[Federal Register: December 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 248)]
[Notices]
[Page 76796]
[DOCID:fr28de05-82]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER06-143-000]

Pepperell Realty, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

December 16, 2005.
    Pepperell Realty, LLC (Pepperell) filed an application for market-
based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff. The proposed
rate tariff provides for the sales of energy and capacity at market-
based rates. Pepperell also requested waiver of various Commission
regulations. In particular, Pepperell requested that the Commission
grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability by Pepperell.
    On December 13, 2005, pursuant to delegated authority, the
Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development--South, granted
the request for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order
also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the
Federal Register establishing a period of time for the filing of
protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest
the blanket approval of issuances of securities or assumptions of
liability by Liberty Power New York and Liberty Power District should
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is January 12, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Liberty Power New York and Liberty Power District are authorized to
issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor,
indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another
person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful
object within the corporate purposes of Liberty Power New York and
Liberty Power District, compatible with the public interest, and is
reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approval of Liberty Power New York's and Liberty Power
District's issuances of securities or assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also 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
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-7906 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15845-15846]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07543]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1076]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Guidance for Industry
on Formal Dispute Resolution: Scientific and Technical Issues Related
to Pharmaceutical Current Good Manufacturing Practice

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by May 14,
2018.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to [email protected]. All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0563.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Guidance for Industry on Formal Dispute Resolution: Scientific and
Technical Issues Related to Pharmaceutical Current Good Manufacturing
Practice

OMB Control Number 0910-0563--Extension

    Congress enacted section 562 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-1), which directed FDA to
ensure that it had adequate dispute resolution procedures to provide
for appropriate review of scientific controversies between the FDA and
members of regulated industry, including possible review by a
scientific advisory committee. To implement this provision, we amended
the general appeal regulation applicable across all FDA components (21
CFR 10.75; Internal Agency review of decisions) to provide for advisory
committee review (Sec.  10.75(b)(2)). At the same time, and also
consistent with the mandates of section 562 of the FD&C Act, we adopted
an approach whereby specific implementation procedures regarding
scientific controversy associated with review of certain FDA decisions
are detailed in center-issued guidance.
    Accordingly, FDA developed the guidance entitled, ``Guidance for
Industry on Formal Dispute Resolution: Scientific and Technical Issues
Related to Pharmaceutical Current Good Manufacturing Practice.'' We
intend the guidance to inform manufacturers of veterinary and human
drugs, including human biological drug products, on how to resolve
disputes about scientific and technical issues relating to current good
manufacturing practice (CGMP). Disputes related to scientific and
technical issues may arise during FDA inspections of pharmaceutical
manufacturers to determine compliance with CGMP requirements or during
FDA's assessment of corrective actions undertaken as a result of such
inspections. The guidance recommends procedures that we believe
encourage open and prompt discussion of disputes and lead to their
resolution. The guidance describes procedures for raising such disputes
to the Office of Regulatory Affairs and Center levels and for
requesting review by the dispute resolution (DR) panel. The guidance is
available on our website at: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidances/ucm070279.pdf, along with additional information regarding
the resolution of scientific disputes at FDA.
    In the Federal Register of October 27, 2017 (82 FR 49832), we
published a notice soliciting public comment on the proposed collection
of information. Although no comments were received, we are
reconsidering the usefulness of the guidance document in light of
changing Agency procedures. Consistent with our regulations at 21 CFR
part 10.115 we invite comment on our guidance documents at any time.
Ultimately, as our resources permit, we hope to either revise, replace,
or withdraw the subject guidance document, however, until that time the
guidance remains available. Accordingly, we are seeking to extend OMB
approval of the information collection and estimate the burden as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Annual                          Average
            Activity                 Number of    frequency  per   Total  annual    burden per      Total hours
                                    respondents      response        responses       response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requests for tier-one DR                       2               1               2              30              60
Requests for tier-two DR                       1               1               1               8               8
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............              68
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection.

