[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45012-45013]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16416]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 97 and 160

46 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. USCG-2000-7080]
RIN 1625-AA25 [Formerly RIN 2115-AF97]

Cargo Securing Manuals

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Interim rule; information collection approval.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that it has received approval from
the Office of Management and Budget for an information collection
request associated with the Cargo Securing Manuals interim rule we
published in the Federal Register on May 9, 2016. In that rule, we
stated the interim rule will impose new information collection
requirements and that we would submit these new information collection
requirements to OMB for its review and publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing the results of OMB's review. OMB approved
this new collection of information, entitled Cargo Securing Manuals, on
June 23, 2016, and assigned it OMB control number 1625-0122.

DATES: On June 23, 2016, OMB approved the Coast Guard's collection of
information request associated with the Cargo Securing Manuals interim
rule published May 9, 2016 at 81 FR 27992. OMB's approval for this
collection of information expires on June 30, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ken Smith, Environmental Standards Division (CG-OES-
2), U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Viewing Items Associated With This Document

    To view OMB's approval memo or the Cargo Securing Manuals interim
rule, go to www.regulations.gov, type the docket number, USCG-2000-
7080, in the

``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Open Docket Folder'' in
the first item listed. Use the following link to go directly to the
docket: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=USCG-2000-7080.

Background

    On May 9, 2016, the Coast Guard published an interim rule (81 FR
27992) that implemented cargo securing manual requirements. Part 97,
subpart A, and Sec.  160.215 of 33 CFR and 46 CFR 97.12-10 in that rule
contain collection-of-information provisions that require approval by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. On June 23, 2016, the OMB approved
the Coast Guard's collection of information request for this interim
rule and assigned OMB Control Number 1625-0122 to the new collection
entitled, Cargo Securing Manuals. The approval for this collection of
information expires on June 30, 2019.
    This document is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552(a).

    Dated: July 6, 2016.
F.J. Sturm,
Acting Director, Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2016-16416 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240–
276–9310.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
FDA is announcing the availability of
a guidance for industry entitled ‘‘Orally
Disintegrating Tablets.’’ The guidance
provides pharmaceutical manufacturers
of new and generic drug products with
an agency perspective on the definition
of an ODT and also provides
recommendations to applicants who
would like to designate proposed
products as ODTs.
On April 9, 2007 (72 FR 17563), FDA
announced the availability of the draft
version of this guidance. The public
comment period closed on June 8, 2007.
The draft guidance also was discussed
at an Advisory Committee for
Pharmaceutical Science meeting held on
July 22 and 23, 2008. A number of
comments were received from the
public and during the meeting, all of
which the agency considered carefully
as it finalized the guidance and made
appropriate changes. Any changes to the
guidance were minor and made to
clarify statements in the draft guidance.
In an effort to develop drug products
that are more convenient to use and to
address potential issues of patient
compliance for certain product
indications and patient populations,
pharmaceutical manufacturers have
developed products that can be ingested
simply by placing them on the tongue.
The products are designed to
disintegrate or dissolve rapidly on
contact with saliva, thus eliminating the
need to chew the tablet, swallow an
intact tablet, or take the tablet with
liquids. This mode of administration
was initially expected to be beneficial to
pediatric and geriatric patients, to
people with conditions related to
impaired swallowing, and for treatment
of patients when compliance may be
difficult (e.g., for psychiatric disorders).
As firms started developing additional
products using different technology and
formulations, many of these later
products exhibited wide variation in
product characteristics from the initial
products. Because this shift in product
characteristics can affect suitability for
particular uses, the agency developed
this guidance for industry.
This guidance is being issued
consistent with FDA’s good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115).
The guidance represents the agency’s
current thinking on orally disintegrating
tablets. 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.
II. Comments
Interested persons may submit to the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES
) written or electronic
comments regarding this document.
Submit a single copy of electronic
comments or two paper copies of any
mailed comments, except that
individuals may submit one paper copy.
Comments are to be identified 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.
Please note that on January 15, 2008,
the FDA Division of Dockets
Management Web site transitioned to
the Federal Dockets Management
System (FDMS). FDMS is a
Government-wide, electronic docket
management system. Electronic
comments or submissions will be
accepted by FDA only through FDMS at
http://www.regulations.gov.
III. Electronic Access
Persons with access to the Internet
may obtain the document at either
http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/
index.htm or http://
www.regulations.gov.
Dated: December 8, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
[FR Doc. E8–29688 Filed 12–15–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0628]
Microbiological Testing for Contact
Lens Care Products; Public Workshop
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice of public workshop.
SUMMARY:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing a
public workshop entitled
‘‘Microbiological Testing for Contact
Lens Care Products.’’ FDA is co-
sponsoring the public workshop with
the American Academy of
Ophthalmology, the American Academy
of Optometry, the American Optometric
Association, and the Contact Lens
Association of Ophthalmologists. The
purpose of the public workshop is to
discuss test method parameters for
evaluating the activity of contact lens
care products against Acanthamoeba
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:09 Dec 15, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\16DEN1.SGM
16DEN1


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 150 (Monday, August 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36839-36843]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16510]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 32769; File No. 812-14720]

MVC Capital, Inc., et al.; Notice of Application

August 1, 2017.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of application for an order under sections 17(d) and
57(i) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') and rule 17d-
1 under the Act permitting certain joint transactions otherwise
prohibited by sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1
under the Act.

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

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants request an order to permit a
business development company (``BDC'') and certain closed-end
investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies with each
other and with affiliated investment funds.

APPLICANTS: MVC Capital, Inc. (``MVC Capital''), TTGA C-I LP Fund, TTGA
C-I MMF LP Fund and Tokarz Group Advisers LLC (``Tokarz''), on behalf
of itself and its successors.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The term ``successor'' means an entity that results from a
reorganization into another jurisdiction or change in the type of
business organization.

