[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 38 (Friday, February 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9929-9930]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04187]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Forty-Third Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (206) Aeronautical
Information and Meteorological Data Link Services

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Forty-Third RTCA Special Committee 206 meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Forty-Third RTCA Special Committee 206 meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held March 7-11, 2016 from 8:30 a.m.-5:00
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Delta Airlines Headquarters,
1010 Delta Boulevard Atlanta, Georgia 30354, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or
Karan Hofmann, Program Director, RTCA, Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202)
330-0680.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 206. The agenda
will include the following:

Monday, March 7, 2016 (08:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.)

1. Opening Plenary
    a. Opening remarks: DFO, RTCA, Chairman, and Hosts
    b. Attendees' introductions
    c. Review and approval of meeting agenda
    d. Approval of previous meeting minutes (Washington, DC)
    e. Action item review
    f. PMC Feedback on TOR Changes
    i. Kickoff of SG5 FIS-B UAT MOPS
    g. Sub-Groups' reports (SG1/6: MASPS, SG4: EDR, & SG7: Winds)
    h. Industry presentations
    i. Status of EDR Standards--Mike Emanuel
    ii. ICAO Information Management Panel--Allan Hart (ICCAIA Advisor)
2. Sub-Groups meetings (1:00 p.m.)

Tuesday, March 8, 2016 (08:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.)

1. Sub-Groups meetings

Wednesday, March 9, 2016 (08:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.)

1. Sub-Groups meetings

Thursday, March 10, 2016 (08:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.)

1. Sub-Groups meetings

Friday, March 11, 2016 (08:30 a.m.-11:00 a.m.)

1. Closing Plenary
    a. Sub-Groups' reports
    b. Future meetings plans and dates
    c. Industry coordination
    d. SC-206 action item review
    e. Other business

2. Adjourn (11 a.m.)
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Plenary information will be
provided upon request. Persons who wish to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a
written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 22, 2016.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, Enterprise Support Services
Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-04187 Filed 2-23-16; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53882-53883]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23304]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2015-D-2306]

Testicular Toxicity: Evaluation During Drug Development; Guidance
for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a final guidance for industry entitled ``Testicular
Toxicity: Evaluation During Drug Development.'' The guidance addresses
nonclinical findings that may raise concerns of a drug-related adverse
effect on the testes, clinical monitoring of adverse testicular effects
early in clinical development, and the design and conduct of a safety
clinical trial assessing drug-related testicular toxicity. The guidance
is intended to assist sponsors developing drugs and therapeutic
biologics regulated within the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
to identify nonclinical signals of testicular toxicity and to evaluate
the potential for such toxicity in humans. This guidance finalizes the
draft guidance of the same name issued on July 17, 2015.

DATES: The announcement of the guidance is published in the Federal
Register on October 25, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written comments on
Agency guidances at any time as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2015-D-2306 for ``Testicular Toxicity: Evaluation During Drug
Development.'' Received comments will be placed in the docket and,
except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly
viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management
Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-
addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Mercier, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 5390, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-0957.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry
entitled ``Testicular Toxicity: Evaluation During Drug Development.''
This guidance is intended to help sponsors identify nonclinical signals
that raise concern regarding the potential for human testicular
toxicity and to evaluate those signals appropriately in human studies.
    The guidance describes the standard battery of nonclinical studies
that are used to assess the effects of

pharmaceuticals on the male reproductive system. The guidance discusses
findings in nonclinical studies that may increase the level of concern
for drug-related testicular toxicity. The guidance provides a general
approach on how to weigh the relevance of nonclinical findings,
considering factors that can confound the interpretation of these
findings. If a concerning nonclinical signal is identified, the
guidance presents suggestions for clinical monitoring when the product
is initially administered to humans.
    If a reasonable basis for concern of human testicular toxicity
exists, a trial with a primary objective of evaluating drug-related
testicular toxicity may be warranted. The guidance provides
recommendations for the design of such a trial, including study
conduct, endpoints, and presentation of results. These are general
recommendations for defining the role of drugs in testicular injury;
however, the specific details of an individual trial may vary depending
on the context of use of the drug product.
    This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same name issued
on July 17, 2015 (80 FR 42501). Changes made to the guidance took into
consideration written and verbal comments received. In addition to
editorial changes primarily for clarification, the major changes in the
guidance include revision of information on nonclinical study design
(including species selection, chronic study design, histopathology
assessment, sperm quality, and findings that increase concern for
impaired fertility) and revision of information that, to the extent
possible, subjects enrolled in the dedicated clinical safety trial
represent the intended population.
    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
current thinking of FDA on the evaluation of testicular toxicity during
drug development. It does not establish any rights for any person and
is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative
approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0014. The collections of
information in 21 CFR parts 50 and 56 (``Protection of Human Subjects:
Informed Consent and Institutional Review Boards'') have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0755.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at
either https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or
https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: October 19, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-23304 Filed 10-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 76 (Monday, April 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21911-21913]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08211]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88633; File No. SR-ICC-2020-006]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice Relating to ICC's Treasury Operations Policies and
Procedures

April 14, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ notice is hereby given that on April 8, 2020,
ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission the proposed rule change, security-based swap submission, or
advance notice as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items
have been prepared by ICC. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, security-based swap
submission, or advance notice from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice

    The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to revise the
ICC Treasury Operations Policies and Procedures (``Treasury Policy'').
These revisions do not require any changes to the ICC Clearing Rules
(the ``Rules'').

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

    In its filing with the Commission, ICC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change,
security-based swap submission, or advance notice and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed rule change, security-based swap
submission, or advance notice. The text of these statements may be
examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ICC has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most
significant aspects of these statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or
Advance Notice

(a) Purpose
    ICC proposes to revise its Treasury Policy. Specifically, ICC
proposes clarification changes related to ICC's approval process for
new banking relationships, ICC's minimum criteria applicable to
settlement banks, and ICC's backup settlement banks. ICC believes that
such revisions will facilitate the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions and derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions for which it is responsible. ICC proposes
to make such changes effective following Commission approval of the
proposed rule change. The proposed revisions are described in detail as
follows.
    ICC proposes amendments to the ``Direct Settlement'' section of the
ICC Treasury Policy. With respect to banking relationships, ICC
proposes to clarify that approval of the Credit Review Subcommittee of
the Participant Review Committee (``CRS'') is required before ICC may
begin using the bank's services. The CRS is comprised of ICC staff,
including the ICC President, ICC Chief Operating Officer, and
representatives from various departments, and is tasked with
counterparty review responsibilities. Further, ICC proposes to set
forth the minimum criteria applicable to ICC's settlement banks in the
Treasury Policy, which includes criteria related to regulation and
supervision, completion of required documentation to allow ICC to
assess financial stability and credit/counterparty risk, and
operational capability, among others. With respect to settlement banks,
ICC maintains one primary banking relationship and two backup banking
relationships. Currently, the Treasury Policy notes ICC's primary
banking relationship and one backup banking relationship. The proposed
changes incorporate reference to the second backup banking
relationship, which was inadvertently excluded and does not represent a
new banking relationship.
(b) Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \3\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and
to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts and
transactions; to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which
are in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible; and to comply with the provisions of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder. ICC believes that the proposed rule change
is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to ICC, in particular, to Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F),\4\ because ICC believes that the proposed rule change
will promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and
transactions, and contribute to the safeguarding of securities and
funds associated with security-based swap transactions in ICC's custody
or control, or for which ICC is responsible. The proposed changes
clarify ICC's approval process for new banking relationships, ICC's
minimum criteria for its settlement banks, and ICC's backup settlement
banks. The clarifications related to the approval process for new
banking relationships and the minimum criteria for ICC's settlement
banks ensure that ICC has clear and comprehensive procedures for
approving new banking relationships and is following its process for
review and approval of new banking relationships. The incorporation of
the second backup banking relationship corrects an omission to ensure
that ICC's policies and procedures clearly and accurately document
ICC's banking relationships. The proposed updates thus ensure that the
documentation of ICC's Treasury Policy remains up-to-date, transparent,
and focused on clearly articulating the policies and procedures used to
support ICC's treasury functions, which promotes the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions,
derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions and

