[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 247 (Friday, December 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 94457]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30917]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Regulations 13D and 13G; Schedules 13D and 13G, SEC File No.
270-137, OMB Control No. 3235-0145.

    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'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Schedules 13D and 13G (17 CFR 240.13d-101 and 240.13d-102) are
filed pursuant to Sections 13(d) and 13(g) (15 U.S.C. 78m(d) and
78m(g)) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') and
Regulations 13D and 13G (17 CFR 240.13d-1--240.13d-7) thereunder to
report beneficial ownership of equity securities registered under
Section 12 (15 U.S.C. 78l) of the Exchange Act. Regulations 13D and 13G
provide investors, and the subject issuer with information about
accumulations of equity securities that may have the potential to
change or influence control of the issuer. Schedule 13D and Schedule
13G are filed by persons, including small entities, to report their
ownership of more than 5% of a class of equity securities registered
under Section 12. We estimate that Schedule 13D takes approximately
14.5 hours to prepare and is filed by approximately 1,508 filers. We
estimate that 25% of the 14.5 hours (3.625 hours per response) is
prepared by the filer for a total annual reporting burden of 5,467
hours (3.625 hours per response x 1,508 responses).
    We estimate that Schedule 13G takes approximately 12.4 hours to
prepare and is filed by approximately 7,079 filers. We estimate that
25% of the 12.4 hours (3.10 hours per response) is prepared by the
filer for a total annual reporting burden of 21,945 hours (3.10 hours
per response x 7,079 responses).
    The information provided by respondents is mandatory. Schedule 13D
or Schedule 13G is filed by a respondent only when necessary. All
information provided to the Commission is public. However, Rules 0-6
and 24b-2 (17 CFR 240.0-6 and 240.24b-2) under the Exchange Act do
permit reporting persons to request confidential treatment for certain
sensitive information concerning national security, trade secrets, or
privileged commercial or financial information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following Web site, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30
days of this notice.

    Dated: December 16, 2016.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30917 Filed 12-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50282-50284]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17592]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 391

[Docket No. FMCSA-2022-0111]

Qualifications of Drivers: Medical Examiner's Handbook and
Medical Advisory Criteria Proposed Regulatory Guidance

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed regulatory guidance; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces the availability of the draft Medical
Examiner's Handbook (MEH), which includes updates to the Medical
Advisory Criteria published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
and requests comments on the proposed

regulatory guidance. The MEH and Medical Advisory Criteria provide
information about regulatory requirements and guidance to medical
examiners (ME) listed on FMCSA's National Registry of Certified Medical
Examiners (National Registry) who perform physical qualification
examinations of interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. The
draft MEH with proposed changes to the Medical Advisory Criteria is
available in Docket Number FMCSA-2022-0111.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 30, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2022-0111 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2022-0111/document. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Dockets Operations, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Dockets Operations, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building,
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure
someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or (202) 366-
9826 before visiting Dockets Operations.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division, FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Dockets
Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number (FMCSA-
2022-0111), indicate the specific page and section of the MEH to which
your comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an
email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2022-0111/document, click on this request for comments,
click ``Comment,'' and type your comment into the text box on the
following screen.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view any documents mentioned as being available in the docket,
go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2022-0111/document and
choose the document to review. To view comments, click this request for
comments, and click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to
the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets
Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To
be sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
(202) 366-9826 before visiting Dockets Operations.

C. Privacy Act

    DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its guidance
process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal
information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice DOT/ALL 14--Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    FMCSA's mission is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities
involving large trucks and buses. FMCSA is authorized by statute to
establish minimum physical qualification standards for drivers of CMVs
operating in interstate commerce.
    The determination by MEs on the National Registry of a driver's
physical qualification is a critical element of FMCSA's safety program
to ensure the physical condition of CMV drivers is adequate to enable
them to operate the vehicles safely. First posted on FMCSA's website in
2008, the MEH provided guidance to MEs on the physical qualification
standards in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) and
the conduct of the physical qualification examination. FMCSA has also
issued guidance for MEs in the form of Medical Advisory Criteria, now
published at 49 CFR part 391, Appendix A.
    In 2015, FMCSA withdrew the MEH because some of the information was
obsolete or was prescriptive in nature. MEs and training organizations
were informed that the MEH was no longer in use and that they should
not consider the MEH as Agency guidance.
    The FMCSRs, in 49 CFR 391.41 through 391.49, provide the basic
driver physical qualification standards for interstate CMV operators.
MEs currently make physical qualification determinations on a case-by-
case basis and may consider guidance to assist with making those
determinations.
    The goal of the updated MEH and related Medical Advisory Criteria
is to provide information about regulatory requirements and guidance
for MEs to consider when making physical qualification determinations
in conjunction with established best medical practices. The revised
Medical Advisory Criteria, in addition to being included in the MEH,
would also be published in Appendix A to 49 CFR part 391. The final
version of the criteria would be identical in both publications. FMCSA
is proposing to update both the MEH and Medical Advisory Criteria and
seeks public comment on these documents.

III. MRB Task Statement 17-1

    The Medical Review Board (MRB) was established to provide FMCSA
with medical advice and recommendations on medical standards and
guidelines for the physical qualifications of CMV operators, ME
education, and medical research (49 U.S.C. 31149(a)(1)). The MRB, in
view of its statutory creation and advisory function, is chartered by
DOT as an advisory committee under the provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). See also Announcement of
Establishment of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Medical Review Board (70 FR 57642; Oct. 3, 2005). The members of the
MRB are appointed by the Secretary to reflect expertise in a variety of
medical specialties relevant to the driver fitness requirements of
FMCSA (49 U.S.C. 31149(a)(2)).
    To assist in the development of the MEH, FMCSA, in collaboration
with its Chief Medical Officer, requested advice from the MRB for the
Agency to consider via MRB Task Statement 17-1.

Specifically, FMCSA asked the MRB to review and provide recommendations
for streamlining the MEH. This included removing non-regulatory
directive language and updating and removing obsolete information. The
MRB held public meetings, in part, to discuss the development of the
new MEH and Medical Advisory Criteria and to review drafts of the MEH.
Details of the meetings, including MRB Task Statement 17-1, are posted
on the Agency's public website at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/medical-review-board-mrb-meeting-topics.