FILING DATES: The application was filed on December 6, 2016, and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
amended on April 6, 2017, and June 27, 2017.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An order granting the requested
relief 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 August 25, 2017 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: Brent J. Fields, Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F St. NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: 287
Bowman Avenue, 2nd Floor, Purchase, NY 10577.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce R. MacNeil, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6817, or David J. Marcinkus, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Chief Counsel's Office, Division of Investment Management).

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

Applicants' Representations

    1. MVC Capital is a Delaware corporation organized as a closed-end
management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a BDC
within the meaning of section 2(a)(48) of the Act.\2\ MVC Capital
participates in the private equity business generally by providing
negotiated debt instruments and/or equity capital. MVC Capital's
investments are generally used to fund growth, buyouts, acquisitions,
recapitalizations note purchases, and/or bridge financing. MVC
Capital's Objectives and Strategies \3\ are to seek to maximize total
return from capital appreciation and/or income and it expects to
achieve this objective be providing equity and or debt financing to
small and middle-market companies in a variety of industries. The Board
of MVC Capital is comprised of seven directors, five of whom are not
``interested persons,'' within the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the
1940 Act (the ``Non-Interested Directors''), of MVC Capital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 2(a)(48) defines a BDC to be any closed-end
investment company that operates for the purpose of making
investments in securities described in section 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\ ``Objectives and Strategies'' means with respect to a
Regulated Fund (defined below), the investment objectives and
strategies, as described in the Regulated Fund's registration
statement on Form N-2, other filings the Regulated Fund has made
with the Commission under the Securities Act of 1933 (the
``Securities Act''), or under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and the Regulated Fund's reports to shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. TTGA C-I MMF LP Fund and TGA C-I LP Fund are each a Delaware
limited partnership and each would be an investment company but for
section 3(copyright)(1) of the Act. TTGA C-I LP Fund and TTGA C-I MMF
LP Fund each have an investment objective is to generate both current
income and long term capital appreciation. TGA C-I LP Fund is in the
process of applying for a license from the Small Business
Administration (``SBA'') to operate under the Small Business Act of
1958 (``SBA Act''), as a small business investment company (each such
licensed entity, a ``SBIC Subsidiary'').
    3. Tokarz is registered with the Commission as an investment
adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of (the ``Advisers Act'').
Tokarz serves as investment adviser to MVC Capital, TTGA C-I LP and
TTGA C-I MMF.
    4. Applicants seek an order (``Order'') to permit one or more
Regulated Funds \4\ and/or one or more Affiliated Funds \5\ to
participate in the same investment opportunities through a proposed co-
investment program (the ``Co-Investment Program'') where such
participation would otherwise be prohibited under section 57(a)(4) and
rule 17d-1 by (a) co-investing with each other in securities issued by
issuers in private placement transactions in which an Adviser
negotiates terms in addition to price; \6\ and (b) making additional
investments in securities of such issuers, including through the
exercise of warrants, conversion privileges, and other rights to
purchase securities of the issuers (``Follow-On Investments''). ``Co-
Investment Transaction'' means any transaction in which a Regulated
Fund (or its Wholly-Owned Investment Sub) participated together with
one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one or more Affiliated Funds
in reliance on the requested Order. ``Potential Co-Investment
Transaction'' means any investment opportunity in which a Regulated
Fund (or its Wholly-Owned Investment Sub, as defined below) could not
participate together with one or more Affiliated Funds and/or one or
more other Regulated Funds without obtaining and relying on the
Order.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Regulated Fund'' means MVC Capital and any Future
Regulated Fund. ``Future Regulated Fund'' means any closed-end
management investment company (a) that is registered under the Act
or has elected to be regulated as a BDC, (b) whose investment
adviser is an Adviser, and (c) that intends to participate in the
Co-Investment Program. The term ``Adviser'' means Tokarz and/or any
future investment adviser that controls, is controlled by or is
under common control with Tokarz and is registered as an investment
adviser under the Advisers Act.
    \5\ TTGA I LP, TTGA MMF LP and any Future Affiliated Funds are
the ``Affiliated Funds. ``Future Affiliated Fund'' means any entity
(a) whose investment adviser is an Adviser, (b) that would be an
investment company but for sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act,
and (c) that intends to participate in the Co-Investment Program.
    \6\ The term ``private placement transactions'' means
transactions in which the offer and sale of securities by the issuer
are exempt from registration under the Securities Act.
    \7\ All existing entities that currently intend to rely upon the
requested Order have been named as applicants. Any other existing or
future entity that subsequently relies on the Order will comply with
the terms and conditions of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Applicants state that a Regulated Fund may, from time to time,
form a one or more Wholly-Owned Investment Subs.\8\ Such a subsidiary
would be prohibited from investing in a Co-Investment Transaction with
any Affiliated Fund or Regulated Fund because it would be a company
controlled by its parent Regulated Fund for purposes of section
57(a)(4) and rule 17d-1. Applicants request that each Wholly-Owned
Investment Sub be permitted to participate in Co-Investment
Transactions in lieu of its parent Regulated Fund and that the Wholly-
Owned Investment Sub's participation in any such transaction be
treated, for purposes of the requested Order, as though the parent
Regulated Fund were participating directly. Applicants represent that
this treatment is justified because a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub would
have no purpose other than serving as a holding vehicle for the
Regulated Fund's investments and, therefore, no conflicts of interest
could arise between the Regulated Fund and the Wholly-Owned Investment
Sub. The Regulated Fund's Board would make all relevant determinations
under the conditions with regard to a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub's
participation in a Co-Investment Transaction, and the Regulated Fund's
Board would be informed of, and take into consideration, any proposed
use of a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub in the Regulated Fund's place. If
the Regulated Fund proposes to participate in the same Co-Investment
Transaction with any of its Wholly-Owned Investment Subs, the Board
will also be informed of, and take into consideration, the relative
participation of the Regulated Fund and the Wholly-Owned Investment
Sub.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The term ``Wholly-Owned Investment Sub'' means an entity (i)
that is wholly-owned by a Regulated Fund (with the Regulated Fund at
all times holding, beneficially and of record, 100% of the voting
and economic interests); (ii) whose sole business purpose is to hold
one or more investments on behalf of the Regulated Fund (and, in the
case of an SBIC Subsidiary, maintain a license under the SBA Act and
issue debentures guaranteed by the SBA); (iii) with respect to which
the Regulated Fund's Board has the sole authority to make all
determinations with respect to the entity's participation under the
conditions of the application; and (iv) that would be an investment
company but for sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act.

