[Federal Register: January 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2166]
[DOCID:fr14ja10-105]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 17Ad-2(c), (d), and (h); SEC File No. 270-149; OMB Control
No. 3235-0130.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 17Ad-2(c), (d), and (h),
(17 CFR 240.17Ad-2(c), (d), and (h)), under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 17Ad-2(e),(d), and (h) enumerates the requirements with which
transfer agents must comply to inform the Commission or the appropriate
regulator of a transfer agent's failure to meet the minimum performance
standards set by the Commission rule by filing a notice.
    While it is estimated there are 740 transfer agents, approximately
five notices pursuant to Rule 17Ad-2(c), (d), and (h) are filed
annually. In view of (a) The readily available nature of most of the
information required to be included in the notice (since that
information must be compiled and retained pursuant to other Commission
rules); (b) the summary fashion in which such information must be
presented in the notice (most notices are one page or less in length);
and (c) the experience of the staff regarding the notices, the
Commission staff estimates that, on the average, most notices require
approximately one-half hour to prepare. The Commission staff estimates
that transfer agents spend an average of two and a half hours per year
complying with the rule.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information on
respondents; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to: Charles Boucher, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312
or send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: January 6, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-546 Filed 1-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 180 (Monday, September 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 57083]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22817]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. ER12-2600-000]

American Illuminating Company, LLC; Supplemental Notice that
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of American Illuminating Company, LLC's application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is October 1, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 11, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-22817 Filed 9-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 69)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 16814-16815]
[DOCID:fr13ap09-26]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-1017]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces two public meetings to receive
comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking entitled ``Regulated
Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and Washington'' that
was published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2009 (74 FR
7022). The Coast Guard is also reopening the period for public comment
on that notice of proposed rulemaking.
    As stated in the notice of proposed rulemaking, the Coast Guard
proposes to establish Regulated Navigation Areas (RNA) covering
specific bars along the coasts of Oregon (OR) and Washington (WA) that
will include procedures for restricting and/or closing those bars as
well as additional safety requirements for recreational and small
commercial vessels operating in the RNAs. The RNAs are necessary to
help ensure the safety of the persons and vessels operating in those
hazardous bar areas. The RNAs will do so by establishing clear
procedures for restricting and/or closing the bars and mandating
additional safety requirements for recreational and small commercial
vessels operating in the RNAs when certain conditions exist.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published at 74 FR
7022, Feb. 12, 2009 is reopened and will close on April 19, 2009. All
comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or
before April 19, 2009. The public meetings for the proposed rule will
be held in Astoria, OR, on Tuesday, April 14, 2009, from 6 p.m. to 9
p.m., and in Newport, OR, on Wednesday, April 15, 2009, from 6 p.m. to
9 p.m., in order to provide an opportunity for oral comments. Please
note that the meetings may close early if all business is finished.
Written comments and related material may also be submitted to Coast
Guard personnel specified at that meeting.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting in Astoria, OR, will be held at ``The
Loft'' at the Red Building, 20 Basin Street, Astoria, OR 97103,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. The public meeting in Newport, OR, will be held
at The Embarcadero Resort Hotel & Marina, 1000 SE Bay Blvd., Newport,
OR 97365, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-547-4779.
    You may submit written comments identified by docket number USCG-
2008-1017 before or after the meeting using any one of the following
methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
Our online docket for this rulemaking is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG-2008-1017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning the
meeting or the proposed rule, please call or e-mail LCDR Emily Saddler,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District, Prevention Division, Inspections and
Investigations Branch, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    We published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal
Register on February 12, 2009 (74 FR 7022), entitled ``Regulated
Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and Washington.'' In
it we stated that we did not plan to hold a public meeting, but that we
welcomed requests explaining why one would be beneficial (74 FR 7023).
We received several such requests and have concluded that a public
meeting would aid this rulemaking. Therefore, we are publishing this
notice.
    In the NPRM, we propose to establish Regulated Navigation Areas
(RNA) covering specific bars along the coasts of Oregon and Washington
that will include procedures for restricting and/or closing those bars
as well as additional safety requirements for recreational and small
commercial vessels operating in the RNAs. The RNAs are necessary to
help ensure the safety of the persons and vessels operating in those
hazardous bar areas. The RNAs will do so by establishing clear
procedures for restricting and/or closing the bars and mandating
additional safety requirements for recreational and small commercial
vessels operating in the RNAs when certain conditions exist.
    You may view the NPRM in our online docket, in addition to
supporting documents prepared by the Coast Guard, including an
``Environmental Analysis Checklist'' and RNA Fact Sheets for
recreational, passenger, and commercial fishing vessels, and comments
submitted thus far by going to http://www.regulations.gov. Once there,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert USCG-2008-1017 in the Docket ID box, press Enter, and
then click on the item in the Docket ID column. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.
    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments either orally at the meetings or in writing. If you bring
written comments to the meetings, you may submit them to Coast Guard
personnel specified at the meetings to receive written comments. These
comments will be submitted to our online public docket. All comments
received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov
and will include any personal information you have provided.
    Comments submitted after the meetings must reach the Coast Guard on
or before April 19, 2009. If you submit a comment online via http://
www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard
when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver,
or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by
the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket Management Facility.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Information on Service for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting,
contact LCDR Emily Saddler at the telephone number or e-mail address
indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
notice.

