016)
required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no comments.
Accordingly, no changes have been made to the Collections.

Information Collection Request

    Title: Vessel and Facility Response Plans (Domestic and
International), and Additional Response Requirements for Prince William
Sound.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0066
    Summary: The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) required the
development of Vessel and Facility Response Plans to minimize the
impact of oil spills. OPA 90 also required additional response
requirements for Prince William Sound. Shipboard Oil Pollution
Emergency Plans and Shipboard Marine Pollution Emergency Plans are
required of other vessels to minimize impacts of oil spills.
    Need: This information is needed to ensure that vessels and
facilities are prepared to respond in event of a spill incident. The
information will be reviewed by the Coast Guard to assess the
effectiveness of the response plan.
    Forms: CG-6083, Application for Approval/Revision of Vessel
Pollution Response Plans and Vessel Response Plan (VRP) Express Search
Tool.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of vessels and facilities.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from
136,460 hours to 75,395 hours a year. The decrease in burden is
primarily due to a decrease in the estimated annual number of Facility
Response Plan (FRP) respondents.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35, as amended.

    Dated: October 27, 2016.
Brian P. Burns,
U. S. Coast Guard, Deputy Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-27432 Filed 11-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: February 27, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 38)]
[Notices]
[Page 8924-8925]
[DOCID:fr27fe09-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP09-63-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Application

February 20, 2009.
    Take notice that on February 9, 2009, Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company (Tennessee), 1001 Louisiana Houston, Texas 77002, filed in the
above referenced docket an abbreviated application pursuant to section
7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's
regulations, for an order approving the abandonment of three pipeline
segments that cross the Mississippi River in East Carroll Parish,
Louisiana, and Issaquena County, Mississippi. The project named The
Mississippi River Levee Abandonment Project includes the abandonment
and removal of an associated side valve and aboveground appurtenances,
all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available
for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Specifically, Tennessee proposes to (a) abandon in place the
portion of the pipeline segments that lie between the east and west
levees and across the Mississippi River, and (b) abandon by removal the
portion of the pipeline segments that lie within the east and west
levees, as well as a side valve and associated aboveground piping
located within the east levee. The overall length of each line to be
abandoned by removal and in place is approximately 4.17 miles.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Susan
T. Halbach, Senior Counsel, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, 1001
Louisiana Houston, Texas 77002, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax: (713) 420-
1601, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Kathy Cash, Principal
Analyst, Rates and Regulatory Affairs, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company
1001 Louisiana Houston, TX 77002, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax: (713)
420-1605, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to

participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon
as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in
opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a
comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments
in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to
the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: March 13, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-4163 Filed 2-26-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 220 (Thursday, November 18, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 64369]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0205]

Special Local Regulation: Seminole Hard Rock Winterfest Holiday
Boat Parade

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a special local regulation on
December 11, 2021, from 2:30 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. to provide for the
safety and security of certain navigable waterways during the Seminole
Hard Rock Winterfest Holiday Boat Parade. All non-participant persons
and vessels will be prohibited from entering, transiting, anchoring, or
remaining within the regulated area during the enforcement period
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Miami or a designated
representative. The operator of any vessel in the regulated area must
comply with instructions from the Coast Guard or designated
representative.

DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 100.702, Table 1 to Sec.  100.702, Line
11, will be enforced on December 11, 2021, from 2:30 p.m. through 11:30
p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email Mr. Omar Beceiro, Sector Miami
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard: Telephone: 305-535-
4317, Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce a special local
regulation for the Seminole Hard Rock Winterfest Holiday Boat Parade
published in 33 CFR 100.702, Table 1 to Sec.  100.702, Line 11 on
December 11, 2021, from 2:30 p.m. through 11:30 p.m. This action is
being taken to provide for the safety and security of certain navigable
waters of the Intracoastal Waterway during this one-day event. Our
regulation for marine events within the Seventh Coast Guard District,
Sec.  100.702, specifies the location of the special local regulation
for the Seminole Hard Rock Winterfest Holiday Boat Parade, which
includes a moving buffer zone of 50 yards around the parade as it
travels along the New River and Intracoastal Waterway in Ft.
Lauderdale, FL. Only event sponsor designated participants and official
patrol vessels may enter the regulated area. Spectator vessels may
contact the Coast Guard Patrol Commander to request permission to pass
through the regulated area. If granted permission, vessels must pass
directly through the regulated area at a safe speed without loitering.
    In addition to this notice of enforcement in the Federal Register.
the Coast Guard will inform the public through Local Notice to Mariners
and marine information broadcasts at least 24 hours in advance of the
enforcement of the special local regulation.

    Dated: November 11, 2021.
J.F. Burdian,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard,Captain of the Port Miami.
[FR Doc. 2021-25149 Filed 11-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46497-46498]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19906]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3381]

Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration Advisory
Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming
public advisory committee meeting of the Science Board to the Food and
Drug Administration. The Science Board provides advice to the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs and other appropriate officials on
specific, complex scientific and technical issues important to FDA and
its mission, including emerging issues within the scientific community.
Additionally, the Science Board provides advice to the Agency on
keeping pace with technical and scientific developments including in
regulatory science, input into the Agency's research agenda, and on
upgrading its scientific and research facilities and training
opportunities. It will also provide, where requested, expert review of
Agency sponsored intramural and extramural scientific research
programs. The meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will be held on October 22, 2018, from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31
Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503, section A), Silver Spring,
MD 20993. For those unable to attend in person, the meeting will also
be webcast. The link for the webcast is available at https://collaboration.fda.gov/scienceboard2018/. Answers to commonly asked
questions including information regarding special accommodations due to
a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at:
https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rakesh Raghuwanshi, Office of the
Chief Scientist, Office of the Commissioner, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 3309, Silver
Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], or FDA
Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in
the Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last
minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory
committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide
timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's website
at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down
to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the
advisory committee information line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The Science Board will hear a response from the Center for
Veterinary Medicine (CVM) to the recommendations made by the Science
Board's 2017 review of CVM's National Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring
System program. The Science Board will also discuss potential hazards
and nutritional considerations in the production of food derived from
animal cell culture technologies.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is
available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
October 15, 2018. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 3:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. Those individuals
interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the
contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of
the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses
of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time
requested to make their presentation on or before October 5, 2018. Time
allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of
registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably
accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may
conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open
public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested
persons regarding their request to speak by October 9, 2018.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Rakesh Raghuwanshi at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: September 10, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-19906 Filed 9-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: May 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 89)]
[Notices]
[Page 26944]
[DOCID:fr09my06-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP01-377-009]

Northern Border Pipeline Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

May 2, 2006.
    Take notice that on April 27, 2006, Northern Border Pipeline
Company (Northern Border) tendered for filing to become part of
Northern Border's FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Twelfth
Revised Sheet No. 99A, to become effective April 1, 2006.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Sec.  154.210 of the
Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must
serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-6954 Filed 5-8-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 6179]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02248]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4633-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Arkansas; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-4633-DR), dated December 23,
2021, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued December 23, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated December 23, 2021, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Arkansas resulting from severe storms and tornadoes during the
period of December 10 to December 11, 2021, is of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,
42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists in the State of Arkansas.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance under section 408 will
be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Jerry S. Thomas, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Arkansas have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Craighead, Jackson, Mississippi, Poinsett, and Woodruff Counties
for Individual Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Arkansas are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-02248 Filed 2-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 87 (Tuesday, May 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25954-25958]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10287]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72051; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-37]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Adding New Paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule 128--
Equities, Entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Executions for Equities''

April 30, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on April 21, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
MKT'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to add new paragraphs (j) and (k) to Rule
128--Equities, entitled ``Clearly Erroneous Executions For Equities.''
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts 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 filing is to add new paragraph (j) to Rule
128--Equities to provide the Exchange with authority to nullify
transactions that were effected based on the same fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information even if such
transactions occur over a period of several days, as further described
below. An example of fundamentally incorrect and grossly misinterpreted
issuance information that led to a severe valuation error is included
below for illustrative purposes.
    The Exchange also proposes to add new paragraph (k) to Rule 128--
Equities to make clear that in the event of any disruption or
malfunction in the operation of the electronic communications and
trading facilities of