    As reflected in table 1, we estimate only a nominal burden for the
information collection and assume: (1) That two manufacturers will
submit two requests annually for tier-one DR; (2) that there will be
one appeal to the DR panel (tier-two DR); (3) that it will take
respondents approximately 30 hours to prepare and submit each tier-one
DR request; and (4) that it will take approximately 8 hours to prepare
and submit each tier-two DR request. We base this estimate on our
experience with the information collection. There has been no increase
in the burden

estimate since the previous OMB approval.

    Dated: April 6, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-07543 Filed 4-11-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 65 (Friday, April 4, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18867-18868]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07548]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 1

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-1421]

Guidance for Industry on What You Need To Know About
Establishment, Maintenance, and Availability of Records--Small Entity
Compliance Guide; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a guidance for industry entitled ``What You Need To
Know About Establishment, Maintenance, and Availability of Records--
Small Entity Compliance Guide'' (SECG), which updates an earlier
guidance of the same title. Previously, this guidance restated the
legal requirements of FDA's maintenance and establishment of records
regulation and served as that regulation's SECG. Because the FDA Food
Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) amended FDA's maintenance and
establishment of records regulation, FDA issued an interim final rule
(IFR) amending certain regulations to be consistent with the changes.
Accordingly, FDA is revising this guidance to help any entity comply
with FDA's maintenance and establishment of records requirements,
including the amendments to these requirements made by the IFR as
finalized. This guidance continues to serve as FDA's SECG.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on FDA guidances at
any time.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance
to the Outreach and Information Center, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration (HFS-009), 5100 Paint
Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive
labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the
guidance.
    Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William A. Correll, Jr., Office of
Compliance, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-009),
Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD
20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a guidance for industry
entitled ``What You Need To Know About Establishment, Maintenance, and
Availability of Records--Small Entity Compliance Guide (SECG).'' This
guidance is being issued consistent with our good guidance practices
regulation (21 CFR 10.115(c)(2)). The guidance represents our current
thinking on the establishment, maintenance, and availability of
records. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person
and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach
may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statutes and regulations.
    FSMA (Pub. L. 111-353), among other things, amended FDA's records
access under section 414(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FD&C Act). In the Federal Register of February 23, 2012 (77 FR 10658),
FDA issued an IFR that amended certain requirements on the availability
of records in the regulation on the establishment and maintenance of
records in 21 CFR Part 1, Subpart J to be consistent with amendments to
the FD&C Act made by FSMA. This interim final rule was effective March
1, 2012.
    Previously, this guidance restated the legal requirements of FDA's
establishment and maintenance of records regulation at 21 CFR part 1,
Subpart J, implementing section 414 of the FD&C Act, as added by the
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act
of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-188). This guidance also served as FDA's SECG for
21 CFR Part 1, Subpart J in accordance with section 212 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (Pub. L. 104-121). Because
section 101 of FSMA amended section 414(a) of the FD&C Act, FDA issued
an IFR amending certain requirements on the availability of records in
21 CFR Part 1, Subpart J. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register, we are issuing a final rule adopting the IFR without changes.
The final rule is effective upon publication. Accordingly, FDA is
updating this SECG to help any entity comply with the requirements in
21 CFR part 1, Subpart J, including the amendments to 21 CFR Part 1,
Subpart J made by the IFR and adopted as final. This guidance continues
to serve as FDA's SECG for 21 CFR part 1, Subpart J.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires Agencies
to determine whether a final rule will have a significant impact on
small entities when an Agency issues a final rule ``after being
required . . . to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking.''
Although FDA is not required to perform a regulatory flexibility
analysis because, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and 21 CFR
10.40(e)(1), the Agency found for good cause that use of prior notice
and comment procedures were contrary to the public interest;