contributes to the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in
the custody or control of ICC or for which it is responsible. As such,
the proposed rule change is designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions, derivatives
agreements, contracts, and transactions and to contribute to the
safeguarding of securities and funds associated with security-based
swap transactions in ICC's custody or control, or for which ICC is
responsible within the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the proposed rule change is consistent with the
relevant requirements of Rule 17Ad-22.\6\ Rule 17Ad-22(b)(3) \7\
requires ICC to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written
policies and procedures reasonably designed to maintain sufficient
financial resources to withstand, at a minimum, a default by the two CP
families to which it has the largest exposures in extreme but plausible
market conditions. The proposed changes enhance ICC's ability to manage
its financial resources, including by clearly articulating its approval
process for new banking relationships and the minimum criteria
applicable to ICC's settlement banks. Such changes ensure financial
health and the ability to fulfill obligations by ICC's banking
relationships, which promotes and strengthens ICC's own financial
condition and supports ICC's ability to maintain sufficient financial
resources to withstand, at a minimum, a default by the two CP families
to which it has the largest exposures in extreme but plausible market
conditions, consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(b)(3).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(b)(3).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(d)(3) \9\ requires ICC to establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to hold assets in a manner that minimizes risk of loss or of
delay in its access to them and to invest assets in instruments with
minimal credit, market, and liquidity risks. The proposed changes
strengthen ICC's ability to safeguard assets and limit the potential
for loss or delay in access to such assets by ensuring that ICC has
clear and comprehensive procedures that describe the minimum criteria
applicable to ICC's settlement banks and the approval process for new
banking relationships. ICC believes that having policies and procedures
that clearly and accurately document ICC's treasury functions are an
important component to the effectiveness of ICC's treasury operations,
which promote ICC's ability to hold assets in a manner that minimizes
risk of loss or of delay in its access to them and to invest assets in
instruments with minimal credit, market, and liquidity risks. Such
changes are therefore reasonably designed to meet the requirements of
Rule 17Ad-22(d)(3).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(3).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(d)(5) \11\ requires ICC to establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to employ money settlement arrangements that eliminate or
strictly limit ICC's settlement bank risks and require funds transfers
to ICC to be final when effected. The proposed changes enhance ICC's
ability to manage and limit its credit and liquidity risk arising from
its settlement banks, including by establishing the minimum criteria
applicable to ICC's settlement banks, including criteria related to
regulation and supervision, completion of required documentation to
allow ICC to assess financial stability and credit/counterparty risk,
and operational capability, among others, and by clarifying that
approval of the CRS is required before ICC may begin using the bank's
services, consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(d)(5).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(5).
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(d)(8) \13\ requires ICC to establish, implement,
maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent
to fulfill the public interest requirements in Section 17A of the Act
\14\ applicable to clearing agencies, to support the objectives of
owners and participants, and to promote the effectiveness of ICC's risk
management procedures. The proposed revisions allow for feedback from,
and notification to, the CRS, which is comprised of ICC staff,
including the ICC President, ICC Chief Operating Officer, and
representatives from various departments, prior to using the bank's
services. These governance arrangements are clear and transparent, such
that information relating to the assignment of responsibilities and the
requisite involvement of ICC personnel is clearly documented, and also
promote the effectiveness of ICC's risk management procedures by
detailing the responsibilities of relevant stakeholders in the review
and approval of new banking relationships, consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(d)(8).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(8).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The proposed changes to
ICC's Treasury Policy will apply uniformly across all market
participants. Therefore, ICC does not believe the proposed rule change
imposes any burden on competition that is inappropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule
Change, Security-Based Swap Submission, or Advance Notice Received From
Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by ICC.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change, Security-Based
Swap Submission, or Advance Notice and Timing for Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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, security-based swap submission, or advance notice 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-ICC-2020-006 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2020-006. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change, security-based
swap submission, or advance notice that are filed with the Commission,
and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change,
security-based swap submission, or advance notice between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
such filings will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of ICE Clear Credit and on ICE Clear Credit's website
at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation.
    All comments received will be posted without change. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2020-006 and should be
submitted on or before May 11, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-08211 Filed 4-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 45)]
[Notices]
[Page 10855-10856]
[DOCID:fr09mr10-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61626; File No. SR-NYSE-2010-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending NYSE Rule 476 To Add a Provision for Violations Relating to
Failing To Observe High Standards of Commercial Honor and Just and
Equitable Principles of Trade

March 2, 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 February 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 476 to add a provision for
violations relating to failing to observe high standards of commercial
honor and just and equitable principles of trade. 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    In this filing, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') proposes to amend Rule 476 to add a provision for
violations relating to failing to observe high standards of commercial
honor and just and equitable principles of trade. The Commission
previously approved an amendment to NYSE Rule 476 to delete subsection
(a)(6), which concerned just and equitable principles of trade.\4\ The
rationale for that deletion was because NYSE adopted Rule 2010, which
provided for the same content as the prior version of Rule 476(a)(6)
and which harmonized the Exchange rule with the NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE
Amex'') and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'')
standards for just and equitable principles of trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange [sic] Release No. 59965 (May 21,
2009), 74 FR 25783 (May 29, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, in deleting Rule 476(a)(6) and replacing it with Rule
2010, the Exchange inadvertently deleted the ability for the Exchange
to bring charges relating to failing to observe high standards of
commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade against
approved persons, principal executives, and employees of member
organizations. As approved, NYSE Rule 2010 is applicable only to
members and member organizations. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to
amend Rule 476, which has an enabling provision to bring charges
against approved persons and employees of member organizations, to add
subsection (a)(6) to cover the same content that was previously
deleted. To ensure that the standards for just and equitable principles
of trade are consistent across Exchange rules, NYSE Amex, and FINRA,
the Exchange proposes to adopt rule text that mirrors the standard set
forth in Rule 2010, which is virtually identical to NYSE Amex Equities
Rule 2010 and FINRA Rule 2010. As proposed, NYSE Rule 476(a)(6) would
read as follows: ``failing to observe high standards of commercial
honor and just and equitable principles of trade.''
    In adopting this revised rule text for Rule 476(a)(6), the Exchange
would be able to bring a charge relating to failing to observe high
standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of
trade against not only members and member organizations, but also
against principal executives, approved persons, and employees of member
organizations. This proposal is consistent with FINRA Rule 2010 because
under FINRA Rule 0140, persons associated with a FINRA member have the
same duties and obligations as a member under FINRA rules. Accordingly,
FINRA has the authority to charge an associated person with a violation
of Rule 2010. By adding this standard to Rule 476(a)(6), the Exchange
will similarly have the authority to charge an employee of a member
organization with a violation relating to failing to observe high
standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of
trade.
    To ensure full harmonization, the Exchange also proposes amending
Rule 476(a)(5) and deleting the phrase ``fraud or fraudulent acts'' and
replacing it with the rule text from Rule 2020 to provide that the
Exchange can bring charges against an employee of a member organization
for effecting any transaction in, or inducing the purchase or sale of,
any security by means of any manipulative, deceptive or other
fraudulent device or contrivance.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes deleting the reference to ``allied
member,'' which no longer is a category

at the Exchange, and replacing it with ``principal executive.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58549 (Sept. 15,
2008), 73 FR 54444 (Sept. 19, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-80) (deleting the
term ``allied member'' and replacing it with ``principal
executive'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act \6\ which requires the rules of an exchange 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. The
proposed rule change also is designed to support the principles of
Section 11A(a)(1) \7\ of the Act in that it seeks to assure fair
competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets. The
Exchange believes this rule proposal ensures that it will be enabled to
charge, as necessary, when a member, member organization, principal
executive, approved person, or employee of a member organization fails
to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable
principles of trade, as contemplated by the Act, or effects any
transaction in, or induces the purchase or sale of, any security by
means of any manipulative, deceptive or other fraudulent device or
contrivance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \10\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\11\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission notes that
the proposed rule change is restoring the Exchange's ability to
discipline employees of member organizations under paragraphs (a)(5)
and (a)(6) of Rule 476. The proposed rule change does not raise any new
substantive issues and will harmonize NYSE Rules and FINRA Rules in
this regard. For these reasons, the Commission believes that waiver of
the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission designates
the proposed rule change effective and operative upon filing.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). 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 filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Commission notes that NYSE has satisfied the five-
day pre-filing notice requirement.
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission 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.

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-2010-07 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-2010-07. 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,\13\ 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 NYSE
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-2010-07 and should be
submitted on or before March 30, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov/.

    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. 2010-4912 Filed 3-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


#########################################################################
#												                                                #
#				          Property Value Benefit Transfer                       #
#												                                                #
#########################################################################

# Authors: George Gardner, Mary Sluder
# Date Created: 06/23/23
# Last Updated: 12/04/23

# Purpose: estimates illustrative property value benefits of a 1 mg/L DO improvement in the
# specified zones of the Delaware River, accounting for values of single-family households
# within 2 miles of the specified zones of the Delaware River.

# See Netusil; see Appendix D in Alkire (page D-11)

rm(list=ls())
gc()

tic<-proc.time() #start stop watch

options(stringsAsFactors=FALSE)
pacman::p_load(dplyr, sf, tidycensus, tidyr, purrr, magrittr, ggplot2, nhdplusTools, measurements,
               foreign, tigris, openxlsx, terra, rgdal, readr, rgeos, sp, raster)

#Increase memory limit
memory.limit(size=10000)

# Variables to change before running the code --------------------------------

var <- "59229" # Change to user ID

outpath <- paste0("C:/Users/",var,"/ICF/CWA Anniversary & Econ Support - TD3_Delaware River WQS/Property Values/Property Value Benefit Transfer/Outputs/")
# has information on the FMA, Delaware River main stem and zones, sturgeon critical habitats.
EPA_Data <- paste0("C:/Users/",var,"/ICF/CWA Anniversary & Econ Support - TD3_Delaware River WQS/GIS/Data/")

# Census Data Prep
# Activate API Key
census_api_key("0d3711e1f7f03d54ea326708428a15bcec0c0621") # Key registered to Sam Ennett
years <- c(2021)
# Census Tract level data on: # occupied hh's, # total hh's, # 1-unit hh's (detached, attached), median housing value (owner occupied units)
# DP04_0001 = Total Housing Units
# DP04_0002 = Occupied Housing Units
# DP04_0007 = 1-Unit Detached Housing Units
# DP04_0008 = 1-Unit Attached Housing Units
# DP04_0089 = Median Housing Value (Owner-occupied Units)

Census_var <- c("DP04_0001", "DP04_0002", "DP04_0007", "DP04_0008", "DP04_0089")

# STEP 1: Read in data ----------------------------------------------------------------

# Fish Maintenance Area
FMA <- st_read(paste0(EPA_Data,"Fish Maintenance Area/delriv_fma.shp")) |>
  st_transform("ESRI:102008")

# # Census Data for NY, DE, PA, and NJ
# Note: can adjust this call to pull any of the ACS data you need.

# get tract-level ACS data for NY, DE, NJ, and PA.
Tract_df <- get_acs(geography = "tract",
             year = years,
             survey = "acs5",
             state = c("NY", "PA", "NJ","DE"),
             variables = Census_var,
             geometry = T)
Tract_df <- Tract_df |>
  st_transform("ESRI:102008") # 56500

# NOTE: The test adds tract-level population ACS data and compares it to tract-level number of housing units.
# There are 205 tracts with 0 housing units but 153 tracts with 0 population. Of the 205 tracts with 0 households,
# 57 tracts have non-zero populations. Test signifies some accuracy issues with the ACS data.
#Test <- get_acs(geography = "tract",
#                year = years,
#                survey = "acs5",
#                state = c("NY", "PA", "NJ"),
#                variables = c(Census_var, "B01001_001"),
#                geometry = F)
#Test <-   Test %>%
#  dplyr::select(-moe) %>%
#  pivot_wider(names_from = "variable", values_from = "estimate")

# Create table of Tract-level ACS statistics:
ACS_Stats <- Tract_df %>%
  st_drop_geometry() %>%
  dplyr::select(-moe) %>%
  pivot_wider(names_from = "variable", values_from = "estimate") # 11300
names(ACS_Stats) <- c("GEOID", "TRACT", "TOT_HH_UNITS", "OCC_HH_UNITS", "ONE_UNIT_DET",
                      "ONE_UNIT_ATT", "MED_HH_VAL")

# Fill in NAs for MED_HH_VAL with County statistics.
Temp_County <- get_acs(geography = "county",
                  year = years,
                  survey = "acs5",
                  state = c("NY", "PA", "NJ","DE"),
                  variables = "DP04_0089",
                  geometry = F)
Temp_County <- Temp_County[, c(1, 4)] # 153
names(Temp_County) <- c("GEOID2", "MED_HH_VAL2")

# merge tract data to county data.
ACS_Stats <- ACS_Stats %>%
  mutate(GEOID2 = substr(GEOID, 1, 5))
ACS_Stats <- merge(ACS_Stats, Temp_County, by.x = "GEOID2", by.y = "GEOID2", all.x = TRUE) #11300
# replace NA values.
ACS_Stats <- ACS_Stats %>%
  mutate(MED_HH_VAL = ifelse(is.na(MED_HH_VAL), MED_HH_VAL2, MED_HH_VAL))
# clean up data and remove tract and county dataframes.
ACS_Stats <- ACS_Stats[, c(2:8)]
rm(Temp_County, Tract_df)