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

    6. When considering Potential Co-Investment Transactions for any
Regulated Fund, the applicable Adviser will consider only the
Objectives and Strategies, investment policies, investment positions,
capital available for investment, and other pertinent factors
applicable to that Regulated Fund. The Regulated Funds' Advisers expect
that any portfolio company that is an appropriate investment for a
Regulated Fund should also be an appropriate investment for one or more
other Regulated Funds and/or one or more Affiliated Funds, with certain
exceptions based on available capital or diversification.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Regulated Funds, however, will not be obligated to
invest, or co-invest, when investment opportunities are referred to
them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Other than pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as
provided in conditions 7 and 8, and after making the determinations
required in conditions 1 and 2(a), the Adviser will present each
Potential Co-Investment Transaction and the proposed allocation to the
directors of the Board eligible to vote under section 57(o) of the Act
(``Eligible Directors''), and the ``required majority,'' as defined in
section 57(o) of the Act (``Required Majority'') \10\ will approve each
Co-Investment Transaction prior to any investment by the participating
Regulated Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In the case of a Regulated Fund that is a registered
closed-end fund, the Board members that make up the Required
Majority will be determined as if the Regulated Fund were a BDC
subject to section 57(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. With respect to the pro rata dispositions and Follow-On
Investments provided in conditions 7 and 8, a Regulated Fund may
participate in a pro rata disposition or Follow-On Investment without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if, among other
things: (i) The proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and
Affiliated Fund in such disposition is proportionate to its outstanding
investments in the issuer immediately preceding the disposition or
Follow-On Investment, as the case may be; and (ii) the Board of the
Regulated Fund has approved that Regulated Fund's participation in pro
rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as being in the best
interests of the Regulated Fund. If the Board does not so approve, any
such disposition or Follow-On Investment will be submitted to the
Regulated Fund's Eligible Directors. The Board of any Regulated Fund
may at any time rescind, suspend or qualify its approval of pro rata
dispositions and Follow-On Investments with the result that all
dispositions and/or Follow-On Investments must be submitted to the
Eligible Directors.
    9. No Non-Interested Director of a Regulated Fund will have a
financial interest in any Co-Investment Transaction, other than
indirectly through share ownership in one of the Regulated Funds.
    10. Applicants also represent that if the Advisers, the principals
of the Advisers (``Principals''), or any person controlling, controlled
by, or under common control with an Adviser or the Principals, and the
Affiliated Funds (collectively, the ``Holders'') own in the aggregate
more than 25% of the outstanding voting shares of a Regulated Fund (the
``Shares''), then the Holders will vote such Shares as required under
condition 14. Applicants believe this condition will ensure that the
Non-Interested Directors will act independently in evaluating the Co-
Investment Program, because the ability of the Advisers or the
Principals to influence the Non-Interested Directors by a suggestion,
explicit or implied, that the Non-Interested Directors can be removed
will be limited significantly. Applicants represent that the Non-
Interested Directors will evaluate and approve any such independent
third party, taking into account its qualifications, reputation for
independence, cost to the shareholders, and other factors that they
deem relevant.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 57(a)(4) of the Act prohibits certain affiliated persons
of a BDC from participating in joint transactions with the BDC or a
company controlled by a BDC in contravention of rules as prescribed by
the Commission. Under section 57(b)(2) of the Act, any person who is
directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with a BDC is subject to section 57(a)(4). Applicants submit
that each of the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds could be deemed
to be a person related to each Regulated Fund in a manner described by
section 57(b) by virtue of being under common control. Section 57(i) of
the Act provides that, until the Commission prescribes rules under
section 57(a)(4), the Commission's rules under section 17(d) of the Act
applicable to registered closed-end investment companies will be deemed
to apply to transactions subject to section 57(a)(4). Because the
Commission has not adopted any rules under section 57(a)(4), rule 17d-1
also applies to joint transactions with Regulated Funds that are BDCs.
Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act are applicable to
Regulated Funds that are registered closed-end investment companies.
    2. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit
affiliated persons of a registered investment company from
participating in joint transactions with the company unless the
Commission has granted an order permitting such transactions. In
passing upon applications under rule 17d-1, the Commission considers
whether the company's participation in the joint transaction is
consistent with the provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and
the extent to which such participation is on a basis different from or
less advantageous than that of other participants.
    3. Applicants state that in the absence of the requested relief,
the Regulated Funds would be, in some circumstances, limited in their
ability to participate in attractive and appropriate investment
opportunities. Applicants believe that the proposed terms and
conditions will ensure that the Co-Investment Transactions are
consistent with the protection of each Regulated Fund's shareholders
and with the purposes intended by the policies and provisions of the
Act. Applicants state that the Regulated Funds' participation in the
Co-Investment Transactions will be consistent with the provisions,
policies, and purposes of the Act and on a basis that is not different
from or less advantageous than that of other participants.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief shall
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. Each time an Adviser considers a Potential Co-Investment
Transaction for an Affiliated Fund or another Regulated Fund that falls
within a Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies, the
Regulated Fund's Adviser will make an independent determination of the
appropriateness of the investment for such Regulated Fund in light of
the Regulated Fund's then-current circumstances.
    2. (a) If the Adviser deems a Regulated Fund's participation in any
Potential Co-Investment Transaction to be appropriate for the Regulated
Fund, it will then determine an appropriate level of investment for the
Regulated Fund.
    (b) If the aggregate amount recommended by the applicable Adviser
to be invested by the applicable Regulated Fund in the Potential Co-
Investment Transaction, together with the amount proposed to be
invested by the other participating Regulated Funds and/or Affiliated
Funds, collectively, in the same transaction, exceeds the

amount of the investment opportunity, the investment opportunity will
be allocated among them pro rata based on each participant's capital
available for investment in the asset class being allocated, up to the
amount proposed to be invested by each. The applicable Adviser will
provide the Eligible Directors of each participating Regulated Fund
with information concerning each participating party's available
capital to assist the Eligible Directors with their review of the
Regulated Fund's investments for compliance with these allocation
procedures.
    (c) After making the determinations required in conditions 1 and
2(a), the applicable Adviser will distribute written information
concerning the Potential Co-Investment Transaction (including the
amount proposed to be invested by each participating Regulated Fund and
Affiliated Fund) to the Eligible Directors of each participating
Regulated Fund for their consideration. A Regulated Fund will co-invest
with one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one or more Affiliated
Funds only if, prior to the Regulated Fund's participation in the
Potential Co-Investment Transaction, a Required Majority concludes
that:
    (i) The terms of the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, including
the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Regulated
Fund and its shareholders and do not involve overreaching in respect of
the Regulated Fund or its shareholders on the part of any person
concerned;
    (ii) the Potential Co-Investment Transaction is consistent with:
    (A) The interests of the shareholders of the Regulated Fund; and
    (B) the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies;
    (iii) the investment by any other Regulated Funds or Affiliated
Funds would not disadvantage the Regulated Fund, and participation by
the Regulated Fund would not be on a basis different from or less
advantageous than that of other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds;
provided that, if any other Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund, but not
the Regulated Fund itself, gains the right to nominate a director for
election to a portfolio company's board of directors or the right to
have a board observer or any similar right to participate in the
governance or management of the portfolio company, such event shall not
be interpreted to prohibit the Required Majority from reaching the
conclusions required by this condition (2)(c)(iii), if:
    (A) The Eligible Directors will have the right to ratify the
selection of such director or board observer, if any;
    (B) the applicable Adviser agrees to, and does, provide periodic
reports to the Regulated Fund's Board with respect to the actions of
such director or the information received by such board observer or
obtained through the exercise of any similar right to participate in
the governance or management of the portfolio company; and;
    (C) any fees or other compensation that any Affiliated Fund or any
Regulated Fund or any affiliated person of any Affiliated Fund or any
Regulated Fund receives in connection with the right of an Affiliated
Fund or a Regulated Fund to nominate a director or appoint a board
observer or otherwise to participate in the governance or management of
the portfolio company will be shared proportionately among the
participating Affiliated Funds (who each may, in turn, share its
portion with its affiliated persons) and the participating Regulated
Funds in accordance with the amount of each party's investment; and
    (iv) the proposed investment by the Regulated Fund will not benefit
the Advisers, the Affiliated Funds or the other Regulated Funds or any
affiliated person of any of them (other than the parties to the Co-
Investment Transaction), except (A) to the extent permitted by
condition 13, (B) to the extent permitted by section 17(e) or 57(k) of
the Act, as applicable, (C) indirectly, as a result of an interest in
the securities issued by one of the parties to the Co-Investment
Transaction, or (D) in the case of fees or other compensation described
in condition 2(c)(iii)(C).
    3. Each Regulated Fund has the right to decline to participate in
any Potential Co-Investment Transaction or to invest less than the
amount proposed.
    4. The applicable Adviser will present to the Board of each
Regulated Fund, on a quarterly basis, a record of all investments in
Potential Co-Investment Transactions made by any of the other Regulated
Funds or Affiliated Funds during the preceding quarter that fell within
the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies that were
not made available to the Regulated Fund, and an explanation of why the
investment opportunities were not offered to the Regulated Fund. All
information presented to the Board pursuant to this condition will be
kept for the life of the Regulated Fund and at least two years
thereafter, and will be subject to examination by the Commission and
its staff.
    5. Except for Follow-On Investments made in accordance with
condition 8,\11\ a Regulated Fund will not invest in reliance on the
Order in any issuer in which another Regulated Fund, Affiliated Fund,
or any affiliated person of another Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund
is an existing investor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This exception applies only to Follow-On Investments by a
Regulated Fund in issuers in which that Regulated Fund already holds
investments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. A Regulated Fund will not participate in any Potential Co-
Investment Transaction unless the terms, conditions, price, class of
securities to be purchased, settlement date, and registration rights
will be the same for each participating Regulated Fund and Affiliated
Fund. The grant to an Affiliated Fund or another Regulated Fund, but
not the Regulated Fund, of the right to nominate a director for
election to a portfolio company's board of directors, the right to have
an observer on the board of directors or similar rights to participate
in the governance or management of the portfolio company will not be
interpreted so as to violate this condition 6, if conditions
2(c)(iii)(A), (B) and (C) are met.
    7. (a) If any Affiliated Fund or any Regulated Fund elects to sell,
exchange or otherwise dispose of an interest in a security that was
acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Advisers will:
    (i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed disposition at the earliest
practical time; and
    (ii) formulate a recommendation as to participation by each
Regulated Fund in the disposition.
    (b) Each Regulated Fund will have the right to participate in such
disposition on a proportionate basis, at the same price and on the same
terms and conditions as those applicable to the participating
Affiliated Funds and Regulated Funds.
    (c) A Regulated Fund may participate in such disposition without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The proposed
participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund in such
disposition is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the
issuer immediately preceding the disposition; (ii) the Board of the
Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests of the
Regulated Fund the ability to participate in such dispositions on a pro
rata basis (as described in greater detail in the application); and
(iii) the Board of the Regulated Fund is provided on a

