[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30695-30696]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10846]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP20-844-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to a Negotiated Rate
Agreement-Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC to be effective 5/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20200501-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/18/20.

    Docket Number: PR20-57-000.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: Revised Statement
of Operating Conditions eff 5-1-2020 to be effective 5/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/11/2020.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>56.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/1/2020.

    Docket Number: PR20-58-000.
    Applicants: Black Hills/Kansas Gas Utility Company, LLC.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: Black Hills/Kansas
Gas Utility Company LLC SOC Filing CP19-483 to be effective 8/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 5/11/2020.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>80.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/1/2020.

    Docket Number: PR20-59-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas of Maryland, Inc.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: CMD Rates effective
May 1 2020 to be effective 5/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 5/13/2020.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>43.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/3/2020.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered,
but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 14, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-10846 Filed 5-19-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 26, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70494-70496]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27947]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30929; Amdt. No. 3564]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective November 26, 2013. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of November 26, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability--All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available
online free of charge. Visit http://www.nfdc.faa.gov to register.
Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may
be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs
Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or revoking SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS.
The complete regulators description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The applicable FAA
Forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, in addition
to their complex nature and the need for a special format make
publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical.
Furthermore, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs,
Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their depiction on
charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. The advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on
FAA forms is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR
sections and specifies the types of SIAPs and the effective dates of
the, associated Takeoff Minimums and ODPs. This amendment also
identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the
amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as contained in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The
circumstances which created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums
and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30
days. For the remaining SIAPS and Takeoff Minimums and ODPS, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPS contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPS and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedures before adopting these SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, that good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in
less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule '' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,1979); and
(3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 8, 2013.
John Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or revoking Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and/or Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0902 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 12 DECEMBER 2013

Fort Yukon, AK, Fort Yukon, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2
Koliganek, AK, Koliganek, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A
Petersburg, AK, Petersburg James A Johnson, RNAV (GPS)-B, Amdt 1A
White Mountain, AK, White Mountain, RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Orig
White Mountain, AK, White Mountain, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Orig
White Mountain, AK, White Mountain, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Orig
Huntsville, AL, Madison County Executive/Tom Sharp Jr Fld, ILS OR
LOC/DME RWY 18, Amdt 1
Huntsville, AL, Madison County Executive/Tom Sharp Jr Fld, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2
Huntsville, AL, Madison County Executive/Tom Sharp Jr Fld, RNAV
(GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1
Huntsville, AL, Madison County Executive/Tom Sharp Jr Fld, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4
Huntsville, AL, Madison County Executive/Tom Sharp Jr Fld, VOR/DME-
B, Amdt 7
Fort Huachuca Sierra Vista, AZ, Sierra Vista Muni-Libby AAF, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Oakland, CA, Metropolitan Oakland Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 28R, Amdt
2A
San Diego, CA, San Diego Intl, LOC RWY 27, Amdt 5
San Diego, CA, San Diego Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 3
Buena Vista, CO, Central Colorado Rgnl, GPS RWY 33, Orig, CANCELED
Buena Vista, CO, Central Colorado Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Orig
Eagle, CO, Eagle County Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
8
Trinidad, CO, Perry Stokes, NDB-A, Amdt 3
Trinidad, CO, Perry Stokes, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 1
Trinidad, CO, Perry Stokes, RNAV (GPS)-B, Amdt 1
Trinidad, CO, Perry Stokes, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4
Lakeland, FL, Lakeland Linder Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 2
Lakeland, FL, Lakeland Linder Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 2
Live Oak, FL, Suwannee County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Orig
Live Oak, FL, Suwannee County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Orig
Live Oak, FL, Suwannee County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Orig
Miami, FL, Dade-Collier Training and Transition, ILS OR LOC RWY 9,
Amdt 15
Miami, FL, Dade-Collier Training and Transition, NDB RWY 9, Amdt 14
Miami, FL, Dade-Collier Training and Transition, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9,
Orig
Miami, FL, Miami Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8L, Amdt 2
Miami, FL, Miami Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 26R, Amdt 2
Umatilla, FL, Umatilla Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig
Umatilla, FL, Umatilla Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig
Umatilla, FL, Umatilla Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield--Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 8L,
Amdt 1B
Atlanta, GA, Hartsfield--Jackson Atlanta Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28,
Amdt 2B
Calhoun, GA, Tom B. David Fld, LOC RWY 35, Amdt 1A, CANCELED
Calhoun, GA, Tom B. David Fld, LOC/NDB-A, Orig
Calhoun, GA, Tom B. David Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
Calhoun, GA, Tom B. David Fld, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
Calhoun, GA, Tom B. David Fld, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 3
Elberton, GA, Elbert County-Patz Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Amdt 1
Elberton, GA, Elbert County-Patz Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1
Elberton, GA, Elbert County-Patz Field, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Elberton, GA, Elbert County-Patz Field, VOR/DME RWY 11, Amdt 4
Sandersville, GA, Kaolin Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
Peoria, IL, Mount Hawley Auxiliary, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 3
Winfield/Arkansas City, KS, Strother Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 35, Amdt
4A, CANCELED
Pittsfield, ME, Pittsfield Muni, NDB RWY 36, Amdt 4C
Pittsfield, ME, Pittsfield Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-B
Pittsfield, ME, Pittsfield Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-B
Three Rivers, MI, Three Rivers Muni Dr Haines, VOR-A, Amdt 10
Traverse City, MI, Cherry Capital, ILS OR LOC RWY 28, Amdt 14
Traverse City, MI, Cherry Capital, NDB RWY 28, Amdt 11
Traverse City, MI, Cherry Capital, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 11
Traverse City, MI, Cherry Capital, VOR-A, Amdt 21
Minneapolis, MN, Flying Cloud, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28R, Amdt 2
St Joseph, MO, Rosecrans Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig
St Joseph, MO, Rosecrans Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
St Joseph, MO, Rosecrans Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig
St Joseph, MO, Rosecrans Memorial, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 2
Jackson, MS, Hawkins Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 2
Jackson, MS, Hawkins Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 2
Olive Branch, MS, Olive Branch, ILS OR LOC RWY 18, Amdt 3
Olive Branch, MS, Olive Branch, LOC/DME RWY 36, Amdt 1
Olive Branch, MS, Olive Branch, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 3
Olive Branch, MS, Olive Branch, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1
Olive Branch, MS, Olive Branch, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 1
Billings, MT, Billings Logan Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 7
Cut Bank, MT, Cut Bank Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
1
Shelby, MT, Shelby, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig
Shelby, MT, Shelby, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 2
Chapel Hill, NC, Horace Williams, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-A
Chapel Hill, NC, Horace Williams, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A
Chapel Hill, NC, Horace Williams, VOR/DME RWY 27, Amdt 1A
Edenton, NC, Northeastern Rgnl, NDB RWY 19, Amdt 6, CANCELED
Greensboro, NC, Piedmont Triad Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 14, Amdt 18C,
CANCELED
Greensboro, NC, Piedmont Triad Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 3
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 31, Amdt 3
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 2
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 1
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, VOR RWY 13, Amdt 1
Devils Lake, ND, Devils Lake Rgnl, VOR RWY 31, Amdt 1
New York, NY, La Guardia, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1A
New York, NY, La Guardia, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1B
New York, NY, La Guardia, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 22, Amdt 2A
New York, NY, La Guardia, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 22, Orig-C
Niagara Falls, NY, Niagara Falls Intl, ILS Y OR LOC RWY 28R, Amdt 23
Niagara Falls, NY, Niagara Falls Intl, ILS Z OR LOC/DME RWY 28R,
Amdt 4
Lancaster, OH, Fairfield County, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
Prineville, OR, Prineville, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2