FDA has nonetheless examined the economic implications of the final
rule in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act and determined
that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Similarly, because FDA is not
required to perform a final regulatory flexibility analysis under 5
U.S.C 605(b) for the final rule, FDA is not required to issue an SECG
to comply with section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (Pub. L. 104-121); nevertheless, FDA has updated this SECG
to state in plain language the requirements of 21 CFR part 1, Subpart
J, as amended by the final rule.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to information collection provisions found in
FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Except for the provision
regarding access to records, the collections of information in 21 CFR
part 1, Subpart J, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-
0560. With regard to access to records, we conclude that these
information collection provisions are exempt from OMB review under 44
U.S.C. 3518(c)(1)(B)(ii) and 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(2) as collections of
information obtained during the conduct of a civil action to which the
United States or any official or Agency thereof is a party, or during
the conduct of an administrative action, investigation, or audit
involving an Agency against specific individuals or entities. The
regulations in 5 CFR 1320.3(c) provide that the exception in 5 CFR
1320.4(a)(2) applies during the entire course of the investigation,
audit or action, but only after a case file or equivalent is opened
with respect to a particular party. Such a case file would be opened as
part of the request to access records.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://regulations.gov.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the guidance at
either http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm
or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: April 1, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-07548 Filed 4-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: August 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 47801]
[DOCID:fr18au06-80]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12629-000-Maine]

F & B Wood Corp.; Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment

August 1, 2006.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations, 18 CFR part
380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed the application for exemption from licensing for the Corriveau
Project, to be located on the Swift River, near the town of Mexico,
Oxford County, Maine, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA). In the EA, Commission staff analyze the potential environmental
impacts of the project and conclude that exempting the project from
licensing, with appropriate environmental measures, would not
constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
    A copy of the EA is on file with the Commission and is available
for public inspection. The EA may also 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 Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the issuance date
of this notice, and should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A,
Washington, DC 20426. Please affix ``Corriveau Project No. 12629'' to
all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via Internet in lieu
of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site under the ``eFiling'' link. For further information, contact
Michael Spencer at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-13768 Filed 8-17-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 64 (Thursday, April 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 18585]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06844]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4477-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

Wisconsin; 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 Wisconsin (FEMA-4477-DR), dated March 11,
2020, and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued March 11, 2020.

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 March 11, 2020, 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 Wisconsin resulting from a severe winter storm and flooding
during the period of January 10 to January 12, 2020, 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 Wisconsin.
    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 Public 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
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation 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 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, John Boyle, of FEMA is appointed to
act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Wisconsin have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Kenosha, Milwaukee, and Racine Counties for Public Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Wisconsin 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.)

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-06844 Filed 4-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25070-25072]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08914]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94776; File No. SR-BX-2022-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Equity 4,
Rule 4756(a)(3), in Light of Planned Changes to the System as Well as
To Address Existing Issues