Public Meeting

    The Coast Guard will hold a public meeting regarding its
``Regulated Navigation Areas; Bars Along the Coasts of Oregon and
Washington'' proposed rule on Tuesday, April 14, 2009, from 6 p.m. to 9
p.m, at The Loft at the Red Building, 20 Basin Street, Astoria, OR
97103, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, and on Wednesday, April 15, 2009, from 6
p.m. to 9 p.m., at The Embarcadero Resort Hotel & Marina, 1000 SE Bay
Blvd., Newport, OR 97365, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-547-4779.
    We plan to have an official transcript of the meetings prepared and
will make that transcript available through a link in our online
docket.

    Dated: March, 30, 2009.
J.P. Currier,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E9-8266 Filed 4-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 234 (Friday, December 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78339-78344]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-2216]

Revocation of Authorizations of Emergency Use of Certain Medical
Devices During COVID-19; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
revocations of the Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) (the
Authorizations) issued to Manufacturers of Protective Barrier
Enclosures and Other Stakeholders for certain protective barrier
enclosures (``PBE Authorization'') and to Manufacturers of Infusion
Pumps and Infusion Pump Accessories and Other Stakeholders for certain
infusion pumps and infusion pump accessories (``Infusion Pump
Authorization''). FDA revoked the PBE Authorization on August 20, 2020,
and the Infusion Pump Authorization on September 21, 2020, under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). The revocations, which
include an explanation of the reasons for each revocation, are
reprinted in this document.

DATES: The PBE Authorization is revoked as of August 20, 2020. The
Infusion Pump Authorization is revoked as of September 21, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the revocations
to the Office of Counterterrorism and Emerging Threats, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 4338, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist
that office in processing your request or include a Fax number to which
the revocations may be sent. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for electronic access to the revocations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer J. Ross, Office of
Counterterrorism and Emerging Threats, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 4332, Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002,<PHONE_NUMBER> (this is not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 564 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3) allows FDA to
strengthen the public health protections against biological, chemical,
nuclear, and radiological agents. Among other things, section 564 of
the FD&C Act allows FDA to authorize the use of an unapproved medical
product or an unapproved use of an approved medical product in certain
situations. On May 1, 2020, FDA issued the PBE Authorization. On May
13, 2020, FDA issued the Infusion Pump Authorization. Of note, these
were both ``umbrella'' Authorizations, i.e., for certain types of
products that met the requirements as described in their respective
Authorizations. Any product with an individual Authorization is not
affected by revocation of these two umbrella Authorizations. Notice of
the issuance of the Authorizations was published in the Federal
Register on July 14, 2020 (85 FR 42407), as required by section
564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act. Subsequent to the issuance of the PBE
Authorization, FDA considered new information, specifically from new
preliminary evidence from simulated intubation procedure models of
potential adverse events that could occur or complications with
protective barrier enclosures without negative pressure. Subsequent to
the issuance of the Infusion Pump Authorization, FDA considered that no
device had been listed under the EUA and that circumstances instead
support allowing for tailored requirements of authorization in
individual EUAs.

II. EUA Criteria for Issuance No Longer Met and Other Circumstances
Make Revocation Appropriate To Protect the Public Health or Safety