the Exchange, another market center or responsible single plan
processor in connection with the transmittal or receipt of a regulatory
trading halt, suspension or pause (hereafter generally referred to as a
``trading halt'' for ease of reference), the Exchange will nullify any
transaction that occurs after the primary listing market for a security
declares a trading halt with respect to such security. In the event a
trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in error, and then
re-instituted, proposed paragraph (k) would also result in
nullification of any transactions that occur before the official, final
end of the trading halt according to the primary listing market.
    The Exchange also proposes a change to certain cross-references in
Rule 128--Equities, due to the addition of (j) and (k). Specifically,
the Exchange proposes to update cross-references in existing paragraph
(i) of Rule 128--Equities in order to make clear that the provisions of
paragraph (i) do not alter the application of other provisions of Rule
128--Equities, including new paragraphs (j) and (k).
Background
    On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to Rule 128--Equities to provide for uniform treatment: (1) Of
clearly erroneous execution reviews in multi-stock events involving
twenty or more securities; and (2) in the event transactions occur that
result in the issuance of an individual stock trading pause by the
primary listing market and subsequent transactions that occur before
the trading pause is in effect on the Exchange.\4\ The Exchange also
adopted additional changes to Rule 128--Equities that reduced the
ability of the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set
forth in Rule 128--Equities,\5\ and in 2013, adopted a provision
designed to address the operation of the Plan to Address Extraordinary
Market Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS under the Act
(the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'' or the ``Plan'').\6\ Most recently,
the Exchange removed the specific provisions related to individual
stock trading pauses and extended the pilot program to coincide with
the pilot period for the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, including any
extensions thereof, applicable to certain provisions of Rule 128--
Equities.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (Sept. 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (Sept. 16, 2010) (SR- NYSEAmex-2010-60).
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68801 (Feb. 1,
2013), 78 FR 8630 (Feb. 6, 2013) (SR- NYSEMKT-2013-11); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6,
2012) (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down Release''); see also Exchange Rule
128--Equities (i).
    \7\ Paragraphs (c), (e)(2), (f), (g), and (i) of Rule 128--
Equities are currently subject to a pilot program. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 70517 (September 26, 2013), 78 FR 60943
(October 2, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-78); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 71820 (March 27, 2014), 79 FR 18595 (April 2, 2014) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2014-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, similar to other provisions added in recent years, as
described above, both paragraph (j) and paragraph (k) would be subject
to the pilot period, and thus, would coincide with the pilot period for
the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, unless extended or made permanent.
Executions Based on Incorrect or Grossly Misinterpreted Issuance
Information
    The Exchange proposes to adopt a new provision, paragraph (j), to
Rule 128--Equities, which would provide that a series of transactions
in a particular security on one or more trading days may be viewed as
one event if all such transactions were effected based on the same
fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information
(e.g., with respect to a stock split or corporate dividend) resulting
in a severe valuation error for all such transactions (the ``Event'').
    As proposed, an Officer, acting on his or her own motion, would be
required to take action to declare all transactions that occurred
during the Event null and void not later than the start of trading on
the day following the last transaction in the Event. If trading in the
security is halted before the valuation error is corrected, the Officer
would be required to take action to declare all transactions that
occurred during the Event null and void prior to the resumption of
trading. The Exchange proposes to make clear that no action can be
taken pursuant to proposed paragraph (j) with respect to any
transactions that have reached settlement date for the security or that
result from an initial public offering of a security. The Exchange
believes that declaring a trade null and void after settlement date
would be complex to administer and unfair to the affected parties. The
Exchange also believes that excluding IPOs from the proposed rule will
ensure that transactions in a new security for which there is no
benchmark information are not called into question, as it is the IPO
process itself, including the extensive public disclosure associated
with IPOs, that is intended to drive price formation.
    Further, the Exchange proposes that to the extent transactions
related to an Event occur on one or more other market centers, the
Exchange will promptly coordinate with such other market center(s) to
ensure consistent treatment of the transactions related to the Event,
if practicable. The Exchange also proposes to state in the Rule that
any action taken in connection with paragraph (j) will be taken without
regard to the Numerical Guidelines set forth in paragraph (c)(1) of
Rule 128--Equities. In particular, the Exchange believes that there
could be scenarios where there are erroneous transactions related to an
Event that do not meet applicable Numerical Guidelines but that are,
upon review, clearly erroneous. One example of a situation that could
occur is a corporate action, such as a stock split, that results in the
dissemination of fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information and leads to erroneous transactions at a price
that is close to the price at which the security was previously
trading. Even if such trading is consistent with prior trading activity
for the security, and thus would not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines, the Exchange would have the authority to nullify such
transactions if they were affected based on the same fundamentally
incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance information and there was
a severe valuation error as a result (i.e., although the security
should be trading at a price further away from its previous range, due
to fundamentally incorrect or grossly misinterpreted issuance
information with respect to the corporate action the security continues
to trade at a price that does not meet applicable Numerical
Guidelines).
    The Exchange also proposes to include a provision, as it does in
many other sub-paragraphs of Rule 128--Equities, stating that each
member or member organization involved in a transaction subject to
proposed paragraph (j) shall be notified as soon as practicable by the
Exchange, and that the party aggrieved by the action may appeal such
action in accordance with Exchange Rule 128--Equities (e)(2).
    In particular, the Exchange believes it is necessary to have
authority to nullify trades that occur in an event similar to an event
involving an exchange offer (``Exchange Offer'') made by U.S. Bancorp
on the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') in 2010 in which there were a
series of executions based on incorrect or grossly misinterpreted
issuance information. As a result of such information, the securities
traded at severely dislocated prices. At the