V. Comments Requested

    Comments are requested on the draft of the proposed MEH, including
the revised Medical Advisory Criteria. To the extent possible, comments
should identify the page number and section number of the MEH to which
the comments apply. Please submit comments only, not redlined or
heavily annotated copies of the entire MEH. FMCSA will consider
comments received by the closing date of the comment period.

VI. Publication of the Regulatory Guidance

    In accordance with section 5203(a)(2)(A) and (a)(3) of the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation Act, Public Law 114-94, 129 Stat.
1312, 1535 (49 U.S.C. 113 note) (Dec. 4, 2015), the regulatory guidance
would be posted in the guidance portal on FMCSA's website at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/guidance. The Agency would then review it no later
than 5 years after it is published. It would consider at that time
whether the guidance should be withdrawn, reissued for another period
up to 5 years, or incorporated into the regulations.

Robin Hutcheson,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-17592 Filed 8-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65320-65321]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0511

Special Local Regulation; Swim the Loop and Motts Channel Sprint;
Wrightsville Beach, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce special local regulations for the
``Swim the Loop and Motts Channel Sprint'' on October 15, 2023, to
provide for the safety of life on navigable waterways during this
event. Our regulation for marine events within the Fifth Coast Guard
District identifies the regulated area for this event, which lies in
the vicinity of Wrightsville Beach, NC. During the enforcement period,
the operator of any vessel in the regulated area must comply with
directions from the Patrol Commander or any official authorized by the
Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector North Carolina.

DATES: The regulation identified in the ``Event'' column of Table 4 to
33 CFR 100.501(i)(4) as covering the Swim the Loop and Motts Channel
Sprint will be enforced from 7 a.m. until 11 a.m. on October 15, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email Chief Petty Officer Elvin
Rodriguez, Waterways Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North Carolina,
Wilmington, NC; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce special local
regulations in 33 CFR 100.501(i)(4) for the Swim the Loop and Motts
Channel Sprint regulated area from 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. on October 15,
2023. As indicated in a footnote to Table 4 of Sec.  100.501(i)(4), the
enforcement dates and times for each of the listed events in this table
are subject to change, and the October date differs from dates provided
in the table. We are making this special local regulation subject to
enforcement at the stated time to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waterways during the day of the event. Table 4 to Sec.
100.501(i)(4) specifies the location of the regulated area for this
event as comprising the navigable waters surrounding Harbor Island, NC,
including the Intracoastal Waterway, Lees Cut, Banks Channel and Motts
Channel. During the enforcement period, as reflected in Sec.
100.501(i)(4), the operator of any vessel in the regulated area must
comply with directions from the Patrol Commander or from any official
representative of the COTP, Sector North Carolina.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this
enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners, Marine Safety
Information Bulletin, and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Timothy J. List,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2023-20566 Filed 9-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


1 Interim Ad Hoc Work Group on Nanoscale Materials National Pollution Prevention and Toxics Advisory Committee ( NPPTAC) U. S. Environmental Protection Agency PUBLIC WORK GROUP SESSION September 29, 2005 8: 00 a. m.   5: 00 p. m.

Holiday Inn Rosslyn at Key Bridge 1900 North Fort Myer Drive Arlington, VA 22209 People unable to attend the meeting may use the following dial in number to listen to the presentations and comments via conference call: 866 587 0111, followed by meeting number * 7599246* ( dial * before and after the meeting number)

8: 00   8: 15 a. m. Welcome, Work Group Introductions, and Agenda Review Meridian Institute 8: 15   8: 30 a. m. Review of NPPTAC Charge to the Interim Ad Hoc Work Group on Nanoscale Materials Meridian Institute 8: 30   10: 00 a. m. Description of Overview Document, Sections I IV Work Group Members Section II. General Goal for EPA's Program Regarding Engineered Nanoscale Materials, Section III. A.  III. B. Nanoscale Materials Voluntary Pilot Program ( NVPP) Larry Andrews, Rohm & Haas and Richard Denison, Environmental Defense 8: 30   8: 55; followed by 15 mins. questions of clarification Section III. C. Benefits and Incentives for Participating in a NVPP Michael Strem, Strem Chemicals 9: 10   9: 15; followed by 10 mins. questions of clarification Section III. D. Evaluation of the Voluntary Program and Follow Up Ken Geiser, Lowell Center for Sustainable Production 9: 25   9: 30; followed by 10 mins. questions of clarification Section IV. Regulatory Approaches for Addressing Potential Risks of Engineered Nanoscale Materials Joseph Guth, Center for Environmental Health 9: 40   9: 45; followed by 10 mins. questions of clarification 10: 00   10: 15 a. m. Break 10: 15   11: 40 a. m. Public Comment on Overview Document, Sections I IV Public Comment and Comments by Registered Commenters 2 11: 40 a. m.   Noon Description of Annex A: Issues from Overview Document Work Group Members Issue # 1   Assurances for the Public Jennifer Sass, Natural Resources Defense Council 11: 40   11: 45 Issue # 2   Sequencing and Duration of Programs Sherry Ward, National Anti Vivisection Society 11: 45   11: 50 Issue # 3   Dispersive Uses and Handling as Hazardous Materials Richard Denison, Environmental Defense 11: 50   11: 55 Issue # 4   Safe Harbor Patricia Kablach Casano, GE 11: 55   12: 00 12: 00   1: 00 p. m. Lunch 1: 00   1: 50 p. m. Public Comment on Annex A: Issues from Overview Document 1: 50   2: 30 p. m. Description of Overview Document, Section V: Issues for Further Consideration Work Group Members Issues 1   4 Steven Russell, American Chemistry Council 1: 50   2: 00 Issues 5   9 Susan Hearn, Dow Chemical Company 2: 00   2: 10 Issues 10   13 Ken Geiser, Lowell Center for Sustainable Production 2: 10   2: 20 Issues 14   17 Sherry Ward, National Anti Vivisection Society 2: 20   2: 30 2: 30   3: 15 p. m. Public Comment on Overview Document, Section V: Issues for Further Consideration, and Other Issues for Consideration 3: 15   3: 30 p. m. Break 3: 30   4: 00 p. m. Final Public Comment 4: 00   4: 30 p. m. Final Work Group Comments Work Group Members 4: 30   5: 00 p. m. Next Steps and Closing Comments Meridian Institute 5: 00 p. m. Adjourn