    Under section 564(g)(2)(B) and (C) of the FD&C Act, the Secretary
of the Department of Health and Human Services may revoke an EUA if,
among other things, the criteria for issuance are no longer met or
other circumstances make such revocation appropriate to protect the
public health or safety. On August 20, 2020, FDA revoked the PBE
Authorization because the criteria for issuance were no longer met and
other circumstances make such revocation appropriate to protect the
public health or safety. Under section 564(c)(2) of the FD&C Act, an
EUA may be issued only if FDA concludes that, based on the totality of
scientific evidence available, including data from adequate and well-
controlled clinical trials, if available, it is reasonable to believe
that the product may be effective in diagnosing, treating, or
preventing such disease or condition and that the known and potential
benefits of the product, when used to diagnose, prevent, or treat such
disease or condition, outweigh the known and potential risks of the
product.
    Given the new preliminary evidence from simulated intubation
procedure models of potential adverse events that could occur or
complications with protective barrier enclosures without negative
pressure recently reported in literature articles, FDA has concluded it
is not reasonable to believe the product may be effective in decreasing
healthcare provider exposure to airborne particles and may instead
contribute to an increase in healthcare provider exposure to airborne
particles. Additionally, the literature articles note potential risks
of protective barrier enclosures, such as increased intubation times,
lower first-pass intubation success rates, damage to personal
protective equipment from intubation boxes, particles escaping from
intubation boxes through arm access holes reaching the face of the
healthcare provider performing the endotracheal intubation, and human
factors issues contributing to increased endotracheal intubation times.
Further, based on the same information and the risks to public health,
including from the device's potential contribution to an increase in
healthcare provider exposure to airborne particles, FDA has concluded
under section 564(g)(2)(C) of the FD&C Act that other circumstances
make revocation appropriate to protect the public health or safety.
Accordingly, FDA has revoked the PBE

Authorization, pursuant to section 564(g)(2)(B) and (C) of the FD&C
Act.
    On September 21, 2020, FDA revoked the Infusion Pump Authorization
because other circumstances make such revocation appropriate to protect
the public health or safety (section 564(g)(2)(C) of the FD&C Act),
considering that no device has been listed under the EUA, and
circumstances instead support allowing for tailored requirements of
authorization in individual EUAs.

III. Electronic Access

    An electronic version of this document and the full text of the
revocations are available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov, and https://www.fda.gov/media/142374/download and
https://www.fda.gov/media/141415/download.

IV. The Revocations

    Having concluded that the criteria for revocation of the
Authorizations under section 564(g) of the FD&C Act are met, FDA has
revoked the EUAs for certain protective barrier enclosures and certain
infusion pumps and infusion pump accessories. The revocations in their
entirety follow and provide an explanation of the reasons for each
revocation, as required by section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act.
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04DE20.025

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04DE20.026

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04DE20.027

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04DE20.028

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04DE20.029

BILLING CODE 4164-01-C

    Dated: November 30, 2020.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-26697 Filed 12-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1623-1624]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00488]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF16-1-000]

Southwestern Power Administration; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on December 18, 2015, Southwestern Power
Administration submitted a tariff filing: 2015 RDW Rate Schedule Filing
to be effective 1/1/2016.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceeding
must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to
the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice
of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceeding are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on January 19, 2016.

    Dated: January 7, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-00488 Filed 1-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49068-49071]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22882]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81887; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2017-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 964NY To Adopt Additional Self-Trade Prevention Modifiers