April 21, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 11, 2022, Nasdaq BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Equity 4, Rule 4756(a)(3), in light
of planned changes to the System as well as to address existing issues,
as described further below. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/bx/rules, 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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Presently, the Exchange is making functional enhancements and
improvements to specific Order Types \3\ and Order Attributes \4\ that
are currently only available via the RASH Order entry protocol.\5\
Specifically, the Exchange will be upgrading the logic and
implementation of these Order Types and Order Attributes so that the
features are more streamlined across the Exchange's System and order
entry protocols, and will enable the Exchange to process these Orders
more quickly and efficiently. Additionally, this System upgrade will
pave the way for the Exchange to enhance the OUCH Order entry protocol
\6\ so that Participants may enter such Order Types and Order
Attributes via OUCH, in addition to the RASH Order entry protocol.\7\
The Exchange plans to implement its enhancement of the OUCH protocol
sequentially, by Order Type and Order Attribute.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ An ``Order Type'' is a standardized set of instructions
associated with an Order that define how it will behave with respect
to pricing, execution, and/or posting to the Exchange Book when
submitted to the Exchange. See Equity 1, Section 1(a)(11).
    \4\ An ``Order Attribute'' is a further set of variable
instructions that may be associated with an Order to further define
how it will behave with respect to pricing, execution, and/or
posting to the Exchange Book when submitted to the Exchange. See id.
    \5\ The RASH (Routing and Special Handling) Order entry protocol
is a proprietary protocol that allows members to enter Orders,
cancel existing Orders and receive executions. RASH allows
participants to use advanced functionality, including discretion,
random reserve, pegging and routing. See http://nasdaqtrader.com/content/technicalsupport/specifications/TradingProducts/rash_sb.pdf.
    \6\ The OUCH Order entry protocol is a proprietary protocol that
allows subscribers to quickly enter orders into the System and
receive executions. OUCH accepts limit Orders from members, and if
there are matching Orders, they will execute. Non-matching Orders
are added to the Limit Order Book, a database of available limit
Orders, where they are matched in price-time priority. OUCH only
provides a method for members to send Orders and receive status
updates on those Orders. See https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=OUCH.
    \7\ The Exchange designed the OUCH protocol to enable members to
enter Orders quickly into the System. As such, the Exchange
developed OUCH with simplicity in mind, and it therefore lacks more
complex order handling capabilities. By contrast, the Exchange
specifically designed RASH to support advanced functionality,
including discretion, random reserve, pegging and routing. Once the
System upgrades occur, then the Exchange intends to propose further
changes to its Rules to permit participants to utilize OUCH, in
addition to RASH, to enter order types that require advanced
functionality.
    \8\ The Exchange notes that its sister exchange, The Nasdaq
Stock Market, LLC (``Nasdaq), recently filed a similar proposed rule
change with the Commission, see Securities Exchange Release No. 34-
94492 (March 23, 2022), 87 FR 18405 (March 30, 2022) (SR-NASDAQ-
2022-020), and that Nasdaq PHLX LLC plans to do the same in parallel
with the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To support and prepare for these upgrades and enhancements, the
Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4756(a)(3), which governs the entry of
Orders, so that it aligns with how the System, once upgraded, will
handle the partial cancellation of Orders to reduce their share size.
The proposed filing also addresses issues with the existing Rule text
and the current implementation of that Rule text by the System.
    In pertinent part, existing Rule 4756(a)(3) states as follows, with
respect how the Exchange handles partial Order cancellations to reduce
share size:

    In addition, a partial cancellation of an Order to reduce its
share size will not affect the priority of the Order on the book;
provided, however, that such a partial cancellation may not be made
with respect to a Pegged Order (including a Discretionary Order that
is Pegged).

The first clause of this text states the general rule that participants
may instruct the Exchange to partially cancel their Orders in order to
reduce share size, and when handling such partial cancellation
instructions, the Exchange will adjust the size of the Orders without
affecting their existing priority. The second clause states an
exception to this general rule, which the Exchange intends to mean that
when the Exchange processes partial cancellations of Orders with the
Pegging Attribute (including Discretionary Orders with Pegging) that
participants enter via RASH or FIX (as opposed to OUCH or FLITE), the
partially cancelled Orders will lose their priority.
    Going forward, planned upgrades will provide for the Exchange to
process partial cancellations of all Order Types and Attributes entered
through all of its Order Entry Protocols, including RASH, OUCH, FIX,
and FLITE, and it will do so without loss of priority, such that the