[Federal Register: August 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 158)]
[Notices]
[Page 50787-50789]
[DOCID:fr17au10-86]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62669; File No. SR-NYSE-2010-57]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by New York Stock Exchange LLC
Amending NYSE Rule 15 To Clarify Use of the Last Sale on the Exchange
as the Reference Price and To Define the Reference Price of a Security
in the Event That There Is No Last Sale in That Security on the
Exchange

August 9, 2010.
    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 August 5, 2010, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') 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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 15 to clarify use of the
last sale on the Exchange as the reference price and to define the
reference price of a security in the event that there is no last sale
in that security on the Exchange. The text of the proposed rule change
is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room,
and http://www.nyse.com.

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 NYSE Rule 15 (Pre-Opening
Indications) to clarify use of the last sale on the Exchange as the
reference price and to define the reference price of a security in the
event that there is no last sale in that security on the Exchange.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange's corporate affiliate, NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE
Amex''), submitted a companion rule filing proposing corresponding
amendments to NYSE Amex Equities Rule 15. See SR-NYSEAmex-2010-82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current NYSE Rule 15
    Pursuant to NYSE Rule 15(a), a DMM must issue a pre-opening
indication if the DMM anticipates that the opening transaction will be
at a price that represents a change from the security's previous day's
closing price on the Exchange of more than the ``applicable price
change.'' \5\ In the case of an American Depositary Receipt (``ADR''),
Rule 15(b) sets forth provisions to take into account the closing price
of the underlying security on the primary foreign market or a change
from parity (as appropriate) in determining the applicable price
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The applicable price change is $0.50 if the closing price of
a security on the Exchange is under $20, $1.00 if the closing price
of a security on the Exchange is $20-$49.99, $2.00 if the closing
price of a security on the Exchange is $50-$99.99, $5.00 if the
closing price of a security on the Exchange is $100-$500 and 1.5% if
the closing price of a security on the Exchange is above $500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the mandatory DMM pre-opening indications, pursuant
to Rule 15(c), Exchange systems disseminate a data feed of real-time
order imbalances that accumulate prior to the opening transaction on
the Exchange and the price at which interest eligible to participate in
the opening transaction may be executed in full (``Order Imbalance
Information'').\6\ The Order Imbalance Information data feed includes
all interest eligible for execution in the opening transaction of the
security in Exchange systems and uses the previous trading day's
closing price in the security on the Exchange as the reference price to
indicate the number of shares required to open the security with an
equal number of shares on the buy side and the sell side. If, however,
a mandatory pre-opening indication is published for a security

pursuant to the provisions of Rule 15(a) or (b), the Order Imbalance
Information data feed determines the reference price based on a
comparison of the bid and offer price of the mandatory pre-opening
indication to the last sale on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Order Imbalance Information is disseminated in
accordance with Rule 15(c)(3). If the Exchange decides to change the
frequency of the dissemination of the Order Imbalance Information,
it will notify the Commission and the market as part of the required
rule amendment process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 15 does not address determination of the reference price in an
IPO or transferred security and none of the alternatives specified in
Rule 15(c)(2)(ii) are applicable as there would be no last sale on the
Exchange the previous day.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange notes that Rule 123D(1) currently provides for
mandatory pre-opening indications for IPOs if the price change as
measured from the offering price meets the requirements for a
mandatory indication as defined under the Rule. However, Rule
123D(1) generally pertains to situations involving unusual market
activity and indications under that rule are sent to the
Consolidated Tape. Rule 15 is intended to be a standardized process
for the issuance of pre-opening indications under more normal market
conditions and are available as part of the Exchange's proprietary
datafeeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed amendments to NYSE Rule 15
    The Exchange believes that publication of mandatory pre-opening
indications and dissemination of Order Imbalance Information with
respect to IPOs and transferred securities would be beneficial to the
market and in the public interest by providing additional information
and transparency. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend Rules
15(a) and (c) to include parameters to establish a reference price for
IPOs and transferred securities for both the mandatory pre-opening
indication and the Order Imbalance Information data feed. Specifically,
the Exchange proposes that the reference price be the offering price
(i.e., ``deal price'') in the case of an IPO, or the last reported sale
price on the securities market from which the security is being
transferred. The Exchange Floor Official who is supervising the opening
of the IPO or transferred security shall confirm that the DMM inputs
the appropriate reference price for that listing in the Exchange
system.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend parts (a)(1) and (c)(2) of Rule
15 to provide that the reference price for pre-opening indications is
the last reported sale on the Exchange. The current text of Rule 15
provides that the ``previous day's closing price on the Exchange'' will
serve as the reference price. Typically, the last reported sale price
is the price of the previous day's closing transaction on the Exchange.
However, in some instances, there may not be a previous day's closing
transaction in a security and, therefore, the last reported sale price
prior to the close is the last execution on the Exchange. For example,
if the Exchange halted trading in a security prior to 4 p.m. and did
not reopen until the following trading day, there would not be any
closing transaction in that security. Or, in the case of a thinly
traded stock, the stock may not have traded at all on the previous day
or the last transaction could have occurred prior to the close of
trading at 4 p.m. and, absent any additional interest in the security
being sent to the Exchange, there would not be a closing transaction in
that security. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 15 to
more accurately describe the reference price. In addition, the last
reported sale price on the Exchange would not include any after-hours
executions of a security on the Exchange.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Currently, the only after-hours trading permitted on the
Exchange is the entry of basket trades in Crossing Session II. The
price of an individual security executed as part of a basket trade
is not sent to the Consolidated Tape and therefore would not be
reported as a last sale on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change supports the
objectives of the Act and will provide a benefit to the market while
also protecting investors and the public interest by (i) filling a
current gap in Exchange systems and by disseminating pre-opening
indication and pre-opening Order Imbalance Information for IPOs and
transferred securities, and (ii) more accurately describing the
reference price, thereby providing greater transparency to customers
prior to the opening transaction.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were 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 Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by
the Commission. The Commission notes that the Exchange has satisfied
this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2010-57 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-2010-57. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 Section, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090, on official business days between 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and on its
Internet Web site at http://www.nyse.com. 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-2010-57 and should be submitted on
or before September 7, 2010.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-20240 Filed 8-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 150 (Friday, August 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38151-38153]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16618]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-0405]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Medical Device Recall
Authority

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by
September 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to [email protected]. All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0432.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

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

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

Medical Device Recall Authority

OMB Control Number 0910-0432--Extension

    This collection of information implements section 518(e) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360h(e)) and
part 810 (21 CFR part 810), mandatory medical device recall authority
provisions. Section 518(e) of the FD&C Act provides FDA with the
authority to issue an order requiring an appropriate person, including
manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers of a device, if
FDA finds that there is reasonable probability that the device intended
for human use would cause serious adverse health consequences or death,
to: (1) Immediately cease distribution of such device and (2)
immediately notify health professionals and device-user facilities of
the order and to instruct such professionals and facilities to cease
use of such device.
    FDA will then provide the person named in the cease distribution
and notification order with the opportunity for an informal hearing on
whether the order should be amended to require a mandatory recall of
the device.
    If, after providing the opportunity for an informal hearing, FDA
determines that such an order is necessary, the Agency may amend the
order to require a mandatory recall.
    FDA issued part 810 to implement the provisions of section 518 of
the FD&C Act. The information collected under the mandatory recall
authority provisions will be used by FDA to implement mandatory
recalls.
    In the Federal Register of February 22, 2018 (83 FR 7740), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                  Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
   Collection activity/21 CFR        Number of     responses per   Total annual   Average burden    Total hours
             section                respondents     respondent       responses     per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collections Specified in the                   2               1               2               8              16
 Order--810.10(d)...............
Request for Regulatory Hearing--               1               1               1               8               8
 810.11(a)......................
Written Request for Review--                   1               1               1               8               8
 810.12(a)-(b)..................
Mandatory Recall Strategy--                    2               1               2              16              32
 810.14.........................
Periodic Status Reports--                      2              12              24              40             960
 810.16(a)-(b)..................
Termination Request--810.17(a)..               2               1               2               8              16
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Hours.................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............           1,040
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

                                                    Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                       Average burden
                 Collection activity/21 CFR section                     Number of       records per      Total annual         per          Total hours
                                                                      recordkeepers     recordkeeper       records       recordkeeping
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation of Notifications to Recipients--810.15(b)............               2                1                2                8               16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

                            Table 3--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
   Collection activity/21 CFR        Number of      disclosures    Total annual   Average burden    Total hours
             section                respondents   per respondent    disclosures   per disclosure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Recipients--                   2               1               2              12              24
 810.15(a)-(c)..................
Notification to Recipients;                    2               1               2               4               8
 Follow-up--810.15(d)...........
Notification of Consignees by                 10               1              10               1              10
 Recipients--810.15(e)..........
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............              42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    The burden estimate has not changed for information collection
related to section 518(e) of the FD&C Act and part 810 since the last
OMB approval.

    Dated: July 24, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-16618 Filed 8-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 55 (Thursday, March 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17392-17393]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06462]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 1975-102; 2061-086]

Idaho Power Company; Notice of Availability of Final
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission or FERC)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380, Commission staff has reviewed the
applications for amendment of the licenses for the Bliss Project (FERC
No. 1975) and Lower Salmon Falls Project (FERC No. 2061) and has
prepared a Final Environmental Assessment. The projects are located on
the Snake River in Gooding, Twin Falls, and Elmore Counties, Idaho.
Both projects occupy lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management.
The Lower Salmon Falls Project also occupies lands within the Hagerman
Fossil Beds National Monument managed by the National Park Service.
    The Final Environmental Assessment contains the Commission staff's
analysis

of the potential environmental effects of the proposed change from run-
of-river to load-following operations of the projects and concludes
that authorizing the amendments, with appropriate environmental
protective measures would not constitute a major federal action that
would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the Final Environmental Assessment is available for
review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support. For further information, contact Rachel Price by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 14, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-06462 Filed 3-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57631-57633]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22912]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67839; File No. SR-EDGA-2012-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Amendments to the EDGA Exchange, Inc. Fee Schedule

September 12, 2012.
    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 September 5, 2012 the EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGA'') 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 amend its fees and rebates applicable to
Members \3\ of the Exchange pursuant to EDGA Rule 15.1(a) and (c). All
of the changes described herein are applicable to EDGA Members. The
text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Internet Web site at http://www.directedge.com, at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As defined in Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RP to the Exchange's fee schedule
for Non-Displayed Orders that add liquidity using the Route Peg Order
type.\4\ The Exchange proposes to assess a charge of $0.0005 per share
for orders that yield Flag RP. The volume associated with Flag RP will
also count towards the volume tiers for non-displayed orders that add
liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 67726 (August
24, 2012) (SR-EDGA-2012-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As defined in Exchange Rule 11.5(c)(14), a Route Peg Order is a
non-displayed limit order that posts to the EDGA Book, and thereafter
is eligible for execution at the National Best Bid (``NBB'') for buy
orders and National Best Offer (``NBO'', and together with the NBB, the
``NBBO'') for sell orders against the original size of the routable
orders that are equal to or less than the original size of the Route
Peg Orders. Route Peg Orders are passive, resting orders on the EDGA
Book and do not take liquidity. Route Peg Orders may be entered,
cancelled, and cancelled/replaced prior to and during Regular Trading
Hours.\5\ Route Peg Orders are eligible for execution in a given
security during Regular Trading Hours, except that, even after the
commencement of Regular Trading Hours, Route Peg Orders are not
eligible for execution (1) in the opening cross, and (2) until such
time that regular session orders in that security can be posted to the
EDGA Book. A Route Peg Order does not execute at a price that is
inferior to a Protected Quotation, and is not permitted to execute if
the NBBO is locked or crossed. Any and all remaining, unexecuted Route
Peg Orders are cancelled at the conclusion of Regular Trading Hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As defined in Rule 1.5(y).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to amend the text of Footnote 2 of the
fee schedule to list Flag RP as one of the non-displayed order types
where the volume associated with Flag RP will count toward the volume
threshold in Footnote 2.
    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule on September 7, 2012.

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\7\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add Flag RP to the Exchange's fee schedule
for Non-Displayed Orders that add liquidity using the Route Peg Order
type. The Exchange believes that assessing a charge of $0.0005 per
share for orders that yield Flag RP represents an equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its Members and other
persons using its facilities because a rate of $0.0005 per share is
equal or less than the prevailing rates for other forms of non-
displayed order types that add liquidity, (e.g., the Exchange assesses
a charge of $0.0005 per share for Flag DM and $0.0010 per share for
Flag HA). Within the non-displayed category of liquidity, Flag RP is
similar to Flag DM in that both have lower order book priority in Rule
11.8(a)(2) compared to Flag HA (Non-Displayed Orders). Lower order book
priority correlates to a lower chance of execution on EDGA, which
justifies a lower price. Therefore, the Exchange is offering comparable
pricing to Flag DM.
    Furthermore, the Route Peg Order type gives the Member a valuable
ability to control the interaction with certain types of contra-side
liquidity (i.e., routable orders of equal or lesser size). The Mid-
Point Discretionary Order (``MDO'') (Flag DM) has a displayed component
\8\ and non-displayed component. The Exchange assesses a lower fee for
the non-displayed component when compared to the standard displayed
charge of $0.0006 as an acknowledgement of the fact that the MDO also
brings in valuable displayed liquidity. The Route Peg Order, on the
other hand, has no displayed component, but has the lowest priority in
the order book. Even though the priority is lower, the Exchange assigns
the same charge to the Route Peg Order type as to Flag DM because of
its unique features, as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67226 (June 20,
2012), 77 FR 38113 (June 26, 2012) (SR-EDGA-2012-22) (The MDO has
two discrete components--a displayed portion that is pegged to the
national best bid or national best offer, and a non-displayed
portion which gives discretion to execute to the mid-point of the
national best bid/offer (``NBBO''), subject to certain limits).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the Exchange is assigning a lower charge for Flag RP
when compared to the standard displayed charge of $0.0006 because of
its lower priority ranking in Rule 11.8(a)(2). The Exchange recently
implemented a taker/maker model \9\ to make the Exchange more
attractive to liquidity takers for their routing decisions because
liquidity takers would be receiving a rebate. For liquidity providers,
it is an attractive place to post liquidity since liquidity takers are
rebated to remove liquidity. Therefore, EDGA is ranked as one of the
first markets in the intermarket queue on system routing tables because
of its attractive removal rebate compared to other markets. As a
result, liquidity providers are willing to pay a fee to compete to
interact with these liquidity takers, resulting in a deeper order book.
As such, order book priority is an important determinant of their
interaction. The Exchange has set the fees for various orders types
(Flags DM, RP, and HA) that reflect that order book priority.
Therefore, orders that have a higher priority in the order book
(displayed orders) will generally be charged more than orders of lower
priority (e.g., Flag DM and RP) because they are more likely to
interact with a liquidity taker and obtain a quicker execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See SR-EDGA-2012-39 (August 30, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By assessing a proposed rate of $0.0005 per share for Flag RP, the
Exchange believes it will encourage use of the new order type. In
addition, the Exchange is setting the fee at such level in order to
incentivize liquidity by encouraging Members to use Route Peg Orders
(Flag RP) since these orders provide Members that enter them and other
Members an additional way to offer/access liquidity at the NBBO,
respectively. This contributes to additional depth of book at the NBBO.
Furthermore, as stated in SR-EDGA-2012-28, the Exchange believes that
by encouraging the use of the Route Peg Order, Members seeking to
access liquidity at the NBBO would be more motivated to direct their
orders to EDGA because they would have a heightened expectation of the
availability of liquidity at the NBBO. The increased liquidity also
benefits all investors by deepening EDGA's liquidity pool, offering
additional flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost savings,
supporting the quality of price discovery, and improving investor
protection. In addition, a User \10\ whose order executed against a
Route Peg Order would be able to obtain an execution at the NBB or NBO
while minimizing the risk that incremental latency associated with
routing the order to an away destination may result in an inferior
execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As defined in Rule 1.5(ee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to amend the text of Footnote 2 \11\ of the
fee schedule to list Flag RP as one of the non-displayed order types
where the volume associated with Flag RP will count toward the volume
threshold in Footnote 2 is reasonable and equitable as the volume tiers
in Footnote 2 include ``non-displayed'' liquidity flags and Flag RP is
a non-displayed liquidity flag. Therefore, the Exchange believes it is
appropriate to include Flag RP in Footnote 2 in order to provide
additional transparency to Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Footnote 2 currently provides that rates for Flags HA and
HR are contingent upon Members adding or removing greater than
1,000,000 shares non-displayed (hidden) on a daily basis, measured
monthly (yield Flags HA, HR, DM and DT) or Member posting greater
than 8,000,000 shares on a daily basis, measured monthly. Members
not meeting either minimum will be charged $0.0030 per share for
Flags HA and HR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange also believes that the proposed amendment is
non-discriminatory because it applies uniformly to all Members.
    The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly-competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive pricing
structure designed to incent market participants to direct their order
flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed rates are
equitable and non-discriminatory in that they apply uniformly to all
Members. The Exchange believes the fees and credits remain competitive
with those charged by other venues and therefore continue to be
reasonable and equitably allocated to Members.