Columbia/Mount Pleasant, TN, Maury County, Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Millington, TN, Millington Rgnl Jetport, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1
Oak Harbor, WA, AJ Eisenberg, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 2D
Milwaukee, WI, General Mitchell Intl, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 7R, Orig
Milwaukee, WI, General Mitchell Intl, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 25L, Orig
Spencer, WV, Boggs Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 2

[FR Doc. 2013-27947 Filed 11-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


OMB Control Number: 2010 0032 Approval Expires: 8/ 31/ 06 SECTION 1 Program Description:

The Performance Track Mentoring Program was developed to facilitate information sharing and help applicants complete and strengthen their Performance Track applications. The Performance Track Mentoring Program is available to any current program member or any facility that has considered applying to the Performance Track program and would like to gain a member s perspective of the program or is seeking personal assistance in setting environmental goals from top performing facilities currently in the program. Mentees are matched with Performance Track facilities that volunteer their time and resources to share their experiences and expertise in environmental best practices.

Instructions: Please provide the following information so that we may appropriately match you in the mentoring program. If you wish to complete this form electronically, please use Times New Roman, 10 font.

First Name:

Last Name:

Title:

Company/ Org:

Mailing Address:

E mail Address:

NAICS Code:

SECTION 2 Please indicate whether you are applying to become a mentor or a mentee:

Mentor ( If this box is checked, please skip to Section 6.)

Mentee SECTION 3 Briefly describe what your site produces and/ or its functions: Mentoring Program Registration Form Provide an estimate of the number of employees at your facility:

SECTION 4 Please indicate in which areas you would like your mentoring relationship to provide additional guidance ( You may check more than one box.):

General Performance Track Information and/ or Guidance EMS Compliance Environmental Commitments Community Outreach SECTION 5 If your site has been working with a current Performance Track member, please indicate which site:

Contact name:

Contact Phone:

If possible, would you like to work with this site as your official mentor?

SECTION 6 Please indicate which characteristics are most important for your mentoring match ( You may check more than one box.):

Similar industry Geographic Proximity Similar Size of Business Other, please specify:

If more than one characteristic was chosen, please specify the most important of the above characteristics:

* Please direct any question or concerns to www. epa. gov/ performancetrack or call 888 339 PTRK. The public reporting and record keeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.25 hours per response. 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 OMB control number. To comment on this collection contact the Director, Collection Strategies Division ( 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed form to this address.


[Federal Register: February 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 8328-8329]
[DOCID:fr16fe06-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53261; File No. SR-PCX-2006-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
streetTRACKS[reg] Gold Shares Trading Hours

February 9, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 24, 2006, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (``PCX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the PCX. The PCX has filed
the proposed rule change, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal
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 Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The PCX, through its wholly owned subsidiary PCX Equities, Inc.
(``PCXE''), proposes to amend its rules governing the Archipelago
Exchange (``ArcaEx''), the equity trading facility of PCXE. With this
filing, the Exchange proposes to expand the hours under PCXE Rule 7.34
that the streetTRACKS[reg] Gold Shares (``Gold Shares'') are eligible
to trade on ArcaEx pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (``UTP'').
The Exchange has designated this proposal as non-controversial and has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative waiting
period contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Internet Web site (http://www.pacificex.com), at the Exchange's

principal office, 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 PCX included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Commission previously approved a proposal to trade the Gold
Shares pursuant to UTP during ArcaEx's core trading session from 9:30
a.m. Eastern Time (``ET'') until 4:15 p.m. ET.\6\ The Exchange seeks to
expand the Gold Shares' trading hours, proposing that they should be
eligible to trade on ArcaEx during the early, core and late trading
sessions (4 a.m. ET to 8 p.m. ET), in accordance with PCXE Rule 7.34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51245 (February 23,
2005), 70 FR 10731 (March 4, 2005) (SR-PCX-2004-117) (``PCX Approval
Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange, via a link to the Trust's
streetTRACKS[reg] Gold Trustsm (``Trust'') Web site (http://www.streettracksgoldshares.com
), will provide at no charge,

continuously updated bids and offers indicative of the spot price of
gold on its own public Web site: (http://www.pacificex.com), and on ArcaEx's Web site at (http://www.archipelago.com).\7\ The Trust Web

site also provides an intraday calculation of the estimated Net Asset
Value (``NAV'') (also known as the Intraday Indicative Value or
``IIV'') of a Gold Share as calculated by multiplying the indicative
spot price of gold by the quantity of gold backing each Gold Share. The
indicative spot price and IIV per Gold Share are provided on an
essentially real-time basis (updated at least every 15 seconds) and are
available during ArcaEx's early, core and late trading sessions.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Trust web site's gold spot price will be provided by The
Bullion Desk (http://www.thebulliondesk.com). The Bullion Desk is

not affiliated with the Trust, its sponsor, its custodian or the
Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50603 (October 28,
2004), 69 FR 64614 (November 5, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2004-22) (``NYSE
Approval Order'')
    \8\ Additionally, each day, the Sponsor updates the IIV per Gold
Share shortly after calculation of the net asset value per Gold
Share. Telephone conversation between Stuart Thomas, Managing
Director, World Gold Council, and David Strandberg, Archipelago
Exchange, and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, Division of
Market Regulation (``Division''), Commission dated January 12, 2006.
See also NYSE Approval Order at p. 14 (the Trust's Web site will
disseminate these values subject to an average delay of 5 to 10
seconds).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of this proposed rule change, the Exchange states that
the representations in the PCX Approval Order regarding trading in Gold
Shares are applicable to all trading sessions, in particular:
    1. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in
Gold Shares during all trading sessions.
    2. The Exchange's surveillance procedures are adequate to properly
monitor trading of the Gold Shares in all trading sessions.
    3. The Exchange has distributed an Information Circular to Equity
Trading Permit (``ETP'') Holders prior to the commencement of trading
of the Gold Shares on the Exchange that explains the terms,
characteristics, and risks of trading such shares.
    4. The Exchange will require ETP Holders with a customer who
purchases newly issued Gold Shares in any trading session on ArcaEx to
provide that customer with a product prospectus and has noted this
prospectus delivery requirement in the Information Circular.
    5. Because ArcaEx is trading Gold Shares pursuant to UTP, the
Exchange will cease trading in the Gold Shares during all ArcaEx
trading sessions if: (a) The primary market stops trading the Gold
Shares because of a regulatory halt similar to a halt based on PCXE
Rule 7.12 and/or a halt because dissemination of the IIV and/or the
unaffiliated gold value has ceased or the Exchange no longer provides a
hyperlink to the Trust's Web site; or (b) the primary market delists
the Gold

Shares. Additionally, the Exchange may cease trading the Gold Shares if
such other event shall occur or condition exists which in the opinion
of the Exchange makes further dealings on the Exchange inadvisable.
    6. Because ArcaEx is trading pursuant to UTP the Gold Shares during
its early and late trading sessions, when the primary market is closed,
the Exchange will monitor the unaffiliated value of gold and IIV per
Gold Share and ensure that trading of the Gold Shares on ArcaEx will
cease during the early and late trading sessions, if the unaffiliated
value of gold and IIV per Gold Share (used by the primary listing
exchange) is no longer calculated or available during the early and
late trading sessions, or the Exchange stops providing a hyperlink on
the Exchange's Web site to such unaffiliated gold value or IIV per Gold
Share.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its 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 facilitate transactions in securities, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

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

    Because the proposed rule change: (i) Does not significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become
operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing, or such shorter
time as the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interests, the proposed rule change has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\
and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required by Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act, the Exchange also provided the
Commission with written notice of intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five days (or such time as designated by the
Commission) prior to doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PCX requests that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative
period specified in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii).\13\ The Commission hereby
grants that request and finds that waiving the 30-day pre-operative
period is consistent with the protection of investors and public
interest because PCX has addressed regulatory issues herein by ensuring
that the Gold Shares will trade in all ArcaEx trading sessions with the
relevant IIV and indicative spot price of gold available. The waiver
will permit the Exchange to implement the proposed rule change without
delay and thereby providing ETP Holders and the public greater
liquidity and opportunities to trade, helping to reduce trading costs
and promote competition among marketplaces.\14\ For these reasons, the
Commission designates the proposal to be effective and operative upon
filing with the Commission.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \14\ 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).
    \15\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate 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.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-PCX-2006-02 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2006-02. The 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. 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-PCX-2006-02 and should be submitted on or before March
9, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-2198 Filed 2-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 32109]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14816]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. TS18-1-000]

Lansing Board of Water and Light; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on July 3, 2018, pursuant to sections 35.28(e)(2)
and 358.1(d) and Rules 101(e) and 207 of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure,\1\ Lansing
Board of Water and Light filed a petition requesting that the
Commission waive reciprocity-based standards of conduct and Open Access
Same-Time Information System requirements that might otherwise apply
under Order Nos. 889 \2\ and 717.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 35.28(e)(2), 358.1(d), 385.101(e), 385.207.
    \2\ Open Access Same-Time Information System (formerly Real-Time
Information Networks) and Standards of Conduct, Order No. 889, 61 FR
21,737 (May 10, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,035 (1996),
clarified, 76 FERC ] 61,009 (1996), modified, Order No. 889-A, 62 FR
12,484 (Mar. 14, 1997), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,049 (1997), reh'g
denied, Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC ] 61,253 (1997), aff'd in part and
remanded in part sub nom. Transmission Access Policy Study Grp. v.
FERC, 225 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2000), aff'd sub nom. New York v.
FERC, 535 U.S. 1 (2002).
    \3\ Standards of Conduct for Transmission Providers, Order No.
717, 73 FR 63,796 (Oct. 27, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280
(2008), on reh'g, Order No. 717-A, 74 FR 54,463 (Oct. 22, 2009),
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,297 (2009), clarified, Order No. 717-B, 129
FERC ] 61,123 (2009), on reh'g, Order No. 717-C, 131 FERC ] 61,045
(2010), on reh'g and clarification, Order No. 717-D, 135 FERC
]61,017 (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the website 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 protected], or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 24, 2018.

    Dated: July 5, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14816 Filed 7-10-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 74696]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26469]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent to Rule on Request To Release Airport Property
at the Colorado Air and Space Port, Watkins, Colorado

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of request to release airport property.

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

SUMMARY:  The FAA proposes to rule and invite public comment on the
release and sale of a 5,457 square foot parcel of land at the Colorado
Air and Space Port.

DATES: Comments are due within 30 days of the date of the publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Emailed comments can be provided to Mr. Michael Matz,
Project Manager/Compliance Specialist, Denver Airports District Office,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Mr. Jeff Kloska, Director, Colorado
Air and Space Port, 5200 Front Range Parkway, Watkins, CO 80137,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Michael Matz, Project Manager/
Compliance Specialist, Denver Airports District Office, 26805 E. 68th
Ave. Suite 224, Denver, CO 80249, [email protected], (303) 342-
1251. Documents reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at the above
locations.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The FAA invites public comment on the request to release property
at the Colorado Air and Space Port under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.
47107(h)(2). The proposal consists of 5,457 square feet of land located
on the North side of the airport, shown as Parcel 7B on the Airport
Layout Plan. The parcel lies on the Northeast corner of East 56th
Avenue and Imboden Road. The FAA concurs that the parcel is no longer
needed for airport purposes. The proposed use of this property is
compatible with existing airport operations in accordance with FAA's
Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, as
published in the Federal Register on February 16, 1999.