existing exception to the general rule in 4756(a)(3) will no longer be
necessary. Thus, the Exchange proposes to eliminate this exception by
deleting it from the Rule. This proposal will provide better outcomes
to participants by enabling them to reduce the share size of their
Orders without the need to sacrifice the priority of their Orders.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to allow the partial
cancellation of an Order without the Order losing priority because the
participant that entered the Order continues to express its willingness
to trade at the price entered when the Order first came onto the Book.
Moreover, if the Order is displayed, other participants quoting at the
same price are aware of the priority of their Orders relative to the
partially cancelled Order. While a partial cancellation may provide
these other participants with greater opportunities to provide a fill,
the Exchange does not believe that it would be reasonable for these
participants to jump ahead of an Order with time priority merely
because the size of the Order has been reduced. Similarly, if the
partially cancelled Order is non-displayed, other participants would
have no awareness of its price, its original size, or its reduced size.
Again, while other participants at that price may have an increased
opportunity to provide a fill when the Order's size is reduced, they
would not have an expectation that the priority of their Orders would
change vis-[agrave]-vis that of an Order that arrived on the Book at an
earlier time.
    Moreover, the Exchange notes that the proposal will simplify and
harmonize the Exchange's processing of partial cancellations across its
Order Entry Protocols.
    Additionally, the proposed Rule change will address ambiguities in
the existing Rule text. The existing Rule text does not state expressly
the Exchange's current practice of restricting the loss of priority
following a partial cancellation to Pegged Orders when such Orders are
entered through RASH or FIX. The existing language suggests that
partial cancellations of these Orders cause a loss of priority in all
cases, regardless of the Exchange's Order Entry Protocol utilized to
enter the Orders. In fact, the Exchange does process partial
cancellations of these Orders without loss of priority when the Orders
are entered through OUCH and FLITE. The proposed Rule change will
address this issue by providing for consistent handling of partial
cancellations across all Orders and all applicable and available Order
Entry Protocols and by eliminating exceptions in the existing Rule
text.
    Similarly, the existing Rule is ambiguous as to the intended scope
of its exception to the general rule for ``Pegged Orders.'' Although
the Rule states that the exception applies to ``Pegged Orders
(including a Discretionary Order that is Pegged),'' the Exchange does
not intend for Orders with Midpoint Pegging to be part of this
exception, and it applies the Rule accordingly. In other words, the
Exchange processes partial cancellations for Orders with Midpoint
Pegging (i.e., Non-Display Orders assigned the Midpoint Peg Attribute)
without loss of priority. The Exchange recognizes that the Rule text
does not specifically address Orders with Midpoint Pegging. Again, the
proposed Rule change will eliminate this issue going forward because
the Exchange will adopt consistent handling of partial cancellations
across all Orders and available and applicable Order Entry Protocols.
    The Exchange intends to implement the foregoing changes during the
Second Quarter of 2022. The Exchange will issue an Equity Trader Alert
at least 7 days in advance of implementing the changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposed amendment to Rule
4756(a)(3) is consistent with the Act. Eliminating the exception to the
general Rule providing for the Exchange to process partial
cancellations without loss of priority will benefit participants by
enabling them to reduce the share size of their Orders without the need
to sacrifice the priority of their Orders.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to allow the partial
cancellation of an Order without the Order losing priority because the
participant that entered the Order continues to express its willingness
to trade at the price entered when the Order first came onto the Book.
Moreover, if the Order is displayed, other participants quoting at the
same price are aware of the priority of their Orders relative to the
partially cancelled Order. While a partial cancellation may provide
these other participants with greater opportunities to provide a fill,
the Exchange does not believe that it would be reasonable for these
participants to jump ahead of an Order with time priority merely
because the size of the Order has been reduced. Similarly, if the
partially cancelled order is non-displayed, other participants would
have no awareness of its price, its original size, or its reduced size.
Again, while other participants at that price may have an increased
opportunity to provide a fill when the Order's size is reduced, they
would not have an expectation that the priority of their Orders would
change vis-[agrave]-vis that of an Order that arrived on the Book at an
earlier time.
    Moreover, the proposal will simplify and harmonize the Exchange's
processing of partial cancellations across its Order Entry Protocols.
This proposed amendment reflects planned upgrades that will allow the
Exchange to process partial cancellation of Orders entered through all
pertinent and available Order Entry Protocols without loss of priority.
    Additionally, the proposed Rule change is consistent with the Act
because it will eliminate ambiguities in the existing Rule text that do
not fully reflect the Exchange's intended meaning or application of the
Rule. As noted above, the existing Rule text does not state that the
Exchange limits the loss of priority for partially cancelled Orders to
Pegged Orders when such Orders are entered through RASH or FIX. The
existing language suggests that partial cancellations of these Orders
lose priority in all cases, regardless of the Exchange's Order Entry
Protocol utilized to enter the Orders. In fact, the Exchange does
process partial cancellations of these Orders without loss of priority
when the Orders are entered through OUCH or FLITE. The proposed Rule
change will address this issue by providing for consistent handling of
partial cancellations across all applicable and available Orders and
Order Entry Protocols and by eliminating exceptions in the existing
Rule text.
    Similarly, the existing Rule does not reflect the Exchange's intent
that Orders with Midpoint Pegging are not included in this exception,
even though it applies the Rule in this manner. In other words, the
Exchange processes partial cancellations for Midpoint Pegging Orders
without loss of priority. The Exchange recognizes that the Rule text
does not specifically address Orders