October 17, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on October 3, 2017, NYSE American LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE American'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 964NY (Display, Priority and
Order Allocation--Trading Systems). The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the filing is to amend Commentary .02 to NYSE
American Options Rule 964NY (Display, Priority and Order Allocation--
Trading Systems) regarding the Exchange's Self-Trade Prevention
(``STP'') functionality.\4\ The Exchange currently offers a basic form
of self-trade prevention \5\ pursuant to which the Exchange cancels any
resting Market Maker quote(s) and order(s) \6\ to buy (sell) that are
priced equal to or higher (lower) than an incoming Market Maker quote,
order or both to sell (buy) entered under the same trading permit
identification (``TPID'').\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Self-Trade Prevention is only applicable to electronic
trading on the Exchange.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66385 (February 13,
2012), 77 FR 9719 (February 17, 2012) (SR-NYSEAmex-2012-03).
    \6\ Self-Trade Prevention currently is applicable to the
following order types used by Market Makers: ``PNP Orders'' and
``PNP-Blind Orders.'' PNP Orders and PNP-Blind Orders are defined in
NYSE American Options Rule 900.3NY, and each is a type of non-
routable Limit Order that is only executed on the Exchange. The
Exchange notes that Market Makers primarily use these order types,
as opposed to other order types offered by the Exchange, because
they are similar to quotes (i.e., they are non-routable Limit
Orders). See Regulatory Information Bulletin RBO-AMEX-12-04 at
https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/american-options/rule-interpretations/2012/NYSEAmex%20RBO-12-04%20Self%20Trade.pdf.
    \7\ The Exchange uses a Market Maker's TPID to monitor for self-
trades. TPIDs are assigned to Market Makers, as well as other ATP
Holders, to identify them in the Exchange's systems. Market Makers
on the Exchange are not able to submit orders on an agency basis.
Thus, a Market Maker within a firm that conducts both an agency and
market making business has a unique TPID that could only be used for
that Market Maker's quotes and orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to expand the self-trade functionality by
adopting three STP modifiers. The proposed STP modifiers are designed
to prevent incoming Market Maker order(s) or quote(s) designated with
an STP modifier from executing against an opposite side resting Market
Maker order(s) or quote(s) also designated with an STP modifier and
entered from the same TPID. As proposed, the STP modifier on the
incoming Market Maker order or quote would control the interaction
between two orders and/or quotes marked with STP modifiers. The
proposed STP modifiers are intended to prevent interaction between the
same TPIDs. STP modifiers must be present on both the buy and the sell
interest in order to prevent an interaction from occurring and to
effect a cancel instruction.
    The Exchange believes the proposed functionality will allow ATP
Holders to better manage order flow and prevent undesirable or
unexpected executions with themselves. Given enhancements in technology
in today's trading environment, ATP Holders often have multiple
connections into the Exchange. Orders, for example, routed by the same
ATP Holder via different connections may, in certain circumstances,
trade against each other. The proposed STP modifiers would provide ATP
Holders the opportunity to prevent these potentially undesirable
interactions occurring under the same TPID on both the buy and sell
side of an execution.
    The three new STP modifiers are discussed more thoroughly below.
STP Cancel Newest (``STPN'')
    An incoming order or quote marked with the STPN modifier will not
execute against opposite side resting interest marked with any STP
modifier from the same TPID. The incoming order or quote marked with
the STPN modifier will be cancelled back to the originating TPID. The
resting order(s) or quote(s) will remain on the Consolidated Book.
    STPN Example 1: Market Maker 1 is configured for one of the three
proposed STP modifiers and submits a quote to sell 100 contracts @
$5.50. A Customer order to sell 5 contracts @ $5.49 is resting on the
Consolidated Book. Market Maker 1 enters an order to buy 100 contracts
@ $5.60 with an STPN modifier.
    STPN Result 1: Market Maker 1 buys 5 contracts @ $5.49 because
Market Maker 1 has no interest at $5.49. The remaining quantity of
Market Maker 1's order will be cancelled due to Market Maker 1's quote
at $5.50.
    STPN Example 2: Market Maker 1 is configured for one of the three
proposed

