[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 53962]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21632]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Technical Standard Order (TSO)-C65a, Airborne Doppler Radar
Ground Speed and/or Drift Angle Measuring Equipment (For Air Carrier
Aircraft)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of cancellation of Technical Standard Order (TSO)-C65a,
Airborne Doppler Radar Ground Speed and/or Drift Angle Measuring
Equipment (For Air Carrier Aircraft).

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the FAA's cancellation of TSO-C65a. The
effect of the cancelled TSO will result in no new TSO-C65a design or
production approvals. However, cancellation will not affect current
production of articles with an existing TSO authorization (TSOA).
Articles produced under an existing TSOA can still be installed per the
existing airworthiness approvals.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Albert Sayadian, AIR-130, Federal
Aviation Administration, 470 L'Enfant Plaza, Suite 4102, Washington, DC
20024. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Doppler radar ground speed and/or drift angle measuring
equipment described by this TSO was used to provide inputs to
semiautomatic self-contained dead reckoning navigation systems which
were not continuously dependent on information derived from ground
based or external navigation aids. The system employed radar signals to
detect and measure ground speed and drift angle, using the aircraft
compass system as its directional reference. This approach is less
accurate than Inertial Navigation Systems (INS), and the use of an
external reference is required for periodic updates if acceptable
position accuracy is to be achieved on long range flights. Use of INS
and Global Positioning System (GPS) has rendered TSO-C65a Doppler
sensor equipment that provides inputs to dead reckoning navigation
systems obsolete.
    On August 18, 1983, the FAA published TSO-C65a. The FAA has no
record of any TSO-C65a applications dating back to 1990. Our research
indicates there are no new TSO-C65a applications in progress, and there
are no authorized manufacturers manufacturing, advertising, or selling
TSO-C65a compliant equipment. Given the obsolescence of the equipment,
and the lack of industry interest in new TSO-C65a product design, the
FAA is cancelling TSO-C65a.

Comments

    Request for comments of our proposed cancellation of TSO-C65a as
published in 77 FR 37470, June 21, 2012, produced no comments.
Conclusion
    TSO-C65a is cancelled effective February 1, 2013.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 28, 2012.
Susan J.M. Cabler,
Assistant Manager, Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-21632 Filed 8-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Bioequivalence of Sandoz methylphenidate osmotic-controlled release tablet with Concerta (Janssen-Cilag).


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 62 (Friday, March 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19281-19282]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7690]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9002-3]

Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 03/19/2012 Through 03/23/2012
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

EIS No. 20120080, Revised Final EIS, USACE, FL, Central and Southern
Florida Project, Broward County Water Preserve Areas, Updates Resulting
from Policy Changes that occurred since 2007 Civil Works Board
Approval, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD),
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, (CERP), Broward County, FL,
Review Period Ends: 04/30/2012, Contact: Angela E. Dunn<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120081, Draft EIS, USFWS, AK, Izembek National Wildlife
Refuge Land Exchange/Road Corridor,

Proposed Land Exchange for the Purpose of Construction of a Road
between Communities of King Cove and Cold Bay, USACE Section 10 and 404
Permits, AK, Comment Period Ends: 05/18/2012, Contact: Stephanie Brady
907-786-3357.
EIS No. 20120082, Final EIS, USFS, OR, Snow Basin Vegetation Management
Project, Proposal to Implementing Commercial Harvest of Timber, Post
Harvest Non-commercial Thinning, Whitman Ranger District, Wallowa-
Whitman Forest, Baker County, OR, Review Period Ends: 04/30/2012,
Contact: Dea Nelson<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120083, Final Supplement, BLM, NV, Upper Las Vegas Wash
Conservation Transfer Area (CTA), Propose to Establish a Final
Boundary, Implementation, Clark County, NV, Review Period Ends: 04/30/
2012, Contact: Gayle Marrs-Smith<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120084, Final EIS, USFS, FL, City of Tallahassee Southwestern
Transmission Line Project, Proposes to Construct, Operate and Maintain
a New Overhead 230-kilovolt (kV), Electric Transmission Line, Special-
Use-Permit (SUP), Apalachicola National Forest (ANF), Leon County, FL,
Review Period Ends: 04/30/2012, Contact: Harold Shenk<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120085, Final EIS, USN, WA, Trident Support Facilities
Explosives Handling Wharf (EHW-2), New Information, Construction and
Operating, Naval Base Kitsap Bangor, Silverdale, WA, Review Period
Ends: 04/30/2012, Contact: Christine Stevenson<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120086, Draft EIS, DOE, CO, Granby Pumping Plant Switchyard--
Windy Gap Substation Transmission Line Rebuild, To Replace Existing
Transmission Line with Double Circuit Transmission, Grand County, CO,
Comment Period Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Jim Hartman<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120087, Draft EIS, USFS, OR, Eden Ridge Timber Sales,
Implementation, Powers Ranger District, Rogue River-Siskiyou National
Forest, Coos County, OR, Comment Period Ends: 05/14/2012, Contact:
Wesley Crum<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120088, Second Draft EIS (Tiering), FHWA, IL, TIER 2--Elgin
O'Hare--West Bypass, Extending the Planning Period from 2030 to 2040,
Federal Approvals and Funding, Cook and DuPage Counties, IL, Comment
Period Ends: 05/14/2012, Contact: Norman Stoner<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway
Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration are Joint Lead
agencies for this project.
EIS No. 20120089, Final EIS, USFS, CA, Greys Mountain Ecological
Restoration Project, Proposed Forest Management Treatments to Reduce
Fire Hazard and Restore Forest Health, Sierra National Forest, Bass
Lake Ranger District, Madera and Mariposa Counties, CA, Review Period
Ends: 04/30/2012, Contact: Burt Stalter<PHONE_NUMBER> ext. 3208.
EIS No. 20120090, Draft EIS, USAF, AK, Modernization and Enhancement of
Ranges, Airspace, and Training Areas in the Joint Pacific Alaska Range
Complex, AK, Comment Period Ends: 06/07/2012, Contact: Mark Peterson
808-449-1078.

    The U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force are Joint Lead agencies for
this project.

EIS No. 20120091, Second Draft Supplement, BLM, AK, National Petroleum
Reserve -Alaska (NPR-A) Integrated Activity Plan, To Determine
Appropriate Management for BLM-Administrated Lands in the NPR-A, North
Slope Borough, AK, Comment Period Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Jim Ducker
907-271-3130.
EIS No. 20120092, Final EIS, USACE, LA, Louisiana Coastal Area
Barataria Basin Barrier Shoreline Restoration, To Restore the Barrier
Shoreline Ecosystem and Significantly Reduce the Loss of Estuarine and
Freshwater Wetlands, Caminada Headland in Lafourche and Jefferson
Parishes and Shell Islands in Plaquemines Parish, LA, Review Period
Ends: 04/30/2012, Contact: Dr. William P. Klein, Jr.<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20110440, Revised Draft EIS, USFS, ID, Idaho Panhandle National
Forests, Land Management Plan, Revises the 1987 Forest Plan,
Implementation, Boundary, Bonner, Kootenai, Benewah, and Shoshone
Counties, ID and Pend Oreille County, WA, Comment Period Ends: 05/07/
2012, Contact: Mary Farnsworth<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice
Published 01/13/2012; Extending Comment Period from 04/4/2012 to 05/07/
2012.
EIS No. 20110441, Revised Draft EIS, USFS, MT, Kootenai National Forest
Land Management Plan, Revises the 1987 Forest Plan, Implementation,
Lincoln, Sanders, Flathead Counties, MT and Bonner and Boundary
Counties, ID, Comment Period Ends: 04/04/2012, Contact: Paul Bradford
406-293-6211.

    Revision to FR Notice Published 01/06/2012; Extending Comment
Period from 04/04/2012 to 05/07/2012.

EIS No. 20120028, Draft EIS, USACE, CA, Clearwater Program, To Meet the
Wastewater Management Needs of the Joint Outfall System (JOS) Through
the Year 2050, Near San Pedro, Section 404 Permit, Los Angeles County,
CA, Comment Period Ends: 04/10/2012, Contact: Dr. Aaron O. Allen 805-
585-2148.

    Revision to FR Notice Published 2/10/2012; Comment Period Ends 04/
10/2012.

    Dated: March 27, 2012.
Cliff Rader,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2012-7690 Filed 3-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 142)]
[Notices]
[Page 42156-42158]
[DOCID:fr25jy06-121]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54174; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-40]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Its Short Stock Interest,
Dividend, and Merger Strategy Programs