time, the NYSE filed an emergency rule filing in order to respond to
that event.\8\ With the filing the NYSE interpreted the rule applicable
to clearly erroneous executions as permitting the NYSE to nullify all
trades resulting after the Exchange Offer at severely dislocated
prices.\9\ The Exchange believes it is important to have in place a
rule to break such trades if an event like the U.S. Bancorp event
occurs again in the future. The U.S. Bancorp event is described in
further detail below and is intended to be illustrative of the manner
in which the Exchange proposes to utilize proposed paragraph (j), if
necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62609 (July 30,
2010), 75 FR 47327 (August 5, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-55).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In May 2010, U.S. Bancorp commenced an offer to exchange up to
1,250,000 Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/100 interest in a
share of Series A Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, $100,000
liquidation preference per share (the ``Depositary Shares'') for any
and all of the 1,250,000 outstanding 6.189% Fixed-to-Floating Rate
Normal ITS issued by U.S. Bancorp Capital IX, each with a liquidation
amount of $1,000 (the ``Normal ITS''). The Depositary Shares were
approved for listing on the NYSE under the symbol USB PRA. On June 11,
2010, the NYSE opened the shares on a quote, but trading did not
commence until June 16, 2010 at prices in the range of $79.00 per
share. There were additional executions on the NYSE in that price range
on June 17 and 18, 2010. On June 18, 2010, NYSE staff learned that the
prices at which trades had executed were not consistent with the value
of the security, which was closer to an $800 price. Upon learning of
the pricing disparity, NYSE immediately halted trading in the
Depositary Shares on all markets and alerted U.S. Bancorp and other
exchanges that traded the Depositary Shares of the pricing discrepancy.
    In order to address the situation, the NYSE filed a proposal to
interpret its existing clearly erroneous execution rule such that the
trading in Depository Shares from June 16 to June 18 constituted a
single event because that trading was based on incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information that resulted in severe price
dislocation (the ``U.S. Bancorp Event'').\10\ Because the Depository
Shares were halted before the price of the Depository Shares ceased to
be dislocated, and remain halted, the NYSE was able to review trading
in Depository Shares and declare null and void all trading in the U.S.
Bancorp Event before the security resumed trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rather than filing a proposal in response to a similar event
happening again, the Exchange proposes to add paragraph (j) in order to
nullify transactions consistent with the description of the proposed
Rule above.
Executions After a Trading Halt Has Been Declared
    The Exchange proposes to add new paragraph (k) to Rule 128--
Equities to make clear that in the event of any disruption or
malfunction in the operation of the electronic communications and
trading facilities of the Exchange, another market center or
responsible single plan processor in connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a trading halt, the Exchange will nullify any transaction
that occurs after the primary listing market for a security declares a
trading halt and before such trading halt with respect to such security
has officially ended according to the primary listing market. In
addition, proposed paragraph (k) will make clear that in the event a
trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in error and then re-
instituted, the Exchange will nullify transactions that occur before
the official, final end of the trading halt according to the primary
listing market.
    As with other provisions in Rule 128--Equities, including proposed
paragraph (j) as discussed above, the authority to nullify transactions
pursuant to paragraph (k) would be vested in an Officer, acting on his
or her own motion. Any action taken in connection with paragraph (k)
would be taken in a timely fashion, generally within thirty (30)
minutes of the detection of the erroneous transaction and in no
circumstances later than the start of regular trading hours \11\ on the
trading day following the date of execution(s) under review. The
Exchange also proposes to specify that any action taken in connection
with proposed paragraph (k) will be taken without regard to the
Numerical Guidelines set forth in paragraph (c)(1) of Rule 128--
Equities. The Exchange believes it is appropriate to act to nullify
transactions pursuant to proposed paragraph (k) without regard to
applicable Numerical Guidelines because in the situations covered by
paragraph (k), such transactions should not have occurred in the first
instance, and thus, their nullification does not put parties in any
different position than they should have been. The Exchange also
believes that the certainty that the proposed rule provides is critical
in situations involving trading halts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The regular trade hours [sic] on the Exchange are defined
in Rule 51--Equities and is generally the time between 9:30 a.m. to
4:00 p.m. E.T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As it has proposed for paragraph (j), as described above, the
Exchange also proposes to an [sic] include a provision stating that
each member or member organization involved in a transaction subject to
proposed paragraph (k) shall be notified as soon as practicable by the
Exchange, and that the party aggrieved by the action may appeal such
action in accordance with Exchange Rule 128--Equities (e)(2).
    The Exchange notes that trading in a security is typically halted
immediately on the Exchange when the primary listing market issues a
trading halt in such security. However, in certain circumstances, due
to a technical issue related to the transmission or receipt of the
electronic message instituting such trading halt or due to other
extraordinary circumstances, executions can occur on the Exchange
following the declaration of such a trading halt. Similarly, although
rare, the Exchange has witnessed scenarios where due to extraordinary
circumstances a trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in
error and then re-instituted. It is these types of extraordinary
circumstances that the Exchange believes require certainty, and thus,
the Exchange believes it necessary to make clear that in such a
circumstance any transactions after a trading halt has been declared
will be nullified. In the event that a trading halt is declared as of a
future time (i.e., if the primary listing exchange declares a trading
halt as of a specific, future time in order to ensure coordination
amongst market participants), the Exchange would only nullify
transactions occurring after the time the trading halt was supposed to
be in place until the official end of the trading halt according to the
primary listing market.
    The Exchange also notes that it currently has authority pursuant to
paragraph (f) of Rule 128--Equities to review and nullify transactions
that arise during a disruption or malfunction in the operation of any
electronic communications and trading facilities of the Exchange.
Further, paragraph (f) of Rule 128--Equities gives the Exchange
authority to use a lower numerical guideline than is set forth in
paragraph (c)(1) of the Rule when necessary to maintain a fair and
orderly market and to protect investors and the public interest. Thus,
while the Exchange believes that paragraph (f) does give the Exchange
the authority to nullify