    Issued in Denver, Colorado, on November 30, 2022.
Marc Miller,
Acting Manager, Denver Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2022-26469 Filed 12-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 94 (Thursday, May 15, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27817-27820]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11150]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 193

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0375]

Technical Operations Safety Action Program (T-SAP) and Air
Traffic Safety Action Program (ATSAP)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of order designating safety information as protected
from disclosure; disposition of comments.

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

SUMMARY: This action affirms the policy and responds to comments
received in response to the Notice published on July 19, 2013 (78 FR
43091) regarding the application of our regulations, Technical
Operations Safety Action Program (T-SAP) and Air Traffic Safety Action
Program (ATSAP). The Notice proposed that safety information provided
to the FAA under the T-SAP and ATSAP programs be designated by an FAA
Order as protected from public disclosure in accordance with the
provisions of our regulations, Protection of Voluntarily Submitted
Information. The designation is intended to encourage persons to
voluntarily provide information to the FAA under the T-SAP and ATSAP,
so the FAA can learn about and address aviation safety hazards and
implement, as appropriate, corrective measures for events or safety
issues.

DATES: This action becomes effective May 15, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of documents and
other information related to this action, see ``How to Obtain
Additional Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning this action,
contact Ms. Coleen Hawrysko, Group Manager, Air Traffic Organization
(ATO) Safety Programs, Federal Aviation Administration, 490 L'Enfant
Plaza, Suite 7200, Washington, DC 20024; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.), section
40123, certain voluntarily provided safety and security information is
protected from disclosure in order to encourage persons to provide the
information. In accordance with 14 CFR part 193, Protection of
Voluntarily Submitted Information, the FAA must issue an Order that
specifies why the agency finds that the information should be
protected. If the Administrator issues an Order designating information
as protected under 49 U.S.C. 40123, that information will not be
disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (Title 5 of the
United States Code (5 U.S.C.)), section 552 or other laws, except as
provided in 49 U.S.C. 40123, 14 CFR part 193, and the Order designating
the information as protected. This Order is issued under part 193;
section 193.11, which sets out the notice procedure for designating
information as protected.
    The designation of protected information is intended to encourage
persons to voluntarily provide information to the FAA under the T-SAP
and ATSAP, so the FAA can learn about and address aviation safety
hazards of which it was unaware or more fully understand and implement
corrective measures for events or safety issues known by it through
other means. The designation is applicable to any FAA office that
receives information covered under this designation from T-SAP,
established in Notice JO 7210.807, and which will be incorporated in
FAA Order JO 7200.20, Voluntary Safety Reporting Programs, or the ATSAP
described in FAA Order JO 7200.20. The designation will also apply to
any other government agency to receive T-SAP or ATSAP information
covered under the designation from the FAA, and each such agency must
first stipulate in writing that it will abide by the provisions of part
193 and the Order designating T-SAP and ATSAP as protected from public
disclosure under 14 CFR part 193.
    Except for T-SAP or ATSAP reports that involve possible criminal
conduct, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or
intentional falsification, the following information will be protected
from disclosure:
    (1) The content of any report concerning an aviation safety or
security matter that is submitted by a qualified participant under the
T-SAP or ATSAP report, and the name of the submitter of the report.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, mandatory information about occurrences
that are required to be reported under FAA Orders, Notices or guidance
is not protected under this designation, unless the same information
has also been submitted or reported under other procedures prescribed
by the Agency. The exclusion is necessary to assure that the
information protected under this designation has been voluntarily
submitted. It also permits changes to FAA Orders, Notices and guidance
without requiring a change to this designation.
    (2) Any evidence gathered by the Event Review Committee during its
investigation of a safety-related or security-related event reported
under T-SAP or ATSAP, including the T-SAP or ATSAP investigative file.
    T-SAP or ATSAP participants register for, and submit a report into,
the electronic reporting system. These programs continue as long as
provided for by Order, Notice, policy or a collective bargaining
agreement.
    On July 19, 2013, the FAA issued a notice (78 FR 43091), Notice of
Proposed Order Designating Safety Information as Protected from
Disclosure (hereinafter, the ``notice''). The notice sought comment on
the FAA's intent to designate information voluntarily received under T-
SAP or ATSAP as protected from public disclosure in accordance with the
provisions of 14 CFR part 193.

Discussion of Comments

    Three commenters submitted comments in response to docket number--
FAA 2013-0375. The occupations and/or any group affiliations of the
commenters were not stated. The commenters all opposed this action, and
raised the following issues:

     This action is contrary to the President's Open Government
Initiative (OGI).
     Denying public access to voluntarily-submitted reports
would inhibit efforts to improve safety.
     Disagreement with the FAA's assertion that this policy is
needed to insure that safety events would be reported by FAA personnel.
     Requirements contained in part 193 are not applicable to
federal employees.

I. The President's Open Government Initiative

    The commenters asserted that this policy of non-disclosure of
information to the public is contrary to the goals of the OGI. The OGI
is an initiative that includes executive orders, action plans,
memoranda, etc., which espouses enhanced principles of open government,
transparency and greater access to information.
    The FAA's position is that OGI provides for the appropriate
protection of data where there is a compelling public safety interest.
The FAA believes the public is best served by systematic risk
mitigation, rather than by a sporadic focus on high-profile or
emotionally-charged incidents. This can only be achieved through broad-
based data collection and analysis in an environment of trust and
confidence that the results will not be inappropriately released. To
the issue of scope, the OGI does not conflict with the law regarding
protection of safety data.
    The following summarizes the policy intent of the President's
Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government: ``This memorandum is
not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive
or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the
United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers,
employees, or agents, or any other person.'' The full text can be found
at:
    (The President's MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS
AND AGENCIES, SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Transparency_and_Open_Government/.
    The balance of needs is demonstrated in the Memorandum for the
Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: ``Moreover, nothing in
this Directive shall be construed to suggest that the presumption of
openness precludes the legitimate protection of information whose
release would threaten national security, invade personal privacy,
breach confidentiality, or damage other genuinely compelling
interests.'' The full text can be found at: (Office of Management and
Budget, Open Government Directive, December 8, 2009, M-10-06,
MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, http://www.whitehouse.gov/open/documents/open-government-directive).
    Based on 49 U.S.C. 40123, the Administrator has found that the
disclosure of T-SAP and ATSAP information would inhibit the voluntary
provisions of that type of information and that the receipt of that
type of information aids in fulfilling the agency's safety and security
responsibilities. The Administrator has issued regulations under 49
U.S.C. 40123 to carry out provisions in this section. 14 CFR part 193
and follow on directives FAA Order JO 7200.20 and Notice JO 7210.807
detail FAA's Voluntary Safety Reporting Programs. The Administrator has
further found that withholding such information from disclosure would
be consistent with the agency's safety and security responsibilities
allowed under 49 U.S.C. 40123, and this change will protect such
information from public disclosure.

II. Denying Public Access to Voluntarily-Submitted Reports Would
Inhibit Efforts To Improve Safety

    One commenter asserted that the ability of the public to hold the
FAA accountable for its actions and policies is based on full access to
very detailed information. The FAA disagrees. Public access to certain
voluntarily-provided safety data is expressly limited by statute for
the fundamental reasons already articulated--privacy and
confidentiality concerns must be addressed before information will flow
freely. The true aim of this regulatory change is to protect the flying
public and aid in fulfilling the Administrator's safety
responsibilities. The commenter's opinion that no harm would occur
should protections be removed is contrary to history, industry
consensus and Congressional intent. The fact that Aviation Safety
Action Programs reports have been covered under Part 193 and FAA Order
8000.82 since 2003 is evidence of the understanding that this
information will only be obtained if confidentiality under the law is
maintained.

III. Disagreement With the FAA's Assertion That This Policy of Non-
Disclosure Is Needed To Insure That That Safety Events Are Reported by
FAA Personnel

    One commenter referred to the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System
(ASRS), and claimed the de-identified reports are providing adequate
information into their publicly disclosable ASRS database. The FAA
asserts that ASRS and ATSAP programs are both an important source of
information, but are not the same, and thus require different
parameters and guidelines. ASRS does not accept reports related to
accidents, thus critical protection may not be available when it is
most needed. In addition, ASRS does not provide the comprehensive
background and organizational structure to adequately implement
corrective actions, as NASA does not have regulatory or enforcement
authority. On a positive note, however, ATSAP directly supports the
ASRS program, as submitters may voluntarily request de-identified
reports be provided to ASRS. In fact, since November of 2010, a
significant portion of the ATSAP safety data already resides in that
publicly-available database. Prior to providing this option, ASRS was
receiving a very low number of reports from controllers. The monthly
average went from less than 50 to more than 500 after the option to
send a copy of a submitted ATSAP report to ASRS was provided. ASRS
further redacts information from ATSAP reports, and makes only about 10
percent of those reports available on their public site. Simply
removing names, as the commenter suggests, would do little to preserve
confidentiality or privacy, as descriptions of airports, aircraft and
time of day point directly to officially-available records of who was
on duty at the time of an event. As stated in the NASA paper, ``ASRS:
The Case for Confidential Incident Reporting Systems'', ``People are
generally willing to share their knowledge if they are assured their
identities will remain confidential, and ultimately, anonymous and the
information they provide will be protected from disciplinary and legal
consequences.''

IV. Requirements Contained in Part 193 Are Not Applicable to Federal
Employees

    All commenters stated they believed that the provisions contained
in 14 CFR part 193 do not preclude participation by government
employees; however, they all were resolute in their opinion that
government employees should not be included and they asserted that not
including them was the original intent.
    The distinction between the airlines Aviation Safety Reporting
Programs and the FAA's Voluntary Safety Reporting Program (VSRP) is
irrelevant to the intent and language of part 193, as the focus is on
protecting safety information

regardless of its source. Federal employees engaged in public safety
are no less affected by concerns regarding their privacy and undue
scrutiny than industry employees. The goal of the protective provisions
of a VSRP is to remove barriers to reporting for anyone with relevant
knowledge of a safety issue, and there is no functional difference
between private and public sector employees who may have concerns for
confidentiality. As noted by one commenter, part 193 does not prohibit
the protection of the FAA employees from the disclosure of safety and
security information voluntarily submitted to the FAA.
    14 CFR 193.1 states, ``. . . FAA protects from disclosure safety
and security information that you submit voluntarily to the FAA.''
Sec.  193.5(b) states that ``You may be any person, including an
individual, a company, or an organization.'' Any person may voluntarily
submit information if it is accomplished under a designated safety
reporting program. Additionally, there is no explicit exclusion of any
group or individual. The determination of the Administrator to
designate safety information for protection is fully within the scope
and intent of the law.
    Two commenters asserted that the FAA is changing its rationale for
withholding information. This policy merely strengthens the FAA's
determination that the protection of certain voluntarily provided
safety information from disclosure under the FOIA enhances the agency's
ability to obtain safety information that it would likely not otherwise
have received.

Additional Background

    Since receiving its first report in July 2008, ATSAP has received
over 73,000 reports, a remarkable record of success compared to
previous years when traditional reporting yielded information on
perhaps a few hundred incidents per year. Of those VSRP reports,
significant numbers provide information about safety issues that are
not technically required to be reported, providing an avenue for risk
identification that was previously nonexistent.
    There have been over 100 Corrective Action Requests issued as the
result of ATSAP reports and over 60 as the result of T-SAP reports to
date, of which nearly half have been fully mitigated. Information
disclosed in ATSAP reports over the past 5 years has contributed to
more than 200 safety improvements, including local, regional and
national actions to improve safety. T-SAP reports received in the past
3 years have contributed to over 100 safety improvements. The continued
identification of hazards in the National Airspace System as a result
of reports received from front line personnel is vital to the safety of
the flying public. Without protecting the confidentiality of these
voluntary safety report submitters there is no way to build the trust
necessary to encourage the reporting of actual and potential safety
hazards to the degree the FAA is now realizing, if at all.
    In addition to countless informal contacts initiated to resolve
safety issues, the FAA's VSRPs publish safety briefing sheets and
alerts to thousands of aviation safety professionals regarding issues
identified in VSRP reports, often including de-identified excerpts from
reports that are significant, educational, and timely.