quarterly basis with a list of all dispositions made in accordance with
this condition. In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its
written recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the
Eligible Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such
disposition solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines
that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.
    (d) Each Affiliated Fund and each Regulated Fund will bear its own
expenses in connection with any such disposition.
    8. (a) If any Affiliated Fund or any Regulated Fund desires to make
a Follow-On Investment in a portfolio company whose securities were
acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the applicable Advisers will:
    (i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed transaction at the earliest
practicable time; and
    (ii) formulate a recommendation as to the proposed participation,
including the amount of the proposed Follow-On Investment, by each
Regulated Fund.
    (b) A Regulated Fund may participate in such Follow-On Investment
without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The
proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund
in such investment is proportionate to its outstanding investments in
the issuer immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and (ii) the
Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests
of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in Follow-On
Investments on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the
application). In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written
recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible
Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Follow-On
Investment solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines
that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.
    (c) If, with respect to any Follow-On Investment:
    (i) The amount of the opportunity is not based on the Regulated
Funds' and the Affiliated Funds' outstanding investments immediately
preceding the Follow-On Investment; and
    (ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the Adviser to be invested
by each Regulated Fund in the Follow-On Investment, together with the
amount proposed to be invested by the participating Affiliated Funds in
the same transaction, exceeds the amount of the opportunity; then the
amount invested by each such party will be allocated among them pro
rata based on each participant's capital available for investment in
the asset class being allocated, up to the amount proposed to be
invested by each.
    (d) The acquisition of Follow-On Investments as permitted by this
condition will be considered a Co-Investment Transaction for all
purposes and subject to the other conditions set forth in the
application.
    9. The Non-Interested Directors of each Regulated Fund will be
provided quarterly for review all information concerning Potential Co-
Investment Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions, including
investments made by other Regulated Funds or Affiliated Funds that the
Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, so that the
Non-Interested Directors may determine whether all investments made
during the preceding quarter, including those investments that the
Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, comply with
the conditions of the Order. In addition, the Non-Interested Directors
will consider at least annually the continued appropriateness for the
Regulated Fund of participating in new and existing Co-Investment
Transactions.
    10. Each Regulated Fund will maintain the records required by
section 57(f)(3) of the Act as if each of the Regulated Funds were a
BDC and each of the investments permitted under these conditions were
approved by the Required Majority under section 57(f) of the Act.
    11. No Non-Interested Director of a Regulated Fund will also be a
director, general partner, managing member or principal, or otherwise
an ``affiliated person'' (as defined in the Act) of an Affiliated Fund.
    12. The expenses, if any, associated with acquiring, holding or
disposing of any securities acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction
(including, without limitation, the expenses of the distribution of any
such securities registered for sale under the Securities Act) will, to
the extent not payable by the Advisers under their respective
investment advisory agreements with Affiliated Funds and the Regulated
Funds, be shared by the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds in
proportion to the relative amounts of the securities held or to be
acquired or disposed of, as the case may be.
    13. Any transaction fee (including break-up or commitment fees but
excluding broker's fees contemplated by section 17(e) or 57(k) of the
Act, as applicable), received in connection with a Co-Investment
Transaction will be distributed to the participating Regulated Funds
and Affiliated Funds on a pro rata basis based on the amounts they
invested or committed, as the case may be, in such Co-Investment
Transaction. If any transaction fee \12\ is to be held by an Adviser
pending consummation of the transaction, the fee will be deposited into
an account maintained by such Adviser at a bank or banks having the
qualifications prescribed in section 26(a)(1) of the Act, and the
account will earn a competitive rate of interest that will also be
divided pro rata among the participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated
Funds based on the amounts they invest in such Co-Investment
Transaction. None of the Affiliated Funds, the Advisers, the other
Regulated Funds or any affiliated person of the Regulated Funds or
Affiliated Funds will receive additional compensation or remuneration
of any kind as a result of or in connection with a Co-Investment
Transaction other than (a) in the case of the Regulated Funds and the
Affiliated Funds, the pro rata transaction fees described above and
fees or other compensation described in condition 2(c)(iii)(C); and (b)
in the case of an Adviser, investment advisory fees paid in accordance
with the agreement between the Adviser and the Regulated Fund or
Affiliated Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Applicants are not requesting and the staff is not
providing any relief for transaction fees received in connection
with any Co-Investment Transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. If the Holders own in the aggregate more than 25% of the
Shares, then the Holders will vote such Shares as directed by an
independent third party when voting on (1) the election of directors;
(2) the removal of one or more directors; or (3) all other matters
under either the Act or applicable State law affecting the Board's
composition, size or manner of election.
    15. Each Regulated Fund's chief compliance officer as defined in
rule 38a-1(a)(4) will prepare an annual report for its Board each year
that evaluates (and documents the basis of that evaluation) the
Regulated Fund's compliance with the terms and conditions of the
Application and the procedures established to achieve such compliance.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-16510 Filed 8-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42862-42863]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17657]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75446; File No. SR-Phlx-2015-58]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
the Exchange's Pricing Schedule under Section VIII With Respect to
Execution and Routing of Orders in Securities Priced at $1 or More per
Share

July 14, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that, on June 30, 2015, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which
Items have been prepared by the 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 the Exchange's Pricing Schedule
under Section VIII, entitled ``NASDAQ OMX PSX FEES,'' with respect to
execution and routing of orders in securities priced at $1 or more per
share.
    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated that the amendments be operative on July 1,
2015.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend certain credits
for order execution and routing applicable to the use of the order
execution and routing services of the NASDAQ OMX PSX System (``PSX'')
by member organizations for all securities traded at $1 or more per
share.
    The Exchange will increase non-displayed order credits for all
orders with midpoint pegging that provide liquidity through PSX.
Specifically, the credit tiers for non-displayed orders of a $0.0015
per share executed credit for orders with midpoint pegging that provide
liquidity entered by a member organization that provides 1,000,000
shares or more average daily volume of non-displayed liquidity during
the month and the credit tier for non-displayed orders of $0.0010 per
share executed will be replaced with a single credit tier of $0.0020
per share executed for all orders with midpoint pegging \3\ that
provide liquidity to create further incentives to provide midpoint
liquidity on PSX for the benefit of investors and other market
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Including the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order recently filed
with the Commission, once effective and operative. See SR-PHLX-2015-
056 (as recently filed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\4\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility or system which the Exchange operates or controls, and is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed increases to the credits in the fee schedule under the
Exchange's Pricing Schedule under Section VIII are reflective of the
Exchange's ongoing efforts to use pricing incentive programs to attract
order flow to the Exchange and improve market quality. The goal of
these pricing incentives is to provide meaningful incentives for
members to increase their participation on the Exchange.
    The Exchange is proposing to increase non-displayed order credits
for all orders with midpoint pegging that provide liquidity through PSX
by replacing the existing two such tiers with a single tier.
Specifically, the credit tiers for non-displayed orders of a $0.0015
per share executed credit for orders with midpoint pegging that provide
liquidity entered by a member organization that provides 1,000,000
shares or more average daily volume of non-displayed liquidity during
the month and the credit tier for non-displayed orders of $0.0010 per
share executed will be replaced with a single credit tier of $0.0020
per share executed for all orders with midpoint pegging that provide
liquidity.
    The Exchange believes the proposed change is reasonable because the
increase to the credit for all orders with midpoint pegging that
provide liquidity provides member organizations with a uniform credit
designed to incentivize increased midpoint liquidity on PSX.
Additionally, the Exchange believes providing a greater credit will act
as an incentive for members to increase their participation on the
Exchange.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with an equitable allocation of fees and is not unfairly discriminatory
because the single credit for all orders with midpoint pegging that
provide liquidity is uniformly available to all members and affects all
members equally and in the same way.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.\6\
Phlx notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor dozens of different competing
exchanges and alternative trading systems if they deem charges at a
particular venue to be excessive, or credit opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its charges and credits to remain competitive
with other exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own
charges and credits in response, and because market participants may
readily adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes
that the degree to which changes to charges and credits in this market
may impose any burden on competition is extremely limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this instance, the changes to the credits for all orders with
midpoint pegging that provide liquidity do not impose a burden on
competition because Exchange membership is optional and is the subject
of competition from other exchanges. The increased credit is reflective
of the intent to increase the order flow on the Exchange. For these
reasons, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will
impair the ability of members or competing order execution venues to
maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets. Moreover,
because there are numerous competitive alternatives to the use of the
Exchange, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as a
result of the changes if they are unattractive to market participants.
    Accordingly, Phlx does not believe that the proposed rule changes
will impair the ability of members or competing order execution venues
to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\7\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-Phlx-2015-58 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-Phlx-2015-58. 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 such 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-Phlx-2015-58 and should be
submitted on or before August 10, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-17657 Filed 7-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 885-887]
[FR Doc No: 2013-31606]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71215; File No. SR-NYSE-2013-82]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending its Price List Related to Fees for Trading Licenses and To
Delete Obsolete Text

December 31, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on December 18, 2013, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the 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\ 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 amending [sic] its Price List related to
fees for trading licenses and to delete obsolete text. The Exchange
proposes to implement the Price List change immediately. 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List related to fees for
trading licenses and to delete obsolete text. The Exchange proposes to
implement the Price List change immediately.
    NYSE Rule 300(b) provides that, in each annual offering, up to
1,366 trading licenses for the following calendar year will be sold
annually at a price per trading license to be established each year by
the Exchange pursuant to a rule filing submitted to the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') and that the price per trading
license will be published each year in the Exchange's Price List. The
trading license fees for 2013 are $40,000 per trading license for the
first two licenses held by a member organization and $25,000 for each
additional trading license. For trading licenses issued after January
1, 2013, fees are prorated for the portion of the calendar year that
the trading license is outstanding.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For a trading license that is in place for 15 calendar days
or less in a calendar month, proration for that month would be at a
flat rate of $100 per day with no tier pricing involved. For a
trading license that is in place for 16 calendar days or more in a
calendar month, proration for that month would be computed based on
the number of days as applied to the applicable annual fee for the
trading license. See Price List at current n. 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If, however, a member organization is issued additional trading
licenses between July 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013, and the total
number of trading licenses held by the member organization between July
1, 2013 and December 31, 2013 is greater than the total number of
trading licenses held by the member organization on July 1, 2013, then
the member organization is not charged a prorated fee for the period
from July 3, 2013 to December 31, 2013 for those additional trading
licenses above the number the member organization held on July 1,
2013.\4\ If a firm becomes a member organization after July 1, 2013,
the firm is assigned a baseline of one trading license and charged a
prorated fee for that license. Any trading licenses in addition to the
first trading license are not charged a prorated fee for the period
from July 3, 2013 to December 31, 2013. If a member organization merges
with another member organization on or after July 1, 2013, the total
combined number of trading licenses held by each member organization on
July 1, 2013 is considered the baseline number of trading licenses for
the successor member organization as of the date of the merger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69992 (July 16,
2013), 78 FR 43947 (July 22, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-51). See also Price
List at current n. 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For 2014, the Exchange proposes to extend the fee relief for
additional licenses until December 31, 2014. As a result, an annual fee
would not apply to the number of trading licenses issued to a member
organization between July 3, 2013 and December 31, 2014 that exceeds
the total number of trading licenses held by the member organization on
July 1, 2013. The Exchange proposes to maintain July 1, 2013 as the
baseline date so that a consistent point in time would be used to
determine how many trading licenses for which a member organization
would be charged. The fee calculation for new or merged member
organizations would also be extended. Thus, for any firm that becomes a
member organization after July 1, 2013, the firm would be considered to
have one trading license as of July 1, 2013 and charged a fee for that
one license through December 31, 2014. For example, if a firm became a
member organization on November 1, 2013, it would pay a prorated fee
for one license until December 31, 2013 ($6,666) and then, under the
current rates, pay $40,000 for 2014. If a firm becomes a member
organization on March 1, 2014, it would pay a prorated fee under
current rates for one license for the remainder of 2014 ($33,334). If a
member organization merges with another member organization on or after
July 1, 2013, the total combined number of trading licenses held by
each member organization on July 1, 2013 would be considered the
baseline number of trading licenses for the successor member
organization as of the date of the merger through December 31, 2014.
    Footnote 15 in the Price List currently provides that Floor brokers
will receive a monthly credit of $2,000 for the first two Floor broker
licenses held by a member organization and a monthly credit of $500 for
each additional Floor broker license held by a member organization for
November and December 2012. Additionally, the Price List currently
includes a section pertaining to the New York Block Exchange
(``NYBX''), which was an electronic exchange facility that ceased
operating on February 28, 2013.\5\ The Exchange proposes to delete this
text because it is obsolete.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68861 (February 7,
2013), 78 FR 10226 (February 13, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-12).
    \6\ The Exchange would renumber current footnote 16 as new
footnote 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that members or
member organizations would have in complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is reasonable
because maintaining fee relief for the number of trading licenses that
exceeds the total number of trading licenses held by the member
organization on July 1, 2013 would continue to encourage member
organizations to hold additional trading licenses, which would increase
the number of market participants trading on the floor of the Exchange,
thereby promoting liquidity, price discovery and the opportunity for
price improvement for the benefit of all market participants. The
Exchange believes that it is

reasonable to maintain July 1, 2013 as the applicable baseline date so
that a consistent point in time would be used to determine how many
trading licenses for which a member organization would be charged,
which would continue to provide member organizations with greater
flexibility in managing their personnel. Further, the proposed billing
for trading licenses would encourage additional firms to become member
organizations on the Exchange, which would contribute to the quality of
the Exchange's market.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because all similarly situated member
organizations would continue to be subject to the same trading license
fee structure and because access to the Exchange's market would
continue to be offered on fair and nondiscriminatory terms. The
Exchange also believes that the proposed change is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because all member organizations would continue
to have the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of the fee relief with
respect to additional trading licenses. The Exchange believes that it
is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to continue to assign new
member organizations a baseline of one trading license because this
will continue to encourage firms to become member organizations,
thereby encouraging trading activity on the Exchange, which benefits
all market participants.
    The Exchange also believes that removing obsolete text from the
Price List is consistent with the Act because it would add greater
clarity for member organizations.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\9\ the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, the proposed change would help to remove
a potential burden on competition by making it easier for member
organizations to appropriately staff the floor of the Exchange, which
is a key feature of the Exchange's structure for offering a fair and
orderly market and competing with other exchanges. The proposed change
would also contribute to making membership on the Exchange as a member
organization more economical and could therefore lead to increased
competition on the Exchange between member organizations. This, in
turn, could lead to increased intermarket competition between the
Exchange and other markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee or credit levels at a particular
venue to be unattractive. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and credits to
remain competitive with other exchanges. For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment and is therefore consistent with the Act.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \11\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \12\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSE-2013-82 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2013-82. 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 such 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-NYSE-2013-82 and should be
submitted on or before January 28, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-31606 Filed 1-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P [FEDREG][VOL]*[/VOL][NO]*[/NO][DATE]*[/
DATE][NOTICES]


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45944-45945]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18266]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket No. FEMA-2013-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1247]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency; DHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On April 11, 2012, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed flood hazard determination notice that contained an erroneous
table. This notice provides corrections to that table, to be used in
lieu of the information published at 77 FR 21792. The table provided
here represents the proposed flood hazard determinations and
communities affected for Gregg County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before October 28, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), and where
applicable, the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for each community
are available for inspection at both the online location and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1247, to
Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC

20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER> or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed in the table below, in
accordance with Section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of
1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the table below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard determinations shown on the Preliminary FIRM and
FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR
67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations will also be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
are made final.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP may only be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://www.fema.gov/pdf/media/factsheets/2010/srp_fs.pdf.
    In the proposed flood hazard determination notice published at 77
FR 21792 in the April 11, 2012, issue of the Federal Register, FEMA
published a table titled ``Gregg County, Texas, and Incorporated
Areas.'' This table contained inaccurate information as to the
watershed or communities affected by the proposed flood hazard
determinations, or the associated community map repository or web
addresses also featured in the table. In this document, FEMA is
publishing a table containing the accurate information, to address
these prior errors. The information provided below should be used in
lieu of that previously published.

Correction

    In Proposed rule FR Doc. 2012-8600, beginning on page 21791 in the
issue of April 11, 2012, make the following correction. On page 21792,
correct the Gregg County, Texas table as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Gregg County, Texas, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://riskmap6.com/Community.aspx?cid=341&sid=5.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Clarksville City...............  City Hall, 631 U.S. Highway 80
                                          and White Street, Clarksville
                                          City, TX 75693.
City of Easton.........................  City Hall, 185 Kennedy
                                          Boulevard, Easton, TX 75663.
City of Gladewater.....................  City Hall, 519 East Broadway,
                                          Gladewater, TX 75647.
City of Kilgore........................  City Hall, 815 North Kilgore
                                          Street, Kilgore, TX 75662.
City of Lakeport.......................  Lakeport City Hall, 207 Milam
                                          Road, Longview, TX 75603.
City of Longview.......................  Development Services and
                                          Engineering Department, 410
                                          South High Street, Longview,
                                          TX 75601.
City of Warren City....................  Warren City City Hall, 3004
                                          George Richey Road,
                                          Gladewater, TX 75647.
City of White Oak......................  City Hall, 906 South White Oak
                                          Road, White Oak, TX 75693.
Unincorporated Areas of Gregg County...  Gregg County Courthouse, 101
                                          East Methvin, Longview, TX
                                          75601.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: June 28, 2013.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-18266 Filed 7-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 66400]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26197]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL20-9-000]

Oxbow Creek Energy LLC; Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On November 26, 2019, the Commission issued an order in Docket No.
EL20-9-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e (2018), instituting an investigation into whether Oxbow
Creek Energy LLC's rate are just and reasonable. Oxbow Creek Energy
LLC, 169 FERC ] 61,162 (2019).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL20-9-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL20-9-000
must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as
appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2019),
within 21 days of the date of issuance of the order.

    Dated: November 27, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-26197 Filed 12-3-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 94 (Thursday, May 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 27895]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11132]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4168-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2014-0003]

Washington; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Washington (FEMA-4168-DR), dated April 2, 2014, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: April 30, 2014.

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: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Washington is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of April 2, 2014.