# STEP 2: draw buffers around the specified zones of the Lower Delaware River (i.e., the FMA) ----------------
# 1/4 mile buffer
Buff_A <- st_union(st_buffer(FMA, conv_unit(0.25, "mi", "m")))
Buff_A <- st_sf(Buff_A)
# 1/2 mile buffer
Buff_B <- st_union(st_buffer(FMA, conv_unit(0.50, "mi", "m")))
Buff_B <- st_sf(Buff_B)
# 1 mile buffer
Buff_C <- st_union(st_buffer(FMA, conv_unit(1, "mi", "m")))
Buff_C <- st_sf(Buff_C)
# 2 mile buffer
Buff_D <- st_union(st_buffer(FMA, conv_unit(2, "mi", "m")))
Buff_D <- st_sf(Buff_D)

# visual confirmation of buffers.
ggplot() +
  geom_sf(data = Buff_D, fill = "black") +
  geom_sf(data = Buff_C, fill = "yellow") +
  geom_sf(data = Buff_B, fill = "green") +
  geom_sf(data = Buff_A, fill = "red") +
  geom_sf(data = FMA, fill = "blue")

st_erase = function(x, y) st_difference(x, st_union(st_combine(y))) # required because FMA zone has more than one feature and st_difference doesn't work

# Turn buffers into bands.
Band_A <- st_erase(Buff_A, FMA) # (0 - 0.25 mi) # Note removing overlapping FMA zone because buffer/band should start after FMA zone ends - at 0
Band_B <- st_difference(Buff_B, Buff_A) # (0.25 - 0.50 mi)
Band_C <- st_difference(Buff_C, Buff_B) # (0.50 - 1 mi)
Band_D <- st_difference(Buff_D, Buff_C) # (1 - 2 mi)

# visual confirmation of band.
ggplot() +
  geom_sf(data = Band_D, fill = "black") + # adding others to double check
  geom_sf(data = Band_C, fill = "yellow") + # note that running individually shows bands
  geom_sf(data = Band_B, fill = "green") +
  geom_sf(data = Band_A, fill = "red") +
  geom_sf(data = FMA, fill = "blue")

# drop buffers
rm(Buff_A, Buff_B, Buff_C, Buff_D)

# STEP 3: Find tracts whose centroids intersect with the bands ---------------------------------------
# First, get centroids of the tracts from ACS (pick one statistic so we don't have duplicate geometry)
Tract_df <- get_acs(geography = "tract",
                    year = years,
                    survey = "acs5",
                    state = c("NY", "PA", "NJ", "DE"),
                    variables = "DP04_0089",
                    geometry = T)
Tract_df <- Tract_df |>
  st_transform("ESRI:102008") |>
  st_centroid(Tract_df) |>
  st_zm()

# Next, find the centroids of tracts that lie within each band
# tracts in band A (0 - 0.25 mi)
int_Tract_A <- st_filter(Tract_df, y = Band_A, .predicate = st_intersects) # 20
# tracts in band B (0.25 - 0.50 mi)
int_Tract_B <- st_filter(Tract_df, y = Band_B, .predicate = st_intersects) # 26
# tracts in band C (0.50 - 1 mi)
int_Tract_C <- st_filter(Tract_df, y = Band_C, .predicate = st_intersects) # 66
# tracts in band D (1 - 2 mi)
int_Tract_D <- st_filter(Tract_df, y = Band_D, .predicate = st_intersects) # 136

# visual confirmation of the tract centroids and buffers
ggplot() +
  geom_sf(data = Band_A, color = 'red') +
  geom_sf(data = int_Tract_A, color = "black")

# STEP 4: For each tract intersecting the bands, determine the number of single-family -------------
# residential homes and median housing value. ------------------------------------------------------

# merge ACS statistics dataframe with tracts within each band.
ACS_Tract_A <- merge(int_Tract_A, ACS_Stats) %>%
  st_drop_geometry()
ACS_Tract_A <- ACS_Tract_A[,c(1, 6:11)] # 20

ACS_Tract_B <- merge(int_Tract_B, ACS_Stats) %>%
  st_drop_geometry()
ACS_Tract_B <- ACS_Tract_B[,c(1, 6:11)] # 26

ACS_Tract_C <- merge(int_Tract_C, ACS_Stats) %>%
  st_drop_geometry()
ACS_Tract_C <- ACS_Tract_C[,c(1, 6:11)] # 66

ACS_Tract_D <- merge(int_Tract_D, ACS_Stats) %>%
  st_drop_geometry()
ACS_Tract_D <- ACS_Tract_D[,c(1, 6:11)] # 136

# calculate the number of single-family homes (i.e., owner-occupied one-unit attached and detached).
# Occupied households/Total Households)*(Number of 1-unit households [attached + detached])
ACS_Tract_A$SF_HOMES <- 0
ACS_Tract_A <- ACS_Tract_A %>%
  mutate(SF_HOMES = ifelse(TOT_HH_UNITS != 0 , (OCC_HH_UNITS/TOT_HH_UNITS)*(ONE_UNIT_DET+ONE_UNIT_ATT), TOT_HH_UNITS)) # 20
ACS_Tract_A$SF_HOMES <- floor(ACS_Tract_A$SF_HOMES)

ACS_Tract_B$SF_HOMES <- 0
ACS_Tract_B <- ACS_Tract_B %>%
  mutate(SF_HOMES = ifelse(TOT_HH_UNITS != 0 , (OCC_HH_UNITS/TOT_HH_UNITS)*(ONE_UNIT_DET+ONE_UNIT_ATT), TOT_HH_UNITS)) # 26
ACS_Tract_B$SF_HOMES <- floor(ACS_Tract_B$SF_HOMES)

ACS_Tract_C$SF_HOMES <- 0
ACS_Tract_C <- ACS_Tract_C %>%
  mutate(SF_HOMES = ifelse(TOT_HH_UNITS != 0 , (OCC_HH_UNITS/TOT_HH_UNITS)*(ONE_UNIT_DET+ONE_UNIT_ATT), TOT_HH_UNITS)) # 66
ACS_Tract_C$SF_HOMES <- floor(ACS_Tract_C$SF_HOMES)

ACS_Tract_D$SF_HOMES <- 0
ACS_Tract_D <- ACS_Tract_D %>%
  mutate(SF_HOMES = ifelse(TOT_HH_UNITS != 0 , (OCC_HH_UNITS/TOT_HH_UNITS)*(ONE_UNIT_DET+ONE_UNIT_ATT), TOT_HH_UNITS)) # 136
ACS_Tract_D$SF_HOMES <- floor(ACS_Tract_D$SF_HOMES)

# STEP 5: Calculate a weighted average of the median home values in all Census tracts intersecting the bands ---------
# weighted average = sum of (Tract median home value * (number of 1-unit households in tract / total number ----------
# of 1-unit households across intersecting tracts)) across intersecting tracts for each. -----------------------------

# calculate the weights and the weighted median home values.
ACS_Tract_A$Weight <- (ACS_Tract_A$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_A$ONE_UNIT_ATT)/sum(ACS_Tract_A$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_A$ONE_UNIT_ATT)
ACS_Tract_A$WGT_MED_HH_VAL <- ACS_Tract_A$MED_HH_VAL * ACS_Tract_A$Weight

ACS_Tract_B$Weight <- (ACS_Tract_B$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_B$ONE_UNIT_ATT)/sum(ACS_Tract_B$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_B$ONE_UNIT_ATT)
ACS_Tract_B$WGT_MED_HH_VAL <- ACS_Tract_B$MED_HH_VAL * ACS_Tract_B$Weight

ACS_Tract_C$Weight <- (ACS_Tract_C$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_C$ONE_UNIT_ATT)/sum(ACS_Tract_C$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_C$ONE_UNIT_ATT)
ACS_Tract_C$WGT_MED_HH_VAL <- ACS_Tract_C$MED_HH_VAL * ACS_Tract_C$Weight

ACS_Tract_D$Weight <- (ACS_Tract_D$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_D$ONE_UNIT_ATT)/sum(ACS_Tract_D$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_D$ONE_UNIT_ATT)
ACS_Tract_D$WGT_MED_HH_VAL <- ACS_Tract_D$MED_HH_VAL * ACS_Tract_D$Weight

# sum the weighted median home values within each band to obtain the band-specific weighted average median home values.
WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST <- c(sum(ACS_Tract_A$WGT_MED_HH_VAL), sum(ACS_Tract_B$WGT_MED_HH_VAL),
                               sum(ACS_Tract_C$WGT_MED_HH_VAL), sum(ACS_Tract_D$WGT_MED_HH_VAL))

# STEP 6: Estimate the potential gain in average annual rental value (2021$) from DO improvements. -------------------
# Estimated effect on Property Sale Prices from a 1mg/L increase in Dissolved Oxygen (%) * Change in -----------------
# Dissolved Oxygen Levels under Scenarios * Average Annual Rental Value (2021$) --------------------------------------

# Calculate the average annual rental values within each band. Multiply weighted average median home value by 3% discount rate.
AVG_ANNUAL_RENTAL_VALUE_LIST <- as.data.frame(0.03*WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST)

# Take the estimated effects on property sales price from DO changes in Netusil
# Burnt Bridge Creek:
# For 0 - 0.25 mi:    0.0123
# For 0.25 - 0.50 mi: 0.0449
# For 0.50 - 1 mi:    0.0295
# For 1 - 2 mi:       0.0317
Burnt_Bridge <- as.data.frame(c(0.0123, 0.0449, 0.0295, 0.0317))

# Johnson Creek:
# For 0 - 0.25 mi:    0.1371
# For 0.25 - 0.50 mi: 0.0705
# For 0.50 - 1 mi:    0.0818
# For 1 - 2 mi:       0.0312
Johnson_Creek <- as.data.frame(c(0.1371, 0.0705, 0.0818, 0.0312))

# Change in DO level (based on actual flows) under EPA standard = 0.7965 mg/L
# Updated to 0.799 on 12/4/2023 based on EPA guidance
DO_Change <- 0.799

Rental_value_Gain <- cbind(AVG_ANNUAL_RENTAL_VALUE_LIST, Burnt_Bridge, Johnson_Creek)
names(Rental_value_Gain) <- c("AVG_ANN_RENTAL_VAL", "PROP_EFFECT_BB", "PROP_EFFECT_JC")

# calculate potential gain in rental value
Rental_value_Gain <- Rental_value_Gain %>%
  mutate(RENTAL_GAIN_BB = AVG_ANN_RENTAL_VAL*PROP_EFFECT_BB*DO_Change) %>%
  mutate(RENTAL_GAIN_JC = AVG_ANN_RENTAL_VAL*PROP_EFFECT_JC*DO_Change)

# STEP 7: Estimate the total annual rental value change. ----------------------
# potential rental value gain * total number of 1-unit households across intersecting tracts in each revised buffer

# total number of one-unit households for tracts in each band.
TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH <- as.data.frame(c(sum(ACS_Tract_A$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_A$ONE_UNIT_ATT),
                                   sum(ACS_Tract_B$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_B$ONE_UNIT_ATT),
                                   sum(ACS_Tract_C$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_C$ONE_UNIT_ATT),
                                   sum(ACS_Tract_D$ONE_UNIT_DET + ACS_Tract_D$ONE_UNIT_ATT)))
names(TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH) <- c("TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH")

Rental_value_Gain <- cbind(Rental_value_Gain, TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH)

# calculate the total annual rental value change
Rental_value_Gain$TOT_AN_RENTAL_VAL_BB <- Rental_value_Gain$TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH * Rental_value_Gain$RENTAL_GAIN_BB
Rental_value_Gain$TOT_AN_RENTAL_VAL_JC <- Rental_value_Gain$TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH * Rental_value_Gain$RENTAL_GAIN_JC

# STEP 8: Potential Gain in Average Property Value Per Residence (2021$) ------------------------------------
# Estimated Effect on Property Sale Prices from a 1mg/L increase in Dissolved Oxygen (%) * Change in Dissolved
# Oxygen Levels under Scenarios * Weighted average median home value (2021$)

WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST <- as.data.frame(WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST)

Prop_Value_Gain <- cbind(Rental_value_Gain[,c(2:3, 6)], WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST)

Prop_Value_Gain <- Prop_Value_Gain %>%
  mutate(AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_BB = WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST*PROP_EFFECT_BB*DO_Change) %>%
  mutate(AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_JC = WGT_AVG_MED_HH_VALUE_LIST*PROP_EFFECT_JC*DO_Change)

# STEP 9: Estimate the total property value change -----------------------------------------------------------
# Average Property Value Gain Per Residence * total number of 1-unit households
Prop_Value_Gain$TOT_PROP_VAL_BB <- Prop_Value_Gain$AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_BB * Prop_Value_Gain$TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH
Prop_Value_Gain$TOT_PROP_VAL_JC <- Prop_Value_Gain$AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_JC * Prop_Value_Gain$TOT_ONE_UNIT_HH

# STEP 10: Convert from 2021$ to 2022$  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
# historical CPI-U taken from BLS - https://www.bls.gov/cpi/tables/supplemental-files/historical-cpi-u-202305.pdf
CPI <- 292.655/270.970 # 2022$/2021$

Rental_value_Gain_22 <- Rental_value_Gain %>%
  mutate(RENTAL_GAIN_BB = RENTAL_GAIN_BB*CPI) %>%
  mutate(RENTAL_GAIN_JC = RENTAL_GAIN_JC*CPI) %>%
  mutate(TOT_AN_RENTAL_VAL_BB = TOT_AN_RENTAL_VAL_BB*CPI) %>%
  mutate(TOT_AN_RENTAL_VAL_JC = TOT_AN_RENTAL_VAL_JC*CPI)

row.names(Rental_value_Gain_22) <- c("miles 0.00 - 0.25", "miles 0.25 - 0.50", "miles 0.50 - 1.00", "miles 1.00 - 2.00")

Prop_Value_Gain_22 <- Prop_Value_Gain %>%
  mutate(AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_BB = AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_BB*CPI) %>%
  mutate(AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_JC = AVG_PROP_VAL_GAIN_JC*CPI) %>%
  mutate(TOT_PROP_VAL_BB = TOT_PROP_VAL_BB*CPI) %>%
  mutate(TOT_PROP_VAL_JC = TOT_PROP_VAL_JC*CPI)

row.names(Prop_Value_Gain_22) <- c("miles 0.00 - 0.25", "miles 0.25 - 0.50", "miles 0.50 - 1.00", "miles 1.00 - 2.00")

datasets <- list('Rental Value Benefits' = Rental_value_Gain_22, 'Property Value Benefits' = Prop_Value_Gain_22)

# export as excel file.
write.xlsx(datasets, paste0(outpath,"Property_Value_Benefit_Transfer_",Sys.Date(),".xlsx"), rowNames = TRUE)

proc.time()-tic #capture run time


[Federal Register: June 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 116)]
[Notices]
[Page 34065]
[DOCID:fr16jn08-117]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Approval of the Record of Decision for Proposed
Development at the Flying Cloud Airport, Eden Prairie, MN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of approval of the Record of Decision (ROD).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is announcing approval of the Record of Decision on
the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 303c Evaluation
for proposed development at the Flying Cloud Airport (FCM), Eden
Prairie, Minnesota.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Glen Orcutt, FAA, Airports
District Office, 6020 28th Avenue South, Suite 102, Minneapolis, MN
55450, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ROD approves the proposed development at
Flying Cloud Airport including: extension of the main runway to 5,000
feet and the other parallel runway to 3,900 feet; the construction of a
new building area; land acquisition; service roads around the east and
west ends of the parallel runways; hangar removal; Federal actions
regarding installation of navigational aides, airspace use, and
approach and departure procedures associated with the proposed
development; and noise mitigation requirements included in the Final
Agreement and MOU between the Metropolitan Airports Commission and the
City of Eden Prairie.
    The ROD indicates the project is consistent with existing
environmental policies and objectives as set forth in the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, and will not
significantly affect the quality of the environment.
    In reaching this decision, the FAA has given careful consideration
to: (a) The role of FCM in the national air transportation system, (b)
aviation safety, (c) preferences of the airport owner, (d) anticipated
environmental impact, and (e) the decisions of the Minnesota State
Legislature.
    Discussions of these factors are documented in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement, the Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) and Section 303c Evaluation, for the project. The
notice of availability of the FEIS appeared in the Federal Register on
June 18, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 117, Pages 34161-34162), and the
comment period ran through September 17, 2004. The FAA's determinations
on the project are outlined in the ROD, which was approved on May 15,
2008.

    Issued in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on May 28, 2008.
Robert A. Huber,
Manager, Minneapolis Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. E8-13521 Filed 6-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 131 (Monday, July 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41135-41136]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14680]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-2143]

Xellia Pharmaceuticals USA, LLC; Withdrawal of Approval of an
Abbreviated New Drug Application for Bacitracin for Injection

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA or Agency) Center for
Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) is withdrawing the approval of an
abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) for bacitracin for injection,
50,000 units/vial (ANDA 203177), held by Xellia Pharmaceuticals USA,
LLC (Xellia). Xellia has requested withdrawal of approval of this
application and has waived its opportunity for a hearing.

DATES: Approval is withdrawn as of July 11, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sungjoon Chi, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6216, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
402-9674, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 31, 2020, FDA requested that all
application holders of bacitracin for injection voluntarily request
withdrawal of approval of their applications under Sec.  314.150(d) (21
CFR 314.150(d)). Bacitracin for injection is an antibiotic for
intramuscular administration, the use of which is limited to the
treatment of infants with pneumonia and empyema caused by staphylococci
shown to be susceptible to the drug. Bacitracin for injection poses
serious risks, including nephrotoxicity and anaphylactic reactions.
Health care professionals generally no longer use bacitracin for
injection to treat infants with pneumonia and empyema because other
effective FDA-approved treatments are available that do not have these
risks.
    In April 2019, FDA's Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee met and
discussed the safety and effectiveness of bacitracin for injection. The
advisory committee voted almost unanimously, with one abstention, that
the benefits of bacitracin for intramuscular injection do not outweigh
its risks, including nephrotoxicity and anaphylactic reactions, for the
drug's only approved indication. Based on FDA's review of currently
available data and information, the Agency believes that the potential
problems associated with bacitracin for injection are sufficiently
serious that the drug should be removed from the market.
    In a letter dated June 14, 2021, Xellia requested that FDA withdraw
approval of ANDA 203177 under Sec.  314.150(d) and waived its
opportunity for a hearing. Therefore, for the reasons discussed above,
which the applicant does not dispute in its letter requesting
withdrawal of approval under Sec.  314.150(d), FDA's approval of ANDA
203177 and all amendments and supplements thereto, is withdrawn (see
DATES). Distribution of Xellia's bacitracin for injection (50,000
units/vial) into interstate commerce without an approved application is
illegal and subject to regulatory action (see sections 505(a) and
301(d) of the Federal Food,

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(a) and 331(d))).

    Dated: July 5, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-14680 Filed 7-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 240 (Friday, December 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59933-59936]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27019]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82259; File No. SR-IEX-2017-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 2 to the Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Schedule of Fees and Assessments To Adopt a Fee Schedule To Establish
Fees for Industry Members Related to the National Market System Plan
Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail

December 11, 2017.
    On May 9, 2017, Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
adopt a fee schedule to establish the fees for Industry Members related
to the National Market System Plan Governing the Consolidated Audit
Trail (``CAT NMS Plan''). The proposed rule change was published in the
Federal Register for comment on May 22, 2017.\3\ The Commission
received seven comment letters on the proposed

rule change,\4\ and a response to comments from the CAT NMS Plan
Participants.\5\ On June 30, 2017, the Commission temporarily suspended
and initiated proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change.\6\ The Commission thereafter received seven
comment letters,\7\ and a response to comments from the
Participants.\8\ On October 31, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No.
1 to the proposed rule change.\9\ On November 9, 2017, the Commission
extended the time period within which to approve the proposed rule
change or disapprove the proposed rule change to January 14, 2018.\10\
On December 4, 2017, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed
rule change, as described in Items I and II below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments from interested persons on Amendment No. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80692 (May 16,
2017), 82 FR 23325 (May 22, 2017) (``Original Proposal'').
    \4\ Since the CAT NMS Plan Participants' proposed rule changes
to adopt fees to be charged to Industry Members to fund the
consolidated audit trail are substantively identical, the Commission
is considering all comments received on the proposed rule changes
regardless of the comment file to which they were submitted. See
text accompanying note infra, for a list of the CAT NMS Plan
Participants. See Letter from Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director
and Associate General Counsel, Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission
(dated June 6, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbzx-2017-38/batsbzx201738-1788188-153228.pdf; Letter from
Patricia L. Cerny and Steven O'Malley, Compliance Consultants, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission (dated June 12, 2017),
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2017-040/cboe2017040-1799253-153675.pdf; Letter from Daniel Zinn, General
Counsel, OTC Markets Group Inc., to Eduardo A. Aleman, Assistant
Secretary, Commission (dated June 13, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2017-011/finra2017011-1801717-153703.pdf; Letter from Joanna Mallers, Secretary, FIA Principal
Traders Group, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission (dated June
22, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2017-040/cboe2017040-1819670-154195.pdf; Letter from Stuart J. Kaswell,
Executive Vice President and Managing Director, General Counsel,
Managed Funds Association, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission
(dated June 23, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2017-011/finra2017011-1822454-154283.pdf; and Letter from
Suzanne H. Shatto, Investor, to Commission (dated June 27, 2017),
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsedgx-2017-22/batsedgx201722-154443.pdf. The Commission also received a comment
letter which is not pertinent to these proposed rule changes. See
Letter from Christina Crouch, Smart Ltd., to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission (dated June 5, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbzx-2017-38/batsbzx201738-1785545-153152.htm.
    \5\ See Letter from CAT NMS Plan Participants to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission (dated June 29, 2017), available at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-1832632-154584.pdf.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81067 (June 30,
2017), 82 FR 31656 (July 7, 2017).
    \7\ See Letter from W. Hardy Callcott, Partner, Sidley Austin
LLP, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission (dated July 27,
2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-2148338-157737.pdf; Letter from Kevin Coleman,
General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer, Belvedere Trading LLC,
to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission (dated July 28, 2017),
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-2148360-157740.pdf; Letter from Joanna Mallers,
Secretary, FIA Principal Traders Group, to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission (dated July 28, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-2151228-157745.pdf; Letter from Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and
Associate General Counsel, SIFMA, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission (dated July 28, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-2150977-157744.pdf; Letter
from Stuart J. Kaswell, Executive Vice President and Managing
Director, General Counsel, Managed Funds Association, to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, Commission (dated July 28, 2017), available at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-2150818-157743.pdf; Letter from John Kinahan, Chief Executive
Officer, Group One Trading, L.P., to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission (dated August 10, 2017), available at: https://
www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2017-011/finra2017011-2214568-160619.pdf; Letter from Joseph Molluso, Executive Vice President and
CFO, Virtu Financial, to Brent J. Fields, Commission (dated August
18, 2017), available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2017-011/finra2017011-2238648-160830.pdf.
    \8\ See Letter from Michael Simon, Chair, CAT NMS Plan Operating
Committee, to Brent J. Fields, Commission, Secretary (dated November
2, 2017), available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-batsbyx-2017-11/batsbyx201711-2674608-161412.pdf.
    \9\ Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change replaced and
superseded the Original Proposal in its entirety. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 82258 (December 11, 2017).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82049 (November 9,
2017), 82 FR 53549 (November 16, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    On May 9, 2017, Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'' or ``SEC'') proposed rule change SR-IEX-2017-16 (the
``Original Proposal''), pursuant to which IEX proposed to adopt a fee
schedule to establish the fees for Industry Members related to the
National Market System Plan Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail (the
``CAT NMS Plan'' or ``Plan'').\11\ On October 31, 2017, IEX filed an
amendment to the Original Proposal (``First Amendment'') to amend the
Original Proposal. IEX files this proposed rule change (the ``Second
Amendment'') to amend the Original Proposal as amended by the First
Amendment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms used in this
fee filing are defined as set forth herein, the CAT Compliance Rule
Series, in the CAT NMS Plan, or the Original Proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.iextrading.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 the
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 statement 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
    BOX Options Exchange LLC, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Cboe BZX
Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.,
Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc., Cboe Exchange, Inc., Chicago Stock Exchange,
Inc., Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''),
Investors' Exchange LLC, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC,
MIAX PEARL, LLC, NASDAQ BX, Inc., Nasdaq GEMX, LLC, Nasdaq ISE, LLC,
Nasdaq MRX, LLC, NASDAQ PHLX LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, New York
Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc. and NYSE
National, Inc.\12\ (collectively, the ``Participants'') filed with the
Commission, pursuant to Section 11A of the Exchange Act \13\ and Rule
608 of Regulation NMS thereunder,\14\ the CAT NMS Plan.\15\ The
Participants filed the Plan to comply with Rule 613 of Regulation NMS
under the Exchange Act. The Plan was

published for comment in the Federal Register on May 17, 2016,\16\ and
approved by the Commission, as modified, on November 15, 2016.\17\ The
Plan is designed to create, implement and maintain a consolidated audit
trail (``CAT'') that would capture customer and order event information
for orders in NMS Securities and OTC Equity Securities, across all
markets, from the time of order inception through routing,
cancellation, modification, or execution in a single consolidated data
source. The Plan accomplishes this by creating CAT NMS, LLC (the
``Company''), of which each Participant is a member, to operate the
CAT.\18\ Under the CAT NMS Plan, the Operating Committee of the Company
(``Operating Committee'') has discretion to establish funding for the
Company to operate the CAT, including establishing fees that the
Participants will pay, and establishing fees for Industry Members that
will be implemented by the Participants (``CAT Fees'').\19\ The
Participants are required to file with the SEC under Section 19(b) of
the Exchange Act any such CAT Fees applicable to Industry Members that
the Operating Committee approves.\20\ Accordingly, IEX submitted the
Original Proposal to propose the Consolidated Audit Trail Funding Fees,
which would require Industry Members that are Exchange members to pay
the CAT Fees determined by the Operating Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Note that Bats BYX Exchange, Inc., Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.,
Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc., Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc., LLC, C2 Options
Exchange, Incorporated, and Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated, have been renamed Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Cboe BZX
Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.,
Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc., Cboe Exchange, Inc., respectively.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \14\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \15\ See Letter from the Participants to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Commission, dated September 30, 2014; and Letter from
Participants to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated
February 27, 2015. On December 24, 2015, the Participants submitted
an amendment to the CAT NMS Plan. See Letter from Participants to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, Commission, dated December 23, 2015.
    \16\ Securities Exchange Act Rel. No. 77724 (Apr. 27, 2016), 81
FR 30614 (May 17, 2016).
    \17\ Securities Exchange Act Rel. No. 79318 (Nov. 15, 2016), 81
FR 84696 (Nov. 23, 2016) (``Approval Order'').
    \18\ The Plan also serves as the limited liability company
agreement for the Company.
    \19\ Section 11.1(b) of the CAT NMS Plan.
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission published the Original Proposal for public comment
in the Federal Register on May 16, 2017,\21\ and received comments in
response to the Original Proposal or similar fee filings by other
Participants.\22\ On June 30, 2017, the Commission suspended, and
instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove,
the Original Proposal.\23\ The Commission received seven comment
letters in response to those proceedings.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80692 (May 16, 2017),
82 FR 23325 (May 22, 2017) (SR-IEX-2017-16).
    \22\ For a summary of comments, see generally Securities
Exchange Act Rel. No. 81067 (June 30, 2017), 82 FR 31656 (July 7,
2017) (``Suspension Order'').
    \23\ Suspension Order.
    \24\ See Letter from Stuart J. Kaswell, Executive Vice
President, Managing Director and General Counsel, Managed Funds
Association, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, SEC (July 28, 2017);
Letter from Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and Associate
General Counsel, SIFMA, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, SEC (July 28,
2017); Joanna Mallers, Secretary, FIA Principal Traders Group, to
Brent J. Fields, Secretary, SEC (July 28, 2017); Letter from Kevin
Coleman, General Counsel & Chief Compliance Officer, Belvedere
Trading LLC, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary, SEC (July 28, 2017);
Letter from W. Hardy Callcott, Sidley Austin LLP, to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, SEC (July 27, 2017); Letter from John Kinahan,
Chief Executive Officer, Group One Trading, L.P., to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, SEC (Aug. 10, 2017); and Letter from Joseph
Molluso, Executive Vice President, Virtu Financial, to Brent J.
Fields, Secretary, SEC (Aug. 18, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the comments on the Original Proposal, the Operating
Committee determined to make the following changes to the funding
model: (1) Adds two additional CAT Fee tiers for Equity Execution
Venues; (2) discounts the market share of Execution Venue ATSs
exclusively trading OTC Equity Securities as well as the market share
of the FINRA over-the-counter reporting facility (``ORF'') by the
average shares per trade ratio between NMS Stocks and OTC Equity
Securities (calculated as 0.17% based on available data from the second
quarter of 2017) when calculating the market share of Execution Venue
ATS exclusively trading OTC Equity Securities and FINRA; (3) discounts
the Options Market Maker quotes by the trade to quote ratio for options
(calculated as 0.01% based on available data for June 2016 through June
2017) when calculating message traffic for Options Market Makers; (4)
discounts equity market maker quotes by the trade to quote ratio for
equities (calculated as 5.43% based on available data for June 2016
through June 2017) when calculating message traffic for equity market
makers; (5) decreases the number of tiers for Industry Members (other
than the Execution Venue ATSs) from nine to seven; (6) changes the
allocation of CAT costs between Equity Execution Venues and Options
Execution Venues from 75%/25% to 67%/33%; (7) adjusts tier percentages
and recovery allocations for Equity Execution Venues, Options Execution
Venues and Industry Members (other than Execution Venue ATSs); (8)
focuses the comparability of CAT Fees on the individual entity level,
rather than primarily on the comparability of affiliated entities; (9)
commences invoicing of CAT Reporters as promptly as possible following
the latest of the operative date of the Consolidated Audit Trail
Funding Fees for each of the Participants and the operative date of the
CAT NMS Plan amendment adopting CAT Fees for Participants; and (10)
requires the proposed fees to automatically expire two years from the
operative date of the CAT NMS Plan amendment adopting CAT Fees for
Participants. On October 31, 2017, IEX filed the First Amendment and
proposed to amend the Original Proposal to reflect these changes.
    IEX submits this Second Amendment to the revise the proposal as set
forth in the First Amendment to discount the OTC Equity Securities
market share of all Execution Venue ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities,
rather than applying the discount solely to those Execution Venue ATSs
that exclusively trade OTC Equity Securities, when calculating the
market share of Execution Venue ATS trading OTC Equity Securities. As
discussed in the First Amendment:

    The Operating Committee determined to discount the market share
of Execution Venue ATSs exclusively trading OTC Equity Securities as
well as the market share of the FINRA ORF in recognition of the
different trading characteristics of the OTC Equity Securities
market as compared to the market in NMS Stocks. Many OTC Equity
Securities are priced at less than one dollar--and a significant
number at less than one penny--per share and low-priced shares tend
to trade in larger quantities. Accordingly, a disproportionately
large number of shares are involved in transactions involving OTC
Equity Securities versus NMS Stocks. Because the proposed fee tiers
are based on market share calculated by share volume, Execution
Venue ATSs exclusively trading OTC Equity Securities and FINRA would
likely be subject to higher tiers than their operations may
warrant.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See SR-IEX-2017-16, Amendment 2, Section 3(a), at page 23.

    The Operating Committee believes that this argument applies equally
to both Execution Venue ATSs exclusively trading OTC Equity Securities
and to Execution Venue ATSs that trade OTC Equity Securities as well as
other securities. Accordingly, IEX proposes to amend paragraph (b)(2)
of the Consolidated Audit Trail Funding Fees to apply the discount to
all Execution Venue ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities. Specifically,
IEX proposes to change the parenthetical regarding the OTC Equity
Securities discount in paragraph (b)(2) of the proposed fee schedule
from ``with a discount for Equity ATSs exclusively trading OTC Equity
Securities based on the average shares per trade ratio between NMS
Stocks and OTC Equity Securities'' to ``with a discount for OTC Equity
Securities market share of Equity ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities
based on the average shares per trade ratio between NMS Stocks and OTC
Equity Securities.''
2. Statutory Basis
    IEX believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions

of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\26\ which require, among other things,
that the Exchange's rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest, and not designed to permit unfair discrimination
between customers, issuers, brokers and dealer, and Section 6(b)(4) of
the Act, \27\ which requires that the Exchange's rules provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. IEX
believes that the proposed change is consistent with the Act, and that
the proposed fees are reasonable, equitably allocated and not unfairly
discriminatory. In particular, IEX believes that the proposed change
would treat all Equity ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities in a
comparable manner when calculating applicable fees. In addition, the
fee structure takes into consideration distinctions in securities
trading operations of CAT Reporters, including all ATSs trading OTC
Equity Securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Section 6(b)(8) of the Act \28\ require that the Exchange's rules
not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate. IEX does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As previously
described, IEX believes that the proposed rule change fairly and
equitably allocates costs among CAT Reporters. In particular, the
proposed fee schedule is structured to impose comparable fees on
similarly situated CAT Reporters. IEX believes that the proposed change
would treat all Equity ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities in a
comparable manner when calculating applicable fees. In addition, the
fee structure takes into consideration distinctions in securities
trading operations of CAT Reporters, including all ATSs trading OTC
Equity Securities. Moreover, the Operating Committee believes that the
proposed changes address certain competitive concerns raised by
commenters related to ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 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

    IEX set forth responses to comments received regarding the Original
Proposal in the First Amendment. In addition, the proposed changes set
forth in this Second Amendment further respond to comments made
regarding ATSs trading OTC Equity Securities.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposal, as
amended by Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2, is consistent with the
Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-IEX-2017-16 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2017-16. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-IEX-2017-16, and should be submitted on
or before January 5, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-27019 Filed 12-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 26, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 102)]
[Notices]
[Page 30454-30455]
[DOCID:fr26my06-133]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: 71 FR 28892, May
18, 2006.

Status: Closed meeting.

Place: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Date and Time of Previously Announced Meeting: Monday, May 22, 2006, at
11 a.m. and Thursday, May 25, 2006, at 2 p.m.

Change in the Meeting: Additional items.
    The Commission considered the following item during the closed
meeting scheduled for Monday, May 22, 2006: Settlement of an injunctive
action.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(5), (7), (9)(B), (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(5),
(7), (9)(ii), and (10) permit consideration of the scheduled matters at
the closed meeting.
    The post-argument discussion previously announced for Monday, May
22, 2006 will be considered during the closed meeting on Thursday, May
25, 2006.
    Commissioner Atkins, as duty officer, determined that Commission
business required the above changes and that no earlier notice thereof
was possible.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted

or postponed, please contact: The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-
5400.

    Dated: May 22, 2006.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-4917 Filed 5-24-06; 11:16 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 40 (Thursday, February 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13658-13659]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04666]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP13-74-000]

Sierrita Gas Pipeline LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on February 8, 2013, Sierrita Gas Pipeline LLC
(Sierrita), P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, filed in
the above referenced docket an application pursuant to section 3 of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) requesting a Presidential Permit and
authorization to construct new border crossing pipeline facilities and
export of natural gas at the International

Boundary between the United States and Mexico in Pima County, Arizona,
all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection. Concurrent with this
filing, Sierrita filed an application under section 7(c) and Parts 157
and 284 of the NGA in Docket No. CP13-73-000, requesting authorization
to construct and operate a new 59 mile, 36-inch interstate natural gas
pipeline located between Tucson and Sasabe, Arizona. The filing 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 at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Mr.
Francisco Tarin, Director, Regulatory Affairs, Sierrita Gas Pipeline
LLC, P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, by telephone at
(719) 667-7517, by facsimile at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Ms. Sheila Tweed, Deputy General
Counsel or David K. Dewey, Associate Counsel, Sierrita Gas Pipeline
LLC, P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80944, by telephone at
(719) 520-4227, by facsimile at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: March 15, 2013.

    Dated: February 22, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-04666 Filed 2-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P