Conclusion

    Upon review of the issued notice and submitted comments, the FAA
has affirmed the proposed policy, and designates information received
from a T-SAP or ATSAP submission as protected under 49 U.S.C. 40123 and
14 CFR 193.7.

Voluntarily-Provided Information Protected From Disclosure Under the
Designation

    Except for T-SAP or ATSAP reports that involve possible criminal
conduct, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or
intentional falsification, the following information is protected from
disclosure:
    (1) The content of any report concerning an aviation safety or
security matter that is submitted by a qualified participant under the
T-SAP or ATSAP, that is accepted into either program, including the T-
SAP or ATSAP narrative report, and the name of the submitter of the
report. Notwithstanding the foregoing, mandatory information about
occurrences that are required to be reported under FAA Orders, Notices
or guidance is not protected under this designation, unless the same
information has also been submitted or reported under other procedures
prescribed by the Agency. The exclusion is necessary to assure that the
information protected under this designation has been voluntarily
submitted. It also permits changes to FAA Orders, Notices and guidance
without requiring a change to this designation.
    (2) Any evidence gathered by the Event Review Committee during its
investigation of a safety- or security-related event or issue reported
under T-SAP or ATSAP, including the T-SAP or ATSAP investigative file.

 Ways To Participate

    Individuals who are qualified participants register for, and submit
a report into, the electronic reporting system.

Duration of Voluntary Safety Reporting Programs

    These programs continue as long as provided for by Order, Notice,
policy or a collective bargaining agreement.

Summary of Why the FAA Finds That the Disclosure of the Information
Would Inhibit Persons From Voluntarily Providing That Type of
Information

    The FAA finds that disclosure of the information would inhibit the
voluntary provision of that type of information. Individuals are
unwilling to voluntarily provide detailed information about safety
events and concerns, including those that might involve their own
failures to follow Agency directives and policies, if such information
could be released publicly. If information is publicly disclosed, there
is a strong likelihood that the information could be misused for
purposes other than to address and resolve the reported safety concern.
Unless the FAA can provide assurance that safety-related reports will
be withheld from public disclosure, personnel will not participate in
the programs.

Summary of Why the Receipt of That Type of Information Aids in
Fulfilling the FAA's Safety Responsibilities

    The FAA finds that receipt of information in T-SAP or ATSAP reports
aids in fulfilling the FAA's safety responsibilities. Because of its
capacity to provide early identification of needed safety improvements,
this information offers significant potential for addressing hazards
that could lead to incidents or accidents. In particular, one of the
benefits of T-SAP and ATSAP is that they encourage the submission of
narrative descriptions of occurrences and actual and potential safety
hazards that provide more detailed information than is otherwise
available. The T-SAP and ATSAP produce safety-related data that is not
available from any other source. Receipt of this previously unavailable
information has provided the FAA with an improved basis for modifying
procedures, policies, and regulations to improve safety and efficiency.

Consistencies and Inconsistencies With FAA Safety Responsibilities

    The FAA finds that withholding T-SAP and ATSAP information from
public release is consistent with the FAA's safety responsibilities
because it

encourages individuals to provide important safety information that it
otherwise might not receive.
    The FAA designates the following information as protected from
disclosure in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 40123 and 14 CFR part 193:
    b. Description of the type of information that may be voluntarily
provided under the program and a summary of why the FAA finds that the
information is safety-related.
    (1) The following types of reports are ordinarily submitted under
the T-SAP or ATSAP:
    i. Noncompliance reports. Noncompliance reports identify specific
instances of a failure to follow FAA directives.
    ii. Aviation safety concern reports. Aviation safety concerns that
do not involve specific noncompliance with FAA directives. These may
include, but are not limited to, potential safety events or perceived
problems with policies, procedures, and equipment.
    (2) Technical Operations personnel support the delivery and
efficiency of flight services through maintenance of the National
Airspace System facilities, systems and equipment. Reports submitted by
these employees under T-SAP ordinarily involve matters or observations
occurring during the performance of their job responsibilities, and
therefore the information submitted is inherently safety related. Air
Traffic personnel provide and support the provision of air traffic
services at FAA facilities throughout the NAS. Reports submitted by
these employees under ATSAP ordinarily involve occurrences or problems
identified or experienced during the performance of their job
responsibilities which directly affect safety.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2014.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-11150 Filed 5-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 18 (Wednesday, January 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4600-4603]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01509]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74117; File No. SR-ISE-2015-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees

January 22, 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 January 8, 2015, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(the ``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange 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 ISE proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees to (1) increase the
route-out fee applicable to Priority Customer orders routed to away
markets, (2) adopt a stock handling fee for stock-option orders
executed against other stock-option orders in the complex order book,
(3) increase the Crossing Fee Cap subject to a discount for members
that agree in advance to pay the full amount regardless of actual
trading volume, and (4) remove certain obsolete text related to PrecISE
fees. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.ise.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 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Schedule of Fees (1) increase
the route-out fee applicable to Priority Customer orders routed to away
markets, (2) adopt a stock handling fee for stock-option orders
executed against other stock-option orders in the complex order book,
(3) increase the Crossing Fee Cap subject to a discount for members
that agree in advance to pay the full amount regardless of actual
trading volume, and (4) remove certain obsolete text related to PrecISE
fees. Each of the proposed changes is described in more detail below.
The Exchange's Schedule of Fees has separate fees applicable to
Standard Options and Mini Options. The Exchange notes that while the
discussion below relates to fees for Standard Options, the fees for
Mini Options, which are not discussed below, are and shall continue to
be 1/10th of the fees for Standard Options.
I. Route-Out Fees
    The Exchange presently charges a route-out fee applicable to orders
routed to away markets pursuant to the Options Order Protection and
Locked/Crossed Market Plan (the ``Plan''). For Market Maker,\3\ Non-ISE
Market Maker,\4\ and Firm Proprietary \5\/Broker-Dealer,\6\ and
Professional Customer \7\ orders the route-out fee is $0.55 per
contract in Select Symbols,\8\ and $0.95 per contract in Non-Select
Symbols.\9\ For Priority Customer \10\ orders in both Select and Non-
Select Symbols the route-out fee is $0.45 per contract. The Exchange
now proposes to increase the route-out fee to $0.48 per contract for
Priority Customer orders in all symbols. The route-out fee for all
other market participant types will remain at their current rates
described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See ISE Rule
100(a)(25).
    \4\ A Non-ISE Market Maker, or Far Away Market Maker
(``FARMM''), is a market maker as defined in Section 3(a)(38) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 registered in the same options class
on another options exchange.
    \5\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \6\ A Broker-Dealer order is an order submitted by a Member for
a non-Member broker-dealer account.
    \7\ A Professional Customer is a person who is not a broker/
dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
    \8\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
    \9\ ``Non-Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols
excluding Select Symbols.
    \10\ A Priority Customer is defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(37A) as a
person or entity that is not a broker/dealer in securities, and does
not place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Stock Handling Fee for Stock-Option Orders
    When an ISE member enters a stock-option order,\11\ the Exchange
electronically communicates the stock leg of the order to one or more
broker-dealers for execution pursuant to Supplementary Material .02 to
Rule 722. Currently, the Exchange provides this stock routing
functionality as a free service to members, and simply passes-through
fees charged by the broker-dealer.\12\ The Exchange now proposes to
introduce a stock handling fee of $0.0010 per share for the stock leg
of stock-option orders executed against other stock-option orders in
the complex order book.\13\ This amount will include any fees charged
by the stock venue that prints the trade, and an amount intended to
compensate the Exchange for matching these stock-option orders against
other stock-option orders on the complex order book. A maximum of $50
per trade will be assessed under this fee in order to ensure that
market participants do not pay extremely large fees for the execution
of the stock legs of stock-option orders. The Exchange will continue to
bill pass-through fees for the stock leg of stock-option orders that
trade against liquidity on the stock venue, instead of being matched in
the complex order book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See ISE Rule 722(a)(2).
    \12\ The Exchange charges for execution of the options leg(s) of
stock-option orders.
    \13\ The Exchange notes that this stock handling fee, which is
for the stock leg of stock-option orders and is therefore charged
per share rather than per contract, is the same regardless of
whether the options leg(s) is for Standard or Mini Option contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Crossing Fee Cap
    The Exchange currently has a Crossing Fee Cap of $65,000 per month
which applies to Firm Proprietary and Non[hyphen]ISE Market Maker
transactions that are part of the originating or contra side of a
Crossing Order \14\ executed by a member or its affiliate, provided
there is at least 75% common ownership between the firms as reflected
on each firm's Form BD, Schedule A.\15\ The Exchange now proposes to
increase the Crossing Fee Cap to $75,000 per month; provided, however,
that members that commit in advance to paying the full Crossing Fee Cap
at the end of each month will instead have these fees capped at the
current $65,000 per month. Members that commit to the discounted
Crossing Fee Cap must indicate their desire to do so prior to the start
of the month in a form determined by the Exchange. By committing to the
Crossing Fee Cap, members agree to pay the full $65,000 per month
regardless of actual trading volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Crossing Orders are contracts that are submitted as part of
a Facilitation, Solicitation, PIM, Block or QCC order.
    \15\ Fees for Responses to Crossing Orders and surcharge fees
for licensed products are not included in the calculation of the
monthly fee cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. PrecISE Fee Waiver: Obsolete Text
    On October 15, 2014 the Exchange filed an immediately effective
proposed rule change that adopted a limited waiver of PrecISE
Trade[supreg] (``PrecISE'') fees for Electronic Access Members
(``EAMs'') and sponsored customers that execute a high volume of
Crossing Orders in a given month.\16\ As the proposed rule change was
filed in the middle of a calendar month, the PrecISE waiver for the
first billing cycle was based on a prorated volume threshold for
crossing volume executed from October 16, 2014 to October 31, 2014. As
the first billing cycle has now passed, the Exchange proposes to remove
this outdated reference from the Schedule of Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73440 (October 27,
2014), 79 FR 64857 (October 31, 2014) (SR-ISE-2014-48).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\17\ in general, and
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\18\ in particular, in that 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).

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

I. Route-Out Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposed route-out fees are reasonable
and equitable as they offset costs incurred by the Exchange in
connection with using unaffiliated broker-dealers (``Linkage
Handlers'') to access other exchanges for linkage executions pursuant
to Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 1901. Due to increasing taker
fees for accessing liquidity on other markets, the Exchange must
periodically raise its route-out fees to recoup the higher costs
associated with executing orders on away markets. Other exchanges
currently charge a variety of routing related fees associated with
orders that are subject to linkage handling. The route-out fees
proposed herein are within the range of fees charged by these
competitor exchanges. Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the
proposed fees are not unfairly discriminatory because these fees would
be uniformly applied to all Priority Customer orders routed to away
markets. As has historically been the case, Priority Customer orders
will continue to pay lower route-out fees than orders from other market
participants, including Professional Customers. The Exchange believes
that it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to charge lower
fees for Priority Customer orders as a Priority Customer is by
definition not a broker or dealer in securities, and does not place
more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). This limitation does
not apply to participants whose behavior is substantially similar to
that of market professionals, including, Professional Customers, who
will generally submit a higher number of orders (many of which do not
result in executions) than Priority Customers. Moreover, the Exchange
notes that Priority Customer orders are often charged lower taker fees
on other options exchanges, meaning that the execution costs to the
Exchange for routing these orders is correspondingly lower. As such,
the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to pass on this cost savings to the firms entering these
orders.
II. Stock Handling Fee for Stock-Option Orders
    The Exchange believes the proposed stock handling fee for stock-
option orders is reasonable and equitable as the proposed fee will
cover the costs of developing and maintaining the systems that allow
for the matching and processing of the stock legs of stock-option
orders executed in the complex order book, and fees assessed to the
Exchange by broker-dealers contracted to provide stock execution
services. The Exchange notes that the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Inc. (``CBOE'') also charges a similar stock handling fee of $0.0010
per share (capped at $50 per order).\19\ The Exchange believes that it
is reasonable and equitable to charge a similar fee for the execution
of stock-option orders on the ISE. In addition, the Exchange believes
that the proposed fee is not unfairly discriminatory as it will be
uniformly applied to all members that execute stock-option orders on
the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67383 (July 10,
2012), 77 FR 41841 (July 16, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-063).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Crossing Fee Cap
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to
increase the Crossing Fee Cap, and introduce a discount for members
that agree to pay the full Crossing Fee Cap at the end of each month,
as these changes are intended to incentivize members to bring Crossing
Order flow to the Exchange. Members that do not elect to pay the
discounted rate in full at the end of each month will remain eligible
to have their fees capped at $75,000--the level previously available on
the Exchange before the Crossing Fee Cap was lowered to its current
level in August 2014--while also retaining the current benefit of a
waived service fee for the execution of orders above the cap.\20\ At
the same time, members that commit to their Crossing Order fees in
advance will receive a discounted rate, which will encourage members to
bring their Crossing Order flow to the ISE, to the benefit of all
members and investors that trade on the Exchange. Furthermore, the
Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Crossing Fee Cap are
not unfairly discriminatory because all members will have the option to
make the required commitment in order to qualify for the discounted
Crossing Fee Cap. The Crossing Fee Cap will be uniformly applied to
members based on their election.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72817 (August 12,
2014), 79 FR 48801 (August 18, 2014) (SR-ISE-2014-39).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. PrecISE Fee Waiver: Obsolete Text
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable, and not
unfairly discriminatory to remove text in the Schedule of Fees related
to PrecISE fees for the billing period that ended on November 15, 2014
as this date has passed. Removing the obsolete text will increase the
clarity of the Schedule of Fees to the benefit of members and investors
that trade on the ISE.
    The Exchange notes that it has determined to charge fees and
provide rebates in Mini Options at a rate that is 1/10th the rate of
fees and rebates the Exchange provides for trading in Standard Options.
The Exchange believes it is reasonable and equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess lower fees and rebates to provide market
participants an incentive to trade Mini Options on the Exchange. The
Exchange believes the proposed fees and rebates are reasonable and
equitable in light of the fact that Mini Options have a smaller
exercise and assignment value, specifically 1/10th that of a standard
option contract, and, as such, is providing fees and rebates for Mini
Options that are 1/10th of those applicable to Standard Options.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\21\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
fees are similar to--and within the range of--fees charged by the
Exchange's competitors. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct their order flow
to competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to
remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described
above, the Exchange believes that the proposed fee changes reflect this
competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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)(A)(ii) of the Act \22\ and

subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\23\ because it
establishes a due, fee, or other charge imposed by ISE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-ISE-2015-03 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-ISE-2015-03. 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 such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the ISE. 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-ISE-2015-03 and should be
submitted on or before February 18, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01509 Filed 1-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 197)]
[Notices]
[Page 62844-62845]
[DOCID:fr13oc10-77]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001]

Innovations in Technology for the Treatment of Diabetes: Clinical
Development of the Artificial Pancreas (an Autonomous System); Public
Workshop

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop.

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

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes
of Health (NIH) are announcing a public workshop entitled ``Innovations
in Technology for the Treatment of Diabetes: Clinical Development of
the Artificial Pancreas (an Autonomous System).'' The topics to be
discussed are the current state of device systems for autonomous
systems for the treatment of diabetes mellitus, the challenges in
developing this expert system using existing technology, a discussion
of the clinical expectations and success criteria for these systems,
and a discussion of development plans for the transition of this device
system toward an outpatient setting.
    Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on November 10,
2010, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Persons interested in attending this
meeting must register by 5 p.m. on November 3, 2010.
    Location: The meeting will be held at the Hilton Washington, DC
North/Gaithersburg Hotel, 620 Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD 20877.
    Contact: Charles Zimliki, Food and Drug Administration, Center for
Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
66, rm. 2556, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax: 301-847-
8109, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration: Registration is free and will be on a first-come,
first-served basis. To register for the public workshop, webinar or
onsite attendance, please visit the following Web site: http://
www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/
ucm226251.htm (select the appropriate meeting from the list). Please
provide complete contact information for each attendee, including name,
title, affiliation, address, e-mail, and telephone number. For those
without Internet access, please call Victoria Wagman at<PHONE_NUMBER> to
register. Registration requests should be received by 5 p.m. on
November 3, 2010. Early registration is recommended because seating is
limited and therefore FDA/NIH may limit the number of participants from
each organization. If time and space permits, onsite registration on
the day of the public meeting will be provided beginning at 7 a.m.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Susan Monahan (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>at least 7
days in advance.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    CDRH has undertaken an initiative to proactively facilitate medical
device innovation to address unmet public health needs. As part of this
initiative, CDRH with NIH have focused on the development of the
artificial pancreas (or Autonomous System) for the treatment of
diabetes mellitus. An artificial pancreas is a medical device that
links a glucose monitor to an insulin infusion pump where the pump
automatically takes action (using a control algorithm) based upon the
glucose monitor reading. As control algorithms can vary significantly,
there are a variety of artificial pancreas systems currently under
development. These systems can range from low glucose suspend, to
control-to-range, to control-to-target, to bihormonal control where
each device has different purposes or intended uses for controlling
blood sugars. In addition, most research in this area uses existing
medical device technology, which might limit the performance and
evaluation of these systems. Given these device limitations,
preliminary research has focused on evaluating these systems in

a hospital-based environment, where the risks to the patient are
minimized. CDRH and NIH seek feedback on ways to overcome obstacles in
the development of an artificial pancreas and what might be considered
reasonable clinical expectations for systems considering the available
existing technology.
    This public workshop is to seek input from a wide range of
constituencies including but not be limited to industry, academia,
patient/consumer advocacy groups, professional organizations, and other
State and Federal bodies under aligned public health missions, to
address the issues outlined in this notice. During the public workshop,
there will be an open dialogue between Federal Government and experts
from the private and public sectors regarding the topics described in
this document. Workshop participants will not be expected to develop
consensus recommendations, but rather to provide their perspectives on
the clinical development of these device systems.

II. Issues for Discussion

    The workshop will focus on three topics: (1) Technical
considerations when developing a clinical study design; (2)
expectations of the various artificial pancreas device systems; and (3)
a discussion of the various development plans for the Artificial
Pancreas System. The discussion of these general topics should not be
limited by current statutes or regulations and will include, but not be
limited to, discussion of the preceding questions.

III. Where can I find more information about this public workshop?

    Background information on the public workshop, registration
information, the agenda, and other relevant information will be posted,
as it becomes available, on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/
MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/ucm226251.htm.

IV. Transcripts

    Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it
will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may be viewed at
the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD. A
transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM,
after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests
are to be sent to Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35), Office
of Management Programs, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857.

    Dated: October 5, 2010.
Nancy K. Stade,
Deputy Director for Policy, Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
[FR Doc. 2010-25600 Filed 10-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P