July 19, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 28, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which items have been substantially prepared by Phlx.
Phlx has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge, pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
On July 18, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed
rule change.\5\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
    \5\ In Amendment No. 1, Phlx incorporated the proposed
definitions of the terms ``short stock interest strategy,''
``dividend strategy,'' and ``merger strategy'' into its fee schedule
and provided citations for the former definitions of ``dividend
spread'' and``merger spread'' in the purpose section of the
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Phlx proposes to amend its schedule of fees to provide for a rebate
of $0.08 per contract side for Registered Options Trader (``ROT'')
executions and $0.07 per contract side for specialist executions made
pursuant to a short stock interest strategy. In addition, the Exchange
proposes to impose a fee cap of $1,000 on equity option transaction and
comparison charges for short stock interest strategies executed on the
same trading day in the same options class and to assess a $0.05 per
contract side license fee for short stock interest strategies in
connection with certain products that carry license fees. The Exchange
is also proposing to amend its current definitions of dividend spread
transactions and merger spread transactions and to add the new
definitions for dividend, merger, and short stock interest strategies
to its fee schedule.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on Phlx's Web
site at http://www.phlx.com, at the Office of the Secretary at Phlx,

and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    a. Background. Currently, the Exchange provides a rebate for
certain contracts executed in connection with transactions occurring as
part of a dividend or merger strategy. Specifically, for those options
contracts executed pursuant to a dividend or merger strategy, the
Exchange rebates $0.08 per contract side for ROT executions and $0.07
per contract side for specialist executions on the business day before
the underlying stock's ex-date. The ex-date is the date on or after
which a security is traded without a previously declared dividend or
distribution.
    The net transaction and comparison charges after the rebate is
applied are capped at $1,750 for merger strategies executed on the same
trading day in the same options class and for dividend strategies on
the same day in the same options class, except for a security with a
declared dividend or distribution less than $0.25. In that instance,
the net transaction and comparison charges after the rebate is applied
are capped at $1,000 for dividend strategies on the same day in the
same options class.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ These fee caps are implemented after any applicable rebates
are applied to ROT and specialist equity option transaction and
comparison charges. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53529
(March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15508 (March 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A $0.05 per contract side license fee is imposed for dividend
strategies in connection with certain products that carry license
fees.\7\ The license fee is assessed on every transaction and is not
subject to the $1,750 or $1,000 fee cap, nor does it count towards
reaching the fee caps. The $1,000 and $1,750 fee caps and the $0.05 per
contract side license fee are subject to a pilot program scheduled to
expire on September 1, 2006.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For a complete list of these product symbols, see the
Exchange's $60,000 Firm-Related Equity Option and Index Option Cap
Fee Schedule.
    \8\ These fee caps are implemented after any applicable rebates
are applied to ROT and specialist equity option transaction and
comparison charges. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53529
(March 21, 2006), 71 FR 15508 (March 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. Proposal. Phlx proposes to amend its schedule of fees to provide
for a rebate of $0.08 per contract side for ROT executions and $0.07
per contract side for specialist executions made pursuant to a short
stock interest strategy. The Exchange proposes to define a short stock
interest strategy as ``transactions done to achieve a short stock
interest arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and exercise of in-the-
money options of the same class.''
    In addition, the Exchange proposes to impose a fee cap of $1,000 on
equity option transaction and comparison charges for short stock
interest strategies executed on the same trading day in the same
options class. Similar to the fee caps currently in effect in
connection with dividend and merger spread transactions,\9\ the fee cap
will be implemented after any applicable rebates are applied to ROT and
specialist equity option transaction and comparison charges.
    In addition, the Exchange is proposing to assess a $0.05 per
contract side license fee for short stock interest strategies in
connection with certain products that carry license fees.\10\ The
applicable license fee will be assessed on every transaction and will
not be subject to the $1,000 fee cap, nor will it count towards
reaching the $1,000 fee cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Id.
    \10\ For a complete list of these product symbols, see the
Exchange's $60,000 Firm-Related Equity Option and Index Option Cap
Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The short stock interest strategy rebate, $1,000 fee cap and $0.05
per contract side license fee would be effective beginning with trades
settling on or after July 1, 2006. The short stock interest strategy
$1,000 fee cap and $0.05 per contract side license fee

would remain in effect as a pilot program that is scheduled to expire
on September 1, 2006.\11\ Consistent with the current rebate program
for dividend and merger strategies,\12\ any rebate request forms for
short stock interest strategies would have to be submitted to the
Exchange three business days following the end of the previous month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The proposed pilot program will be in effect for the same
time period as the $1,000 and $1,750 fee caps and the $0.05 per
contract side license fee that is scheduled to expire on September
1, 2006. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53529 (March 21,
2006), 71 FR 15508 (March 28, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-16).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53094 (January 10,
2006), 71 FR 2975 (January 18, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2005-75).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing to amend its current definitions of
dividend spread transactions and merger spread transactions
(hereinafter referred to as ``dividend strategy,'' ``merger strategy,''
or ``dividend and merger strategies,'' as applicable) and update its
fee schedule accordingly.
    First, the Exchange proposes to amend the definitions of dividend
and merger strategies in order to clarify that transactions done to
achieve a dividend or merger arbitrage do not necessarily need to be
``spreads'' in order to qualify for the fee cap and rebate program
currently in effect. It is the Exchange's understanding that each of
these strategies can be achieved either by purchasing and selling the
same option series or different options series. Accordingly, as
explained in further detail below, the Exchange proposes to revise each
definition to refer to each strategy as a ``strategy'' instead of as a
``spread'' and to change each definition in certain respects to make
clear that transactions done to achieve a dividend or merger arbitrage
that involve only one options series may also qualify for the above-
referenced fee cap and rebate.
    Second, the Exchange is proposing changes to the definition of each
strategy to better reflect the similarities between the strategies.
Dividend and merger strategies are strategies that have similar
economic risks and are executed in similar ways. Each definition would
be clarified to reflect that each strategy involves the ``purchase,
sale and exercise'' of options. Each definition would also be clarified
to reflect that the options involved must be of the ``same class.''
    The Exchange currently defines a dividend strategy for purposes of
the rebate and fee cap as ``any trade done within a defined time frame
pursuant to a strategy in which a dividend arbitrage can be achieved
between any two deep-in-the-money options.'' \13\ The Exchange proposes
to change ``dividend spread'' to ``dividend strategy,'' and proposes to
define a dividend strategy as ``transactions done to achieve a dividend
arbitrage involving the purchase, sale and exercise of in-the-money
options of the same class, executed prior to the date on which the
underlying stock goes ex-dividend.'' The word ``two'' is not included
in the new definition so that transactions involving only a single
options series that are done to achieve a dividend arbitrage may also
qualify for the fee cap and rebate. The word ``deep'' is also not
included in the new definition because the options used do not
necessarily need to be deep-in-the-money options and also because of
the difficulty in defining what constitutes ``deep'' in-the-money. The
definition is clarified by making explicit two requirements: the
options must be of the same class and the transactions must be effected
on the day prior to the date on which the underlying stock goes ex-
dividend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 53094 (January 10,
2006), 71 FR 2975 (January 18, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2005-75) and 51596
(April 21, 2005), 70 FR 22381 (April 29, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently defines a merger strategy for purposes of
the fee cap and rebate as a ``transaction executed pursuant to a merger
spread strategy involving the simultaneous purchase and sale of options
of the same class and expiration date, but with different strike
prices, followed by the exercise of the resulting long options
position, each executed prior to the date on which shareholders of
record are required to elect their respective form of consideration,
i.e., cash or stock.'' \14\ The Exchange proposes to change ``merger
spread'' to ``merger strategy,'' and proposes to define a merger
strategy as ``transactions done to achieve a merger arbitrage involving
the purchase, sale and exercise of options of the same class and
expiration date, executed prior to the date on which shareholders of
record are required to elect their respective form of consideration,
i.e., cash or stock.'' The proposed definition does not include the
words ``but with different strike prices'' so that transactions
involving only a single options series that are done to achieve a
merger arbitrage may also qualify for the fee cap and rebate. The word
``simultaneous'' is also not included in the new definition because the
purchase and sale transactions do not necessarily need to be executed
simultaneously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that the purpose of the proposed rule
change is to attract additional order flow to the Exchange. The
Exchange believes that implementing a rebate and fee cap for short
stock interest spread strategies, similar to the rebates and fee caps
currently in place for dividend and merger strategy strategies, should
increase the Exchange's ability to compete with other options exchanges
for order flow in connection with this options strategy.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Other options exchanges currently allow for reduced and/or
capped fees for short interest spread transactions. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 53172 (January 24, 2006), 71 FR 5093
(January 31, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-07); 53412 (March 3, 2006), 71 FR
12752 (March 13, 2006) (SR-CBOE-2006-20); 53413 (March 3, 2006), 71
FR 13202 (March 14, 2006) (SR-PCX-2006-06); and 53415 (March 3,
2006), 71 FR 12745 (March 13, 2006) (SR-Amex-2006-10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also represents that the purpose of amending the
definitions of dividend strategies and merger strategies is to add
clarity and to make the definitions more consistent with each other and
with the proposed definition of short stock interest strategies, which
should in turn, reflect the similarities among the strategies.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,\16\ in general, and Section
6(b)(4),\17\ in particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of
reasonable fees and other charges among its members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that proposed rule change, as
amended, 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 either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change, as amended, has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \18\ and subparagraph
(f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder \19\ because it establishes or changes
a due, fee, or other charge. 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.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
    \20\ The effective date of the original proposed rule change is
June 28, 2006, the date of the original filing, and the effective
date of Amendment No. 1 is July 18, 2006, the filing date of the
amendment. For purposes of calculating the 60-day abrogation period
within which the Commission may summarily abrogate the proposed rule
change, as amended, under Section 19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, the
Commission considers the period to commence on July 18, 2006, the
date on which the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 1. See 15 U.S.C.
78s(b)(3)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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-Phlx-2006-40 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-40. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of Phlx. All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-Phlx-2006-40 and should be submitted on or before August 15, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-11792 Filed 7-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10591-10593]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03970]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71570; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2014-018]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to the Options Regulatory Fee

February 19, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 11, 2014, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by NASDAQ.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, entitled ``Options Pricing,''
at Section 5 governing pricing for NASDAQ members using the NASDAQ
Options Market (``NOM''), NASDAQ's facility for executing and routing
standardized equity and index options. Specifically, NOM proposes to
amend its fees to specify the frequency with which the Exchange may
change the Options Regulatory Fee (``ORF'').
    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated that the amendments be operative on March 3,
2014.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ proposes to amend its Rules at Chapter XV, Section 5 to
specify the frequency with which the Exchange may change the ORF. The
ORF is assessed by the Exchange on each member for all options
transactions executed or cleared by the member that are cleared by The
Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') in the customer range (i.e.,
transactions that clear in the customer account of the member's
clearing firm at OCC) regardless of the exchange on which the
transaction occurs.\3\ The fee is collected indirectly

from members through their clearing firms by OCC on behalf of the
Exchange. The dues and fees paid by members go into the general funds
of the Exchange, a portion of which is used to help pay the costs of
regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NOM Participants who do not transact an equities business on
the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC in a calendar year receive a refund of
the fees specified in Rule 7003(b) upon written notification to the
Exchange along with documentation evidencing that no equities
business was conducted on the NASDAQ Stock Market for that calendar
year. The Exchange accepts refund requests up until sixty (60) days
after the end of the calendar year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to feedback from market participants requesting greater
certainty as to when ORF changes may occur, the Exchange proposes to
specify in the Pricing Schedule that the Exchange may only increase or
decrease the ORF semi-annually, and any such fee change will be
effective on the first business day of February or August.\4\ In
addition to submitting a proposed rule change to the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') as required by the Act to increase
or decrease the ORF, the Exchange will notify participants via an
Options Trader Alert of any anticipated change in the amount of the fee
at least 30 calendar days prior to the effective date of the change.
The Exchange believes that by providing guidance on the timing of any
changes to the ORF, the Exchange would make it easier for market
participants to ensure their systems are configured to properly account
for the ORF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange monitors the amount of revenue collected from
the ORF so that it, in combination with its other regulatory fees
and fines, does not exceed regulatory costs. See, e.g., Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 65913 (December 8, 2011), 76 FR 77883
(December 14, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-163).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to limit changes to
the ORF to twice a year on specific dates with advance notice is
reasonable because it will give market participants certainty on the
timing of changes, if any, and better enable them to properly account
for ORF charges among their customers. The Exchange believes that the
proposed change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it
will apply in the same manner to all members that are subject to the
ORF and provide them with additional advance notice of changes to that
fee.

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose
an undue burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
intended to address a competitive issue but rather to provide members
with better notice of any change that the Exchange may make to the ORF.
In any event, because competitors are free to modify their own fees and
credits in response, and because market participants may readily adjust
their trading practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee or credit changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. As a result of all of these
considerations, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed change
will impair the ability of members, or competing order execution venues
to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\7\ At any time within 60 days of the filing
of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily
suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such
action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-018 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-NASDAQ-2014-018. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-018, and should
be submitted on or before March 18, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-03970 Filed 2-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 45996]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18362]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

Duoyuan Printing, Inc.; Order of Suspension: of Trading

 July 26, 2013.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Duoyuan Printing, Inc., because Duoyuan Printing, Inc. has not filed
any periodic reports for any reporting period subsequent to March 31,
2010.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of the investors require a suspension of trading in
securities of Duoyuan Printing, Inc.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in Duoyuan Printing, Inc.
is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, July 26, 2013, through
11:59 p.m. EDT, on August 8, 2013.

    By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. 2013-18362 Filed 7-26-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P