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

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) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \13\ thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-EDGA-2012-41 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-EDGA-2012-41. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2012-41 and should be
submitted on or before October 9, 2012.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-22912 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


forth a statement in its SSP plan that describes the certification
process used by the railroad to help ensure that safety concerns and
hazards are adequately addressed prior to the initiation of operations
and major projects to extend, rehabilitate, or modify an existing
system or replace vehicles and equipment.
    (v) Safety culture. A railroad shall set forth a statement in its
SSP plan that describes how it measures the success of its safety
culture identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

Sec.  270.105  Discovery and admission as evidence of certain
information.

    (a) Any information (including plans, reports, documents, surveys,
schedules, lists, or data) compiled or collected solely for the purpose
of developing, implementing, or evaluating a system safety program
under this part, including a railroad carrier's analysis of its safety
risks conducted pursuant to Sec.  270.103(r)(1) and its statement of
the mitigation measures with which it would address those risks created
pursuant to Sec.  270.103(r)(2), shall not be subject to discovery,
admitted into evidence, or considered for other purposes in a Federal
or State court proceedings for damages involving personal injury,
wrongful death, or property damage.
    (b) This section does not affect the discovery, admissibility, or
consideration for other purposes of information (including plans,
reports, documents, surveys, schedules, lists, or data) compiled or
collected for a purpose other than that specifically identified in
paragraph (a) of this section. Such information shall continue to be
discoverable and admissible into evidence if it was discoverable and
admissible prior to the existence of this section. This includes such
information that either:
    (1) Existed prior to (365 days from the publication of the final
rule);
    (2) Existed prior to (365 days from the publication of the final
rule) and that continues to be compiled or collected; or
    (3) Is compiled or collected after (365 days from the publication
of the final rule).
    (c) State discovery rules and sunshine laws that could be used to
require the disclosure of information protected by paragraph (a) of
this section are preempted.
    (d) Paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section shall apply to any
railroad safety risk reduction programs required by this chapter for
Class I railroads, railroads with inadequate safety performance, or any
other railroad.

Subpart C--Review, Approval, and Retention of System Safety Program
Plans

Sec.  270.201  Filing and approval.

    (a) Filing. (1) Each railroad to which this part applies shall
submit one copy of its SSP plan to the FRA Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer at Mail Stop 25, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, not more than (395 days after the
effective date of the final rule) or not less than 90 days prior to
commencing operations, whichever is later.
    (2) The railroad shall not include in its SSP plan the risk-based
hazard analysis conducted pursuant to Sec.  270.103(r). The railroad
shall make the results of any risk-based hazard analysis available upon
request to representatives of FRA and States participating under part
212 of this chapter.
    (3) The SSP plan shall include the signature, name, title, address,
and telephone number of the chief safety officer who bears primary
managerial authority for implementing the program for the submitting
railroad. The system safety plan shall also include the name and
contact information for:
    (i) The primary person responsible for managing the system safety
program, and
    (ii) The senior representatives of host railroads, contract
operators, shared track/corridor operators, and others who provide
significant safety-related services.
    (4) As required by Sec.  270.102(b), each railroad must submit with
its SSP plan a consultation statement describing how it consulted with
its directly affected employees on the contents of its system safety
program. Directly affected employees may also file a statement in
accordance with Sec.  270.102(c).
    (5) The chief official responsible for safety and who bears primary
managerial authority for implementing the program for the submitting
railroad shall certify that the contents of the SSP plan are accurate
and that the railroad

will implement the contents of the program as approved by FRA pursuant
to paragraph (b) of this section.
    (b) Approval. (1) Within 90 days of receipt of a SSP plan, or
within 90 days of receipt of each SSP plan submitted prior to the
commencement of railroad operations, FRA will review the proposed SSP
plan to determine if the elements prescribed in this part are
sufficiently addressed in the railroad's submission. This review will
also consider any statement submitted by directly affected employees
pursuant to Sec.  270.102.
    (2) FRA will notify the primary contact person of each affected
railroad in writing whether the proposed plan has been approved by FRA,
and if not approved, the specific points in which the plan is
deficient. FRA will also provide this notification to each individual
identified in the service list accompanying the consultation statement
required under Sec.  270.102(b).
    (3) If a proposed system safety plan is not approved by FRA, the
affected railroad shall amend the proposed plan to correct all
deficiencies identified by FRA and provide FRA with a corrected copy of
the SSP plan not later than 60 days following receipt of FRA's written
notice that the proposed SSP plan was not approved.
    (c) Review of Amendments. (1)(i) Railroads shall submit
amendment(s) to the SSP plan to FRA not less than 60 days prior to the
proposed effective date of the amendment(s). The railroad shall file
the amended SSP plan with a cover letter outlining the changes made to
the original approved SSP plan by the proposed amendment(s). The cover
letter shall also describe the process it used pursuant to Sec.
270.102(d) to consult with directly affected employees on the
amendment(s).
    (ii) If the amendment(s) is safety-critical and the railroad is
unable to submit the amended SSP plan to FRA 60 days prior to the
proposed effective date of the amendment(s), the railroad shall submit
the amended SSP plan to FRA as soon as possible thereafter.
    (2)(i) FRA will review the proposed amended SSP plan within 45 days
of receipt. FRA will then notify the primary contact person of each
affected railroad whether the proposed amended plan has been approved
by FRA, and if not approved, the specific points in which the proposed
amendment(s) to the SSP plan is deficient.
    (ii) If FRA has not notified the railroad by the proposed effective
date of the amendment(s) whether the proposed amended plan has been
approved or not, the railroad may implement the amendment(s), subject
to FRA's decision.
    (iii) If a proposed SSP amendment is not approved by FRA, the
affected railroad shall correct all deficiencies identified by FRA. The
railroad shall provide FRA with a corrected copy of the amended SSP
plan no later than 60 days following receipt of FRA's written notice
that the proposed amendment was not approved.
    (d) Reopened Review. Following initial approval of a plan, or
amendment, FRA may reopen consideration of the plan, or amendment, for
cause stated.

Sec.  270.203  Retention of system safety program plan.

    Each railroad to which this part applies shall retain at its system
headquarters and at any division headquarters, one copy of the SSP plan
required by this part and one copy of each subsequent amendment to that
plan. These records shall be made available to representatives of FRA
and States participating under part 212 of this chapter for inspection
and copying during normal business hours.

Subpart D--System Safety Program Internal Assessments and External
Auditing

Sec.  270.301  General.

    The system safety program and its implementation shall be assessed
internally by the railroad and audited externally by the FRA or FRA's
designee.

Sec.  270.303  Internal system safety program assessment.

    (a) Following FRA's initial approval of the railroad's SSP plan
pursuant to Sec.  270.201, the railroad shall annually conduct an
assessment of the extent to which:
    (1) The system safety program is fully implemented;
    (2) The railroad is in compliance with the implemented elements of
the approved system safety program; and
    (3) The railroad has achieved the goals set forth in Sec.
270.103(d).
    (b) As part of its system safety plan, the railroad shall set forth
a statement describing the processes used to:
    (1) Conduct internal system safety program assessments;
    (2) Internally report the findings of the internal system safety
program assessments;
    (3) Develop, track, and review recommendations as a result of the
internal system safety program assessment;
    (4) Develop improvement plans based on the internal system safety
program assessments. Improvement plans shall, at a minimum, identify
who is responsible for carrying out the necessary tasks to address
assessment findings and specify a schedule of target dates with
milestones to implement the improvements that address the assessment
findings;
    (5) Manage revisions and updates to the SSP plan based on the
internal system safety program assessments; and
    (6) Comply with the reporting requirements set forth in Sec.
270.201.
    (c)(1) Within 60 days of completing its internal SSP plan
assessment pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, the railroad
shall:
    (i) Submit to FRA a copy of the railroad's internal assessment
report that includes a system safety program assessment and the status
of internal assessment findings and improvement plans; and
    (ii) Outline the specific improvement plans for achieving full
implementation of the SSP plan, as well as achieving the goals of the
plan.
    (2) The railroad's chief official responsible for safety shall
certify the results of the railroad's internal SSP plan assessment.

Sec.  270.305  External safety audit

    (a) FRA may conduct, or cause to be conducted, external audits of a
railroad's system safety program. Each audit will evaluate the
railroad's compliance with the elements required by this part in the
railroad's approved SSP plan. FRA shall provide the railroad written
notification of the results of any audit.
    (b)(1) Within 60 days of FRA's written notification of the results
of the audit, the railroad shall submit to FRA for approval, if
necessary, improvement plans to address all audit findings. Improvement
plans submitted shall, at a minimum, identify who is responsible for
carrying out the necessary tasks to address audit findings and specify
target dates and milestones to implement the improvements that address
the audit findings.
    (2) If FRA does not approve the railroad's improvement plan, FRA
will notify the railroad of the specific deficiencies in the
improvement plan. The affected railroad shall amend the proposed plan
to correct the deficiencies identified by FRA and provide FRA with a
corrected copy of the improvement plan no later than 30 days following
receipt of FRA's written notice that the proposed plan was not
approved.
    (3) Upon request, the railroad shall provide to FRA and States
participating under part 212 of this chapter for review

a report regarding the status of the implementation of the improvements
set forth in the improvement plan established pursuant to paragraph
(b)(1) of this section.

Appendix A to Part 270--Schedule of Civil Penalties [Reserved]

Appendix B to Part 270--Federal Railroad Administration Guidance on the
System Safety Program Consultation Process

    A railroad required to develop a system safety program under
this part must in good faith consult with and use its best efforts
to reach agreement with its directly affected employees on the
contents of the SSP plan. See Sec.  270.102(a). This appendix
discusses the meaning of the terms ``good faith'' and ``best
efforts,'' and provides guidance on how a railroad could comply with
the requirement to consult with directly affected employees on the
contents of its SSP plan. Specific guidance will be provided for
employees who are represented by a non-profit employee labor
organization and employees who are not represented by any such
organization.

The Meaning of ``Good Faith'' and ``Best Efforts''

    ``Good faith'' and ``best efforts'' are not interchangeable
terms representing a vague standard for the Sec.  270.102
consultation process. Rather, each term has a specific and distinct
meaning. When consulting with directly affected employees,
therefore, a railroad must independently meet the standards for both
the good faith and best efforts obligations. A railroad that does
not meet the standard for one or the other will not be in compliance
with the consultation requirements of Sec.  270.102.
    The good faith obligation requires a railroad to consult with
employees in a manner that is honest, fair, and reasonable, and to
genuinely pursue agreement on the contents of an SSP plan. If a
railroad consults with its employees merely in a perfunctory manner,
without genuinely pursuing agreement, it will not have met the good
faith requirement. A railroad may also fail to meet its good faith
obligation if it merely attempts to use the SSP plan to unilaterally
modify a provision of a collective bargaining agreement between the
railroad and a non-profit employee labor organization.
    On the other hand, ``best efforts'' establishes a higher
standard than that imposed by the good faith obligation, and
describes the diligent attempts that a railroad must pursue to reach
agreement with its employees on the contents of its system safety
program. While the good faith obligation is concerned with the
railroad's state of mind during the consultation process, the best
efforts obligation is concerned with the specific efforts made by
the railroad in an attempt to reach agreement. This would include
considerations such as whether a railroad had held sufficient
meetings with its employees, or whether the railroad had made an
effort to respond to feedback provided by employees during the
consultation process. For example, a railroad would not meet the
best efforts obligation if it did not initiate the consultation
process in a timely manner, and thereby failed to provide employees
sufficient time to engage in the consultation process. A railroad
may, however, wish to hold off substantive consultations regarding
the contents of its SSP until one year after the effective date of
the rule in order to ensure that information generated as part of
the process is protected from discovery and admissibility into
evidence under Sec.  270.105 of the rule. Generally, best efforts
are measured by the measures that a reasonable person in the same
circumstances and of the same nature as the acting party would take.
Therefore, the standard imposed by the best efforts obligation may
vary with different railroads, depending on a railroad's size,
resources, and number of employees.
    When reviewing SSP plans, FRA will determine on a case-by-case
basis whether a railroad has met its Sec.  270.102 good faith and
best efforts obligations. This determination will be based upon the
consultation statement submitted by the railroad pursuant to Sec.
270.102(b) and any statements submitted by employees pursuant to
Sec.  270.102(c). If FRA finds that these statements do not provide
sufficient information to determine whether a railroad used good
faith and best efforts to reach agreement, FRA may investigate
further and contact the railroad or its employees to request
additional information. If FRA determines that a railroad did not
use good faith and best efforts, FRA may disapprove the SSP plan
submitted by the railroad and direct the railroad to comply with the
consultation requirements of Sec.  270.102. Pursuant to Sec.
270.201(b)(3), if FRA does not approve the SSP plan, the railroad
will have 60 days, following receipt of FRA's written notice that
the plan was not approved, to correct any deficiency identified. In
such cases, the identified deficiency would be that the railroad did
not use good faith and best efforts to consult and reach agreement
with its directly affected employees. If a railroad then does not
submit to FRA within 60 days a SSP plan meeting the consultation
requirements of Sec.  270.102, the railroad could be subject to
penalties for failure to comply with Sec.  270.201(b)(3).