transactions occurring when there is an Exchange technical issue
related to the transmission or receipt of the electronic message
instituting a trading halt or with respect to a technical issue related
to a prematurely lifted trading halt, the Exchange believes that
proposed paragraph (k) will provide appropriate authority for the
Exchange to nullify all such transactions whether or not the systems
problem occurs on the Exchange with respect to trading halts and
explicit clarity for market participants that such transactions will be
nullified. The Exchange believes that such authority is appropriate
because when relied upon the Exchange will be cancelling trades that
should not have occurred in the first instance. Finally, the Exchange
believes that such authority is appropriate because a trading halt
declared by the primary listing market is indicative of an issue with
respect to the applicable security or a larger set of securities.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\12\ In particular,
the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ because
it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is appropriate to adopt a provision
granting the Exchange authority to nullify trades that occur if an
Event similar to the U.S. Bancorp Event occurs again. The Exchange
believes that this provision will allow the Exchange to act in the
event of such a severe valuation error, that such action would promote
just and equitable principles of trade and that the proposal is
therefore consistent with the Act. Similarly, the Exchange believes
that adding a provision allowing the Exchange to nullify transactions
that occur when a trading halt is declared, then prematurely lifted in
error and then reinstituted, and providing that in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of the Exchange, another market
center or responsible single plan processor in connection with the
transmittal or receipt of a trading halt the Exchange will nullify
trades occurring after a trading halt has been declared by the primary
listing market for the security will help to avoid confusion amongst
market participants, which is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest and therefore consistent with the
Act. The Exchange further believes that the proposal is appropriate and
consistent with the Act because when relied upon the Exchange will be
cancelling trades that should not have occurred in the first instance.
The Exchange also believes that the proposal is appropriate because a
trading halt declared by the primary listing market is indicative of an
issue with respect to the applicable security or a larger set of
securities.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to update cross-references
in existing paragraph (i) of Rule 128--Equities to include new
paragraphs (j) and (k) is consistent with the Act because, as is the
case with respect to the current rule, this change makes clear that the
provisions of paragraph (i) do not alter the application of other
provisions of Rule 128--Equities.
    The Exchange believes that the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (``FINRA'') and other national securities exchanges are also
filing similar proposals to add provisions similar to the provisions
proposed by the Exchange above. Therefore, the proposal promotes just
and equitable principles of trade in that it promotes transparency and
uniformity across markets concerning treatment of transactions as
clearly erroneous. The proposed rule change would also help to assure
consistent results in handling erroneous trades across the U.S.
markets, thus furthering fair and orderly markets, the protection of
investors and the public interest.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change
implicates any competitive issues. To the contrary, as noted above, the
Exchange believes FINRA and other national securities exchanges are
also filing similar proposals, and thus, that the proposal will help to
ensure consistency across market centers.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-37 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-37. 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