STP modifiers and submits a quote to sell 100 contracts @ $5.50. A
Customer order to sell 5 contracts @ $5.50 is resting on the
Consolidated Book. Market Maker 1 enters an order to buy 200 contracts
@ $5.60 with an STPN modifier.
    STPN Result 2: Market Maker 1's entire order to buy 200 contracts
is cancelled due to Market Maker 1's quote at $5.50. No execution with
any other interest at $5.50 occurs.
STP Cancel Oldest (``STPO'')
    An incoming order or quote marked with the STPO modifier will not
execute against opposite side resting interest market with any STP
modifier from the same TPID. The resting order(s) or quote(s) marked
with the STP modifier will be cancelled back to the originating TPID.
The incoming order or quote marked with the STPO modifier will remain
on the Consolidated Book.
    STPO Example 1: Market Maker 1 is configured for one of the three
proposed STP modifiers and submits a quote to sell 100 contracts @
$5.50. Market Maker 1 enters an order to buy 100 contracts @ $5.50 with
an STPO modifier.
    STPO Result 1: Market Maker 1's buy order cannot trade with Market
Maker 1's quote because the buy order is marked for STP and the quotes
are configured for STP. Market Maker 1's quote to sell is cancelled and
removed from the Consolidated Book. Market Maker 1's buy order will
post to the Consolidated Book at $5.50.
    STPO Example 2: Market Maker 1 has a resting order on the
Consolidated Book to sell 10 contracts @ 5.51 with an STPN modifier.
Market Maker 1 is configured for one of the three proposed STP
modifiers and submits a quote to sell 100 contracts @ $5.50. Customer 1
has an order to sell 5 contracts @ $5.50 resting on the Consolidated
Book. Customer 2 has an order to sell 10 contracts @ $5.51 resting on
the Consolidated Book. Market Maker 1 enters an order to buy 100
contracts @ $5.51 with an STPO modifier.
    STPO Result 2: Market Maker 1's buy order cannot trade with Market
Maker 1's quote because the buy order is marked for STP and the quotes
are configured for STP. Market Maker 1's quote to sell 100 contracts @
$5.50 is cancelled and removed from the Consolidated Book. Market Maker
1's buy order will trade 5 contracts with Customer 1 at $5.50, leaving
95 contracts. The remaining 95 contracts will now attempt to trade at
the $5.51 price level. Market Maker 1's buy order, however, cannot
trade with Market Maker 1's resting sell order and the sell order is
therefore cancelled and removed from the Consolidated Book. Market
Maker 1's buy order will then trade 10 contracts with the Customer 2 @
$5.51. The remaining 85 contracts of Market Maker 1's buy order will
post to the Consolidated Book at $5.51.
STP Cancel Both (``STPC'')
    An incoming order or quote marked with the STPC modifier will not
execute against opposite side resting interest marked with any STP
modifier from the same TPID. The entire size of both orders and/or
quotes will be cancelled back to the originating TPID.
    STPC Example 1: Market Maker 1 is configured for one of the three
proposed STP modifiers and submits a quote to sell 100 contracts @
$5.50. Market Maker 1 enters an order to buy 100 contracts @ $5.50 with
an STPC modifier.
    STPC Result 1: No execution occurs. Both Market Maker 1's buy order
and Market Maker 1's quote to sell are cancelled and removed from the
Consolidated Book.
    STPC Example 2: Market Maker 1 has a resting order on the
Consolidated Book to sell 10 contracts @ $5.51 with an STPN modifier.
Market Maker 1 is configured for one of the three proposed STP
modifiers and submits a quote to sell 100 contracts @ $5.50. Market
Maker 1 enters an additional order to buy 100 contracts @ $5.51 with an
STPC modifier.
    STPC Result 2: Market Maker 1's buy order cannot trade with Market
Maker 1's quote to sell 100 contracts @ $5.50 because the buy order is
marked for STP and the quotes are configured for STP. Both the Market
Maker 1 buy order and the Market Maker 1 quote to sell are cancelled
and removed from the Consolidated Book. Market Maker 1's resting order
to sell 10 contracts @ $5.51 is not impacted as the incoming Market
Maker 1 buy order never attempts to trade at the $5.51 price level and
therefore, Market Maker 1's resting sell order remains on the
Consolidated Book.
Additional Discussion
    As with the current functionality, the enhanced STP functionality
would be in effect throughout the trading day for all Market Makers on
the Exchange,\8\ but not during Trading Auctions.\9\ In this regard,
the Exchange believes, as it previously noted when STP was first
adopted, it is highly unlikely that a Market Maker would trade against
its own resting interest during a Trading Auction.\10\ The enhanced STP
functionality would also not apply to individual legs of Complex
Orders. As previously noted by the Exchange, senders of Complex Orders,
including Market Makers, view them as discrete orders with a desire to
execute all legs and to prevent the execution of one leg would be
contrary to the investment purpose of the Complex Order.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Market Markers on the Exchange would not have the ability to
deactivate Self-Trade Prevention or change any settings related to
it.
    \9\ See, e.g., NYSE American Options Rule 952NY.
    \10\ See supra, note 5. The Exchange also previously noted that
it would be difficult to implement STP from a technological and
operational perspective because it would require the Exchange to
cancel resting, executable Market Maker trading interest as it is
calculating the price at which to conduct the Trading Auction.
    \11\ See supra, note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed, the enhanced STP functionality would not be applicable
to Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') Orders,\12\ and to orders
executed in the Exchange's Customer Best Execution (``CUBE'') Auction
by ATP Holders.\13\ Both QCC Orders and CUBE Orders are paired orders
intended to serve a particular investment purpose that are contingent
on the execution of the options leg, in the case of a QCC Order, and
the execution of both sides of a CUBE Order. Because the non-execution
of one or more legs of a QCC Order or a CUBE Order is contrary to the
investment purpose of such orders, the Exchange has determined not to
apply STP in a manner that would prevent the execution of a QCC Order
or a CUBE Order. The Exchange notes that the enhanced STP functionality
proposed herein would not relieve or modify a Market Maker's
obligations under the Exchange's Rules, such as the Market Maker's
quoting obligations, or any other rules and regulations to which the
Market Maker is subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A QCC Order is comprised of an originating order to buy or
sell at least 1,000 contracts, or 10,000 mini-options contracts,
that is identified as being part of a qualified contingent trade, as
that term is defined in Commentary .01 to Rule 900.3NY, coupled with
a contra-side order or orders totaling an equal number of contracts.
See NYSE American Options Rule 900.3NY(y).
    \13\ CUBE is the Exchange's price improvement auction mechanism
that allows an ATP Holder to electronically submit a limit order it
represents as agent on behalf of a public customer, broker dealer,
or any other entity (``CUBE Order'') provided that the Initiating
Participant guarantees the execution of the CUBE Order by submitting
a contra-side order representing principal interest or interest it
has solicited to trade with the CUBE Order at a specified price or
by utilizing auto-match or auto-match limit features provided in the
Rule. See NYSE American Options Rule 971.1NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The enhanced STP functionality proposed herein is similar to
functionality currently offered by the Bats Exchange, Inc.
(``Bats'').\14\ In

particular, Bats offers Match Trade Prevention (``MTP''), a self-trade
prevention functionality where any incoming order designated with an
MTP modifier is prevented from executing against a resting opposite
side order also designated with an MTP modifier and originating from
the same market participant identifier. Additionally, NYSE American,
the Exchange's equities market, provides for self-trade prevention
order modifiers that prevent orders so designated from executing
against resting opposite side orders entered under the same equity
trading permit identification that are also designated with the
modifier.\15\ With two exceptions, the Exchange is proposing to adopt
all the STP modifiers that are currently available on Bats.\16\ And
with one exception, the Exchange is proposing to adopt all the STP
modifiers that are currently available on the Exchange's equities
market.\17\ The Exchange notes that while the Bats rule and the NYSE
American equities rule apply to orders, and not to orders and quotes,
the Exchange's proposal is otherwise similar to functionality offered
on Bats and on the Exchange's equities market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Bats Rule 21.1(g).
    \15\ See NYSE American Rule 7.31E(i)(2).
    \16\ Bats currently offers MTP Decrement and Cancel (``MDC'')
where an incoming order with the MDC modifier is prevented from
executing against opposite side resting interest marked with any MTP
modifier originating from the same user on that exchange. If both
orders are equal in size, both orders are canceled. For those not
equivalent in size, the smaller order is canceled and the larger
order is decremented by the size of the smaller order with the
balance remaining on the order book. Bats also currently offers MTP
Cancel Smallest (``MCS'') where an incoming order with the MCS
modifier is prevented from executing against opposite side resting
interest marked with any MTP modifier originating from the same
user. If both orders are equal in size, both orders are cancelled.
For those not equivalent in size, the smaller order is canceled and
the larger order remains on the book.
    \17\ The NYSE American equities market also currently offers STP
Decrement and Cancel (``STPD'') that provides similar self-trade
prevention functionality as the Bats offering. At this time, the
Exchange is not proposing to adopt the STPD modifier for the options
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') currently offers functionality
that applies to orders and quotes, but in a limit manner.\18\
Notwithstanding the fact that the STPN and STPC modifiers, as proposed
for orders and quotes, are not currently available on an options
market, the Exchange does not believe the proposed functionality is
novel and does not raise any new regulatory concerns. Further, the STP
functionality currently available on the Exchange applies to both
orders and quotes, and Market Makers are therefore generally familiar
with the application of self-trade prevention to orders and quotes. The
Exchange further believes the proposed adoption of the STPN and STPC
modifiers would add further specificity to the rule while aligning the
proposed functionality with Market Makers' expectation. Self-trade
prevention is a risk mechanism tool to prevent inadvertent trading of
both orders and quotes that has been widely used for many years in both
the equities and options markets. The enhanced functionality proposed
herein would provide Market Makers with a method of managing their
trading interest that is similar to functionality currently available
on other markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See NOM, Chapter VI, Section 10(6). The NOM anti-
internalization (``AIQ'') functionality works similar to the
proposed STPO modifier in that quotes and orders entered by NOM
market makers using the same market participant identifier are
automatically prevented from interacting with each other. Rather
than executing quotes and orders from the same market participant
identifier, the AIQ functionality cancels the oldest of the quotes
and orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes at this time to make a procedural change
for announcements regarding the STP functionality. Presently the
Exchange issues Regulatory Information Bulletins when making
announcements related to STP functionality. Going forward, the Exchange
proposes to issue a Trader Update in lieu of a Regulatory Information
Bulletin. Regulatory Information Bulletins generally contain
information regarding legal and regulatory matters while a Trader
Update deals with issues such as trading, systems changes and real-time
market announcements. The Exchange believes that it is more appropriate
to make announcements regarding the STP functionality via Trader
Update. Trader Updates, like Regulatory Information Bulletins, are
electronically distributed to ATP Holders and posted on the Exchange's
Web site. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend Commentary .02 to
current Rule 964NY by replacing reference to ``Regulatory Information
Bulletin'' with ``Trader Update.''
Implementation
    Because of the technology changes associated with this proposed
rule change, the Exchange will announce by Trader Update the
implementation date of the proposed rule change, which will be no later
than 60 days from the effective date of this rule filing.
2.Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \19\ of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''), in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\20\ in particular, in that
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade
because it would provide Market Makers with a functionality that is
similar to functionality currently available on other markets.\21\
Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest, because it would allow Market Makers
to better manage their trading interest and provide a means to prevent
executions against their own trading interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See supra, notes 14, 15 and 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that Market Makers have expressed an interest in
the proposed functionality as it would prevent them from inadvertently
trading with their own interest. In such a situation, ATP Holders
currently ask the Exchange to nullify such inadvertent trades, which
they are permitted to do under the Exchange's rules because the ATP
Holder is on both sides of the trade.\22\ While the proposed STP
functionality would prevent inadvertent self-trading, the Exchange
notes that the functionality would also prevent intentional self-
trading. In this regard, the proposed rule change provides a means to
prevent manipulative conduct such as ``wash trading.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See NYSE American Options Rule 966NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the replacement of reference to Regulatory Information
Bulletin with Trader Update, would foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities as
Trader Updates deal with issues such as trading, systems changes and
real-time market announcements and are electronically distributed to
ATP Holders and posted on the Exchange's Web site.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
designed to enhance STP functionality provided to Exchange Market
Makers, and will benefit members that wish to protect their orders and
quotes against trading with other orders and quotes that originate from
the same TPID. The new functionality, which is similar to functionality
currently offered on other markets, is also voluntary, and the Exchange
therefore does not believe that providing an enhanced offering to
prevent against self-trading will have any significant impact on
competition. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
evidence of the competitive environment in the options industry where
exchanges must continually improve their offerings to maintain
competitive standing.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \24\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \25\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the Exchange can implement the enhanced functionality without delay.
The Exchange believes that waiver of the operative delay is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest because it
would enable the Exchange to implement the change when the technology
supporting the change is available, which the Exchange anticipates will
be no later than 60 days from the effective date of this rule filing.
The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the new functionality is designed to provide market makers with
a tool to prevent undesirable executions against themselves and
therefore may assist market makers in managing their order flow.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \26\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2017-21 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-NYSEAMER-2017-21. 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-NYSEAMER-2017-21, and should
be submitted on or before November 13, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-22882 Filed 10-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 149 (Tuesday, August 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 46259]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19060]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-86-000]

ITC Grid Development LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory
Order

    Take notice that on July 28, 2015, pursuant to rule 207(a) of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure and sections 366.3(d) and 366.4(b)(3) of the Commission's
regulations, 18 CFR 385.207(a), 366.3(d), and 366.4(b)(3), ITC Grid
Development LLC (ITC Grid), filed a petition for declaratory order
(petition) seeking a Commission ruling: (1) That binding revenue
requirement bids selected as the result of Commission-approved, Order
No. 1000-compliant, and demonstrably competitive transmission project
selection processes will be deemed just and reasonable when filed at
the Commission as a stated rate pursuant to Federal Power Act (FPA)
section 205; and (2) that such binding bids are entitled to protection
under the Mobile-Sierra standard, and may not subsequently be changed
by means of a complaint filed under FPA section 206 unless required by
the public interest. ITC Grid requests that the Commission rule on this
petition within 90 days of when its petition was filed, or by October
26, 2015, in order to facilitate ITC Grid's participation in upcoming
competitive project solicitations, as more fully explained in its
petition. .
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on August 27, 2015.

    Dated: July 29, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19060 Filed 8-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 130 (Friday, July 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40834-40835]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14595]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. TX22-5-000]

Sandpiper Energy Storage, LLC; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on July 1, 2022, pursuant to section 211 of the
Federal Power Act,\1\ and Section 9.3.3 of the San Diego Gas & Electric
Company (SDG&E) Transmission Owner Tariff (SDG&E TO Tariff), Sandpiper
Energy Storage, LLC filed an application requesting that the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issue an order requiring
SDG&E to provide interconnection and transmission service for the
proposed Sandpiper battery energy storage facility under the terms and
conditions of the Transmission Control Agreement between SDG&E and the
California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO), the SDG&E
TO Tariff, CAISO's Fifth Replacement FERC Electric Tariff,\2\ and the
Large Generator Interconnection Agreement among Sandpiper Energy
Storage, LLC, SDG&E,

and CAISO, dated September 9, 2021, as they may be in effect from time
to time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 824j (2018).
    \2\ Capitalized terms that are not otherwise defined herein have
the meanings set forth in the CAISO Tariff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. On or before the comment date, it is
not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons
other than the Applicant.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 22, 2022.

    Dated: July 1, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-14595 Filed 7-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 242 (Thursday, December 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78804-78806]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31684]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76625; File No. SR-BYX-2015-49]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule
11.13(b)(4)(A), Amending Aggressive Re-Route Instruction