Guidance on How a Railroad May Consult With Directly Affected Employees

    Because the standard imposed by the best efforts obligation will
vary depending upon the railroad, there may be countless ways for
various railroads to comply with the consultation requirements of
Sec.  270.102. Therefore, FRA believes it is important to maintain a
flexible approach to the Sec.  270.102 consultation requirements, in
order to give a railroad and its directly affected employees the
freedom to consult in a manner best suited to their specific
circumstances.
    FRA is nevertheless providing guidance in this appendix as to
how a railroad may proceed when consulting (utilizing good faith and
best efforts) with employees in an attempt to reach agreement on the
contents of an SSP plan. FRA believes this guidance may be useful as
a starting point for railroads that are uncertain about how to
comply with the Sec.  270.102 consultation requirements. This
guidance distinguishes between employees who are represented by a
non-profit employee labor organization and employees who are not, as
the processes a railroad may use to consult with represented and
non-represented employees could differ significantly.
    This guidance does not establish prescriptive requirements with
which a railroad must comply, but merely outlines a consultation
process a railroad may choose to follow. A railroad's consultation
statement could indicate that the railroad followed the guidance in
this appendix as evidence that it utilized good faith and best
efforts to reach agreement with its employees on the contents of a
SSP plan.

Employees Represented by a Non-Profit Employee Labor Organization

    As provided in Sec.  270.102(a)(2), a railroad consulting with
the representatives of a non-profit employee labor organization on
the contents of a SSP plan will be considered to have consulted with
the directly affected employees represented by that organization.
    A railroad could utilize the following process as a roadmap for
using good faith and best efforts when consulting with represented
employees in an attempt to reach agreement on the contents of an SSP
plan.
     Pursuant to Sec.  270.102(a)(3), a railroad must meet
with representatives from a non-profit employee labor organization
(representing a class or craft of the railroad's directly affected
employees) within 180 days of the effective date of the final rule
to begin the process of consulting on the contents of the railroad's
SSP plan. A railroad must provide notice at least 60 days before the
scheduled meeting.
     During the time between the initial meeting and the
applicability date of Sec.  270.105 the parties may meet to discuss
administrative details of the consultation process as necessary.
     Within 60 after the applicability date of Sec.  270.105
a railroad should have a meeting with the directed affected
employees to discuss substantive issues with the SSP.
     Within 90 days after the applicability date of Sec.
270.105, a railroad would file its SSP plan with FRA.
     As provided by Sec.  270.102(c), if agreement on the
contents of a SSP plan could not be reached, a labor organization
(representing a class or craft of the railroad's directly affected
employees) could file a statement with the FRA Associate
Administrator for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer explaining
its views on the plan on which agreement was not reached.

Employees Who Are Not Represented by a Non-Profit Employee Labor
Organization

    FRA recognizes that some (or all) of a railroad's directly
affected employees may not be represented by a non-profit employee
labor organization. For such non-represented employees, the
consultation process described for represented employees may not be
appropriate or sufficient. For example, FRA believes that a railroad
with non-represented employees must make a concerted effort to
ensure that its non-

represented employees are aware that they are able to participate in
the development of the railroad's SSP plan. FRA therefore is
providing the following guidance regarding how a railroad may
utilize good faith and best efforts when consulting with non-
represented employees on the contents of its SSP plan.
     Within 60 days of the effective date of the final rule,
a railroad should notify non-represented employees that--
    (1) The railroad is required to consult in good faith with, and
use its best efforts to reach agreement with, all directly affected
employees on the proposed contents of its SSP plan;
    (2) Non-represented employees are invited to participate in the
consultation process (and include instructions on how to engage in
this process); and
    (3) If a railroad is unable to reach agreement with its directly
affected employees on the contents of the proposed SSP plan, an
employee may file a statement with the FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer explaining his or her views
on the plan on which agreement was not reached.
     This initial notification (and all subsequent
communications, as necessary or appropriate) could be provided to
non-represented employees in the following ways:
    (1) Electronically, such as by email or an announcement on the
railroad's Web site;
    (2) By posting the notification in a location easily accessible
and visible to non- represented employees; or
    (3) By providing all non-represented employees a hard copy of
the notification. A railroad could use any or all of these methods
of communication, so long as the notification complies with the
railroad's obligation to utilize best efforts in the consultation
process.
     Following the initial notification (and before the
railroad submits its SSP plan to FRA), a railroad should provide
non-represented employees a draft proposal of its SSP plan. This
draft proposal should solicit additional input from non-represented
employees, and the railroad should provide non-represented employees
60 days to submit comments to the railroad on the draft.
     Following this 60-day comment period and any changes to
the draft SSP plan made as a result, the railroad should submit the
proposed SSP plan to FRA, as required by this part.
     As provided by Sec.  270.102(c), if agreement on the
contents of an SSP plan cannot be reached, then a non-represented
employee may file a statement with the FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer explaining his or her views
on the plan on which agreement was not reached.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 17, 2012.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-20999 Filed 9-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P