    Snohomish County and the Sauk-Suiattle, Stillaguamish, and
Tulalip Tribes for Public Assistance [Categories C-G] (already
designated for Individual Assistance and debris removal and
emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct
federal assistance, under the Public Assistance 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.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-11132 Filed 5-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18702-18704]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06757]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0410; EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0141; FRL-9484-02-R5]

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Redesignation of the Manitowoc,
Wisconsin, Area to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finds that the
Manitowoc, Wisconsin, area is attaining the 2015 ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) and is approving, in
accordance with a request from the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR), the redesignation of the area to attainment for the
2015 ozone NAAQS, because the request meets the statutory requirements
for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Also, EPA is approving
WDNR's certification that its stationary annual emissions statement
regulation, which has been previously approved by EPA under a prior
ozone standard, satisfies the CAA emission statement rule requirement
for the 2015 ozone standard. WDNR submitted these requests on August 3,
2020, and October 29, 2021. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the
Wisconsin State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's plan for
maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2033 in the Manitowoc area.
EPA also finds adequate and is approving Wisconsin's 2025 and 2033
volatile organic compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX)
motor vehicle emission budgets for the Manitowoc area. These revisions
satisfy the emissions inventory requirements for the partial Manitowoc
area under the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The CAA requires emission inventories
for all areas that were designated nonattainment.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 31, 2022.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0410 and EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0141. All documents in
the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either through www.regulations.gov or at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays and facility closures due to COVID-19. We recommend
that you telephone Emily Crispell, Environmental Scientist, at (312)
353-8512 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Crispell, Environmental
Scientist,

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. Background Information

    On February 1, 2022 (87 FR 5438), EPA proposed to approve the 2015
Ozone NAAQS Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for the Manitowoc area,
WDNR's 2025 and 2033 VOC and NOX motor vehicle emission
budgets for the Manitowoc area, WDNR's emissions inventory for the
partial Manitowoc area under the 2015 ozone NAAQS, and WDNR's emissions
statement certification for the 2015 ozone standard. An explanation of
the CAA requirements, a detailed analysis of the revisions, and EPA's
reasons for proposing approval were provided in the notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) and will not be restated here. The public comment
period for this proposed rule ended on March 3, 2022.
    During the comment period, EPA received one comment. The comment
was supportive of the proposed action and the commentor stated that
environmental regulations are necessary and that the proposed
regulation should go into effect. The comment received is included in
the docket for this action. EPA did not receive any adverse comments.
Therefore, we are finalizing our action as proposed.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA finds that the Manitowoc area is attaining the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, based on quality-assured and certified monitoring data for 2018-
2020 showing that the area has met the requirements for redesignation
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Quality-assured and certified
monitoring data for 2021 show that the area continues to attain the
2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA is thus approving a change in the legal
designation of the Manitowoc area from nonattainment to attainment for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the
Wisconsin SIP, the State's maintenance plan for the area. The
maintenance plan is designed to keep the Manitowoc area in attainment
of the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2033. EPA also finds adequate and is
approving the newly established 2025 and 2033 VOC and NOX
motor vehicle emission budgets for the Manitowoc area. EPA is also
approving the base year emissions inventories for the partial Manitowoc
area under the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Finally, we are confirming that
Wisconsin has acceptable and enforceable annual emission statement
regulations for the 2015 ozone standard.
    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA), EPA finds there is good cause for this action to become
effective immediately upon publication. The immediate effective date
for this action is authorized under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
    Section 553(d)(1) of the APA provides that final rules shall not
become effective until 30 days after publication in the Federal
Register ``except . . . a substantive rule which grants or recognizes
an exemption or relieves a restriction.'' The purpose of this provision
is to ``give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior before the final rule takes effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. Fed.
Commc'n Comm'n, 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996); see also United
States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting
legislative history). However, when the agency grants or recognizes an
exemption or relieves a restriction, affected parties do not need a
reasonable time to adjust because the effect is not adverse. EPA has
determined that this rule relieves a restriction because this rule
relieves sources in the area of Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR)
permitting requirements; instead, upon the effective date of this
action, sources will be subject to less restrictive Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements. For this
reason, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) for this action
to become effective on the date of publication of this action.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action

is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 31, 2022. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, and
Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: March 21, 2022.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR parts 52
and 81 as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. Section 52.2585 is amended by adding paragraph (rr) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2585  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (rr) Redesignation. Approval--On October 29, 2021, Wisconsin
submitted a request to redesignate the Manitowoc County area to
attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone standard. As part of the
redesignation request, the State submitted a maintenance plan as
required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of the section
175 maintenance plan include a contingency plan and an obligation to
submit a subsequent maintenance plan revision in eight years as
required by the Clean Air Act. The ozone maintenance plan also
establishes 2025 and 2033 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for
the area. The 2025 MVEBs for the Manitowoc County area are 0.47 tons
per hot summer day for VOC and 0.91 tons per hot summer day for
NOX. The 2033 MVEBs for the Manitowoc County area are 0.32
tons per hot summer day for VOC and 0.61 tons per hot summer day for
NOX.

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

0
4. Section 81.350 is amended by revising the entry for ``Manitowoc
County, WI'' in the table entitled ``Wisconsin-2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
[Primary and Secondary]'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.350  Wisconsin.

* * * * *

                                       Wisconsin--2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Designation                         Classification
         Designated area \1\         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Date \2\             Type             Date \2\             Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Manitowoc County, WI................    3/31/2022   Attainment............  ............  Marginal (Rural
                                                                                Transport).
    Manitowoc County (part):
        Inclusive and east of the
         following roadways with the
         boundary starting from
         north to south: County Road
         B which turns into South
         State Street to County Road
         V which turns into Forest
         Home Drive to South Packer
         Drive to West Hillcrest
         Road to Highway 43 to West
         Custer Street to Dufek
         Drive which turns into
         Highway 42.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise specified. EPA is not determining the
  boundaries of any area of Indian country in this table, including any area of Indian country located in the
  larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in the designation area is not a determination
  that the state has regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
\2\ This date is August 3, 2018, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-06757 Filed 3-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P