December 11, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 2, 2015, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend the Aggressive Re-Route
instruction under Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(4)(A) to route such orders
where that order has been locked or crossed by other Trading Centers.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange currently allows Users to submit various types of
limit orders to the Exchange that are processed pursuant to Exchange
Rules 11.13(a) and 11.13(b), as set forth below. Rule 11.13(a)
describes the process by which an incoming order would execute against
the BATS Book. To the extent an order has not been executed in its
entirety against the BATS Book, Rule 11.13(b) then describes the
process of routing marketable limit orders to one or more Trading
Centers, including a description of how the Exchange treats any
unfilled balance that returns to the Exchange following the first
attempt to fill the order through the routing process. If not filled
through routing, and based on the order instructions, the unfilled
balance of the order may be posted to the BATS Book.
    Under previous Exchange rules,\5\ to the extent the unfilled
balance of an order had been posted to the BATS Book, should the order
subsequently be locked or crossed by another accessible Trading Center,
the System \6\ would route the order to the locking or crossing Trading
Center if instructed to do so by the User (the ``RECYCLE Option''). The
Exchange then filed a proposed rule change with the Commission for
immediate effectiveness to modify the RECYCLE Option and rename it as
the Aggressive and Super-Aggressive Re-Route instruction.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No63097 (October 13,
2010), 75 FR 64767 (October 20, 2010) (SR-BATS-2010-002 [sic])
(naming the designation of an order as eligible for re-routing after
being posted to the BATS Book if another Trading Center has locked
or crossed the posted order as the RECYCLE routing option).
    \6\ As defined in Rule 1.5(aa), the System is the electronic
communications and trading facility designated by the Board through
which securities orders of Users are consolidated for ranking,
execution and, when applicable, routing away.
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73295 (October 3,
2014), 79 FR 61117 (October 9, 2014) (SR-BYX-2014-026) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to
Amend Rules 11.13) (adopting the Aggressive Re-Route instruction).
In SR-BYX-2014-026, the RECYCLE Option was renamed Super Aggressive
Re-Route instruction, under which a routable order posted to the
BATS Book routes to away Trading Centers to remove liquidity from
such Trading Centers any time such order is locked or crossed. The
Exchange subsequently expanded the Super Aggressive Re-Route
instruction to provide that when any order with a Super Aggressive
Re-Route instruction is locked by an incoming BATS Post Only Order
or Partial Post Only at Limit Order that does not remove liquidity
pursuant to Rule 11.9(c)(6) or Rule 11.9(c)(7), respectively, the
Re-Route order is converted to an executable order when displayed
shares become available on the opposite side of the market and will
remove liquidity against such shares (``liquidity swap
functionality''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74739
(April 16, 2015), 80 FR 22567 (April 22, 2015) (SR-BYX-2015-07).
Once amended, the only difference between the Aggressive and Super
Aggressive Re-Route instructions would be that the liquidity swap
functionality described above would be available to an order subject
to the Super Aggressive Re-Route instruction and not available to an
order subject to the Aggressive Re-Route instruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Aggressive Re-Route instruction subjects an order to the
routing process after being posted to the BATS Book only if the order
is subsequently crossed by another Trading Center (rather than if the
order is locked or crossed). Further, a routable non-displayed limit
order posted to the BATS Book that is crossed by another accessible
Trading Center will be automatically routed to the crossing Trading
Center. The Exchange proposes to modify the Aggressive Re-Route
instruction to also provide that, where the order is locked by another
accessible Trading Center, it would be automatically routed to the
locking Trading Center. The proposed amendment would also apply to non-
displayed orders with the Aggressive Re-Route instruction.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In April 2015, the Aggressive Re-Route instruction was
expanded to apply to non-displayed orders. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 74739 (April 16, 2015), 80 FR 22567 (April 22, 2015)
(SR-BYX-2015-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \9\ and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \10\ because it is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. Specifically, the proposed changes
are designed to provide Users with additional control over their orders
in the context of a national market system where quotations may lock or
cross orders posted to the BATS Book and to facilitate executions on
the Exchange consistent with User instructions. Thus, the proposals are
directly targeted at removing impediments to and perfecting the
mechanism of a free and open market and national market system. The
proposed rule change also is designed to support the principles of
Section 11A(a)(1) \11\ of the Act in that it seeks to assure fair
competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets.
Lastly, the Exchange notes that the proposed amendments to the
Aggressive Re-Route instruction previously existed on the Exchange as
the RECYCLE routing option.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
    \12\ See supra notes 5 and 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. The Exchange
believes that proposed amendment to the Aggressive Re-Route
functionality encourages competition by increasing the likelihood of
executions of orders that have been posted to the Exchange. The
increased likelihood of an execution where the order is locked by a
quotation on a Trading Center should attract additional order flow to
the Exchange.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the

Act \15\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \16\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange
stated that waiver of the operative delay will allow the Exchange to
immediately provide Users with additional control over their orders in
the context of a national market system where quotations may lock or
cross orders posted to the BATS Book and to facilitate executions on
the Exchange consistent with User instructions.\17\ The Commission
believes the waiver of the operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the
proposal operative upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \17\ The Exchange further stated that it will provide Members
with reasonable advance notice of the proposed rule change's
implementation date.
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BYX-2015-49 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BYX-2015-49. 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-BYX-2015-49, and should be
submitted on or before January 7, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-31684 Filed 12-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P