with Midpoint Pegging. Again, the proposed Rule change will eliminate
this issue going forward because the Exchange will adopt consistent
handling of partial cancellations across all Orders and applicable and
available Order Entry Protocols.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that its proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As a general principle, the
proposed changes are reflective of the significant competition among
exchanges and non-exchange venues for order flow. In this regard,
proposed changes that facilitate enhancements to the Exchange's System
and Order Entry Protocols as well as those that amend and clarify the
Exchange's Rules regarding its Order Types and Attributes, are pro-
competitive because they bolster the efficiency, integrity, and overall
attractiveness of the Exchange in an absolute sense and relative to its
peers.
    Moreover, the proposed changes will not unduly burden intra-market
competition among various Exchange participants. The Exchange's
proposal to allow the partial cancellation of an Order without the
Order losing priority will not impact intra-market competition because
the participant that entered the Order continues to express its
willingness to trade at the price entered when the Order first came
onto the Book. Moreover, if the Order is displayed, other participants
quoting at the same price are aware of the priority of their Orders
relative to the partially cancelled Order. While a partial cancellation
may provide these other participants with greater opportunities to
provide a fill, the Exchange does not believe that it would be
reasonable for these participants to jump ahead of an Order with time
priority merely because the size of the Order has been reduced.
Similarly, if the partially cancelled Order is non-displayed, other
participants would have no awareness of its price, its original size,
or its reduced size. Again, while other participants at that price may
have an increased opportunity to provide a fill when the Order's size
is reduced, they would not have an expectation that the priority of
their Orders would change vis-[agrave]-vis that of an Order that
arrived on the Book at an earlier time.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-BX-2022-006 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2022-006. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BX-2022-006 and should be submitted on
or before May 18, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-08914 Filed 4-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 99)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 29450-29451]
[DOCID:fr21my08-18]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 35

[Docket No. AD08-8-000]

Demand Response in Organized Electric Markets

May 13, 2008.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Supplemental Notice of Technical Conference.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission is providing an agenda for the technical
conference to be held in this proceeding on May 21, 2008, from 9 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. (EST), and detailed information regarding attendance,
internet access, and transcripts. This conference will provide a forum
to consider issues related to demand response in organized electric
markets, as discussed in the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
which was issued on March 8, 2008 in Commission Docket Nos. RM07-19-000
and AD07-7-000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Irwin, Office of Energy Market
Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Elizabeth Arnold, Office of the General Counsel--Energy Markets,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    On April 10, 2008, the Commission issued a Notice (April 10 Notice)
scheduling a staff technical conference in the above-captioned
proceeding. As stated in the April 10 Notice, the conference will
provide a forum to consider issues related to demand response in
organized electric markets, as discussed in the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking issued in Docket Nos. RM07-19-000 and AD07-7-000. Wholesale
Competition in Regions with Organized Electric Markets, 73 FR 12,576
(Mar. 7, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,682 at P 95 (2008)
(Competition NOPR). The technical conference will be held on May 21,
2008, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (EST), in the Commission Meeting Room at
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The conference will be open for the public to
attend and advance registration is not required. Members of the
Commission may attend the conference.
    The agenda for this conference is attached. If any changes occur,
the revised agenda will be posted on the calendar page for this event
on the Commission's Web site, http://www.ferc.gov, prior to the event.
    A free webcast of this event is available through http://
www.ferc.gov. Anyone with internet access who desires to view this
event can do so by navigating to the Calendar of Events at http://
www.ferc.gov and locating this event in the Calendar. The event will
contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides
technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this
event via television in the Washington, DC area and via phone-bridge
for a fee. If you have any questions, visit http://
www.CapitolConnection.org or contact Danelle Perkowski or David
Reininger at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Transcripts of the conference will be available immediately for a
fee from Ace Reporting Company<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-336-6646). They
will be available for free on the Commission's eLibrary system and on
the Calendar of Events approximately one week after the conference.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    For more information about this conference, please contact:
    Ryan Irwin, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502-6454<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Elizabeth Arnold, Office of the General Counsel--Energy Markets,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC

20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Demand Response in Organized Electric Markets Technical Conference

May 21, 2008

Agenda

9 a.m. Welcoming Remarks
9:20 Presentation by the Honorable Marsha Smith
    Commissioner, Idaho Public Utilities Commission and President,
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), on
behalf of NARUC.
9:45 Panel 1--Value of and Appropriate Compensation for Demand Response
in Organized Electric Markets
    This panel explores the value of demand response in organized
electric markets and appropriate compensation for demand response under
currently approved tariffs. In particular, this panel addresses the
issue of ensuring that demand response resources are appropriately
compensated in a manner that is comparable to other resources. The
panel will examine whether demand response resources are appropriately
valued for the benefit that they bring.
     Eric Woychik, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs,
Comverge, Inc.
     Daniel Violette, Principal, Summit Blue Consulting.
     James Eber, Director--Demand Response and Dynamic Pricing,
Commonwealth Edison Company.
     Lawrence Stalica, Vice President, Linde Energy Services,
Inc.
     David Brewster, President, EnerNOC, Inc.
     Robert Borlick, Energy Consultant, Borlick Associates.
     David LaPlante, Vice President, Wholesale Markets
Strategy, ISO New England Inc.
     Paul Peterson, Senior Associate, Synapse Energy Economics,
Inc.
11:45 Lunch
1:15 Panel 2--Demand Response in Organized Markets--Barriers to
Comparable Treatment and Solutions to Eliminate Potential Barriers: ISO
New England, NYISO and PJM
    This session addresses barriers to comparable treatment for demand
response in the organized markets in ISO New England Inc., New York
Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) and PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C. (PJM) and explores specific solutions for dealing with these
barriers. Panelists are encouraged to address barriers to comparable
treatment for demand response beyond those already identified in the
Competition NOPR.
     The Honorable Anne George, Commissioner, Connecticut
Department of Public Utility Control; Chair, NARUC Committee on
Electricity and Co-Chair of NARUC-FERC Demand Response Collaborative.
     Andrew Ott, Senior Vice President--Markets, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
     Henry Yoshimura, Manager, Demand Response, ISO New England
Inc.
     Paul Tyno, Executive Vice President of Program
Development, Energy Curtailment Specialists, Inc.
     Edward Tatum, Jr., Vice President, RTO & Regulatory
Affairs, Old Dominion Electric Cooperative.
     Timothy Roughan, Director of Distributed Resources,
National Grid USA.
     Sandra Levine, Senior Attorney, Conservation Law
Foundation.
2:45 Break
3 p.m. Panel 3--Demand Response in Organized Markets--Barriers to
Comparable Treatment and Solutions to Eliminate Potential Barriers:
CAISO, Midwest ISO, and SPP
    This session addresses barriers to comparable treatment for demand
response in the organized markets in California Independent System
Operator Corporation (CAISO), Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO), and Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) and
explores specific solutions for dealing with these barriers. Panelists
are encouraged to address barriers to comparable treatment for demand
response beyond those already identified in the Competition NOPR.
     Dennis Derricks, Director, Electric Regulatory Policy,
Integrys Energy Group Inc.
     DeWayne Todd, Power Manager, Alcoa.
     Michael Robinson, Senior Manager of Market Design, Midwest
Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
     Jason Salmi Klotz, Senior Analyst, Energy Division,
California Public Utilities Commission.
     Joyce Reives, Director, DPL Energy Resources Inc.
     H. Walter Johnson, Principal, Technology Strategies,
California Independent System Operator Corporation.
     J. Craig Baker, Senior Vice President, Regulatory
Services, American Electric Power.
4:30 Concluding Remarks

[FR Doc. E8-11314 Filed 5-20-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P