10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-NYSEMKT-2014-37 and should
be submitted on or before May 27, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10287 Filed 5-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 193 (Tuesday, October 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60376-60377]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25388]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-132-000]

Kern River Transmission Company; Notice of Availability of the
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Summerlin Pipe Replacement
Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the
Summerlin Pipe Replacement Project, proposed by Kern River Transmission
Company (Kern River) in the above-referenced docket. Kern River
requests authorization to construct, operate, and maintain a new
natural gas pipeline and associated facilities in Clark County, Nevada,
and remove a corresponding segment of existing pipeline.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the Summerlin Pipe Replacement Project in
accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). The FERC staff concludes that approval of the proposed
project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not constitute a
major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.
    The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) participated as a
cooperating agency in the preparation of the EA. Cooperating agencies
have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to resources
potentially affected by the proposal and participate in the NEPA
analysis. The BLM will adopt and use the EA to consider the issuance of
a right-of-way grant for the portion of the project on BLM lands.
    The proposed Summerlin Pipe Replacement Project includes replacing
a 1.56-mile-long segment of its existing 36-inch-diameter A-Line
pipeline and expanding an existing 0.22-acre valve and pig launcher
yard to 0.37 acre to accommodate a new crossover valve and crossover
piping.
    The FERC staff mailed CD copies of the EA to federal, state, and
local government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes;

potentially affected landowners and other interested individuals and
groups; newspapers and libraries in the project area; and parties to
this proceeding.
    In addition, the EA is available for public viewing on the FERC's
Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. A limited number of
copies of the EA are available for distribution and public inspection
at: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888
First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To
ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to consider your
comments prior to making its decision on this project, it is important
that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or before October
30, 2015.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file
your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the
project docket number (CP15-132-000) with your submission. The
Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert
staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the
eFiling feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.
    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a
motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).\1\ Only intervenors have the
right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. The Commission
grants affected landowners and others with environmental concerns
intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a
clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other party can
adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments will not
give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor status to
have your comments considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the previous discussion on the methods for filing
comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search,'' and enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP15-
132). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: September 30, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-25388 Filed 10-5-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 73857]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29331]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-7276-000]

Brown, Paul H.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on November 27, 2013, Paul H. Brown submitted for
filing, an application for authority to hold interlocking positions,
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C.
825d(b), Part 45 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's
(Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR part 45, and Order
No. 664.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Commission Authorization to Hold Interlocking Positions, 112
FERC ] 61,298 (2005) (Order No. 664); order on reh'g, 114 FERC ]
61,142 (2006) (Order No. 664-A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 18, 2013

    Dated: November 29, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-29331 Filed 12-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P