as an exclusive processor.\181\ Because NYSE Market will be engaging on
an exclusive basis on behalf of New York Stock Exchange LLC in
collecting, processing, or preparing for distribution or publication
information with respect to transactions or quotations on or effected
or made by means of a facility of New York Stock Exchange LLC, it is an
exclusive processor that will, as of the closing date of the Merger, be
required to register pursuant to Section 11A(b) of the Act.\182\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \178\ See NYSE Delegation Agreement, Section III.A.3.
    \179\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(b)(1).
    \180\ See Section 3(a)(22)(A) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.
78c(a)(22)(A), for the definition of a SIP. An SRO is explicitly
excluded from the definition of a SIP.
    \181\ Section 3(a)(22)(B) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(22)(B)
defines an exclusive processor. Rule 609 under the Act, 17 CFR
242.609, requires that the registration of a SIP be on Form SIP, 17
CFR 249.1001.
    \182\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(b)(1). An SRO that is an exclusive
processor is exempt from registration under Section 11A(b)(1) of the
Act because it is excluded from designation as a SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 11A(b)(1) of the Act \183\ provides that the Commission
may, by rule or order, upon its own motion or upon application by a
SIP, conditionally or unconditionally exempt any SIP from

any provision of Section 11A of the Act \184\ or the rules or
regulation thereunder, if the Commission finds that such exemption is
consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, and
the purposes of Section 11A of the Act,\185\ including the maintenance
of fair and orderly markets in securities and the removal of
impediments to and perfection of the mechanism of a national market
system.\186\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \183\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(b)(1).
    \184\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \185\ Id.
    \186\ See also Rule 609(c), 17 CFR 242.609(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission has determined to grant NYSE Market a temporary
exemption from registration under Section 11A(b)(1) of the Act and Rule
609 thereunder for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of
closing of the Merger, while an application for registration or an
application for an exemption pursuant to Section 11A(b)(1) of the Act
and Rule 609 thereunder is prepared.\187\ The Commission also has
determined to grant a conditional continuation of the 30-day temporary
exemption from registration of NYSE Market, conditioned upon its filing
of an application for registration or application for an exemption from
registration within the 30-day time period. Such continuation shall
continue for a period of 90 days following the end of the 30-day period
and will afford interested persons an opportunity to submit written
comments concerning the application filed with the Commission.\188\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \187\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 12079 (February 6,
1976) (order granting temporary exemption from SIP registration for
Nasdaq for (1) a period of 30 days following the consummation of the
sale of the Nasdaq system to NASD and the assignment of NASD's
rights in such purchase to Nasdaq, a subsidiary of NASD and (2) an
additional period of ninety (90) days following the day of
publication of notice of filing of an application for registration
or exemption from registration, if such application is received
within the original 30 days). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 13278 (February 17, 1977) (granting Bradford National
Clearing Corporation, which was to perform SIP functions for the
Pacific Exchange, a 90-day temporary exemption from registration as
a SIP pending Commission determination of Bradford's application for
a permanent exemption, such 90-day period to begin from the
consummation of the agreement calling for Bradford's assumption of
the SIP services) and 27957 (April 27, 1990), 55 FR 19140 (May 8,
1990) (granting NASD a 90-day temporary exemption from registration
of its subsidiary, Market Services, Inc., which was to operate
NASD's PORTAL market, as a SIP pending Commission review of its
application for registration filed with the Commission).
    \188\ Publication of notice of the filing of an application for
registration is required by Section 11A(b)(3) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.
78k-1(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon closing of the Merger, NYSE Market will succeed to the
exchange business of the NYSE and will be regulated as a facility of
New York Stock Exchange LLC.\189\ The Commission therefore finds that
such temporary exemptions are consistent with the public interest, the
protection of investors, and the purposes of Section 11A of the Act.
The exemptions are for a limited period of time during which the
Commission will have regulatory authority over NYSE Market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \189\ After the Merger, NYSE Market will hold all of the current
assets and liabilities of the NYSE other than its registration as a
national securities exchange and other than assets or liabilities
relating to regulator functions. See Notice, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Regulation and Disciplinary Process

    Currently, the regulatory responsibilities of the NYSE are
performed within the NYSE through the NYSE regulatory group.\190\ The
Office of the Hearing Board and the Chief Hearing Officer are not
currently within the NYSE regulatory group; instead, they report to the
NYSE board of directors through its regulatory oversight committee. The
heads of Corporate Audit and Regulatory Quality Review (``RQR'')
likewise currently report to the regulatory oversight committee with
respect of RQR functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \190\ This group is currently referred to as ``NYSE Regulation''
and was so referenced in the Notice. To avoid confusion with NYSE
Regulation, the not-for profit entity that will be a wholly owned
subsidiary of New York Stock Exchange LLC after the Merger, we are
referring to the current regulatory group as ``NYSE regulatory
group.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the Merger, the current NYSE regulatory group will operate as
NYSE Regulation, a separate not-for-profit entity. NYSE Regulation will
have the same responsibilities as the NYSE regulatory group's current
responsibilities, and will contract to provide certain regulatory
services to the Pacific Exchange. The NYSE Regulation board of
directors will perform all the functions of the current NYSE regulatory
oversight committee, with the Office of the Hearing Board and the RQR
reporting to the NYSE Regulation board.
    The NYSE has not proposed in this filing any changes to the initial
disciplinary process.\191\ Initial disciplinary hearings will be held
before a Hearing Panel, the members of which will be drawn from the
Hearing Board. The members of the Hearing Board will be appointed by
the chairman of NYSE Regulation, subject to the approval of the board
of directors of NYSE Regulation, as will a chief hearing officer and
one or more other hearing officers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \191\ The Commission notes that it has recently approved a rule
change by the NYSE that makes several substantive changes to NYSE
Rules 475 and 476. The NYSE does not intend to implement these
changes, however, until April 1, 2006. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 53124 (January 13, 2006), 71 FR 3595 (January 23, 2006).
For purposes of clarity, Exhibit 5A of Amendment No. 8 reflects the
changes proposed in this filing against the current operating
version of NYSE Rules 475 and 476. The NYSE represents that it will
file a proposed rule change to update Rules 475 and 476, as amended
by this proposed rule change, to reflect the changes that will be
implemented on April 1, 2006. See Amendment No. 8, supra note 9, at
7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE has proposed changes to its process for review of
disciplinary decisions. The proposed changes to NYSE Rules 475 and 476
provide that appeals of disciplinary decisions will be to the New York
Stock Exchange LLC board of directors. However, pursuant to the NYSE
Delegation Agreement, New York Stock Exchange LLC has delegated such
authority to the board of directors of NYSE Regulation. Action taken by
the board of directors of NYSE Regulation will be final action of the
New York Stock Exchange LLC.
    The NYSE has proposed that the board of directors of NYSE
Regulation will delegate the authority to hear disciplinary appeals to
the new Committee for Review, which will be the successor committee to
the current RELS Committee of the NYSE board of directors.\192\ The
Committee for Review will include both NYSE Regulation directors and
other individuals representing member constituencies. The NYSE
represented that the Committee for Review also is expected to include
individuals representing investor and listed company
constituencies.\193\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \192\ See proposed NYSE Regulation Bylaws, Article III, Section
5.
    \193\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 2093.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the division or department of NYSE Regulation that
brought the charges, the respondent, or any member of the board of
directors of NYSE Regulation, the proposed rules provide that any
member of the Committee for Review will be authorized to call up
disciplinary decisions of a Hearing Panel for review. In addition,
newly proposed Executive Floor Governors, who will include at least two
specialists and two floor brokers and will constitute the most senior
level of practitioner supervision on the trading floor,\194\ will be
able to call up disciplinary decisions for review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \194\ See proposed NYSE Rule 46A. Executive Floor Governors will
be appointed by the board of directors of New York Stock Exchange
LLC, in consultation with the board of directors of NYSE Regulation.
Executive Floor Governors shall generally have the responsibilities
of the current floor representatives on the Board of Executives,
including being able to call matters for review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE Regulation board of directors can elect to review
decisions by the Committee for Review. Any such

decision of the NYSE Regulation board of directors will be considered
final action of the exchange.\195\ There will be no review by the New
York Stock Exchange LLC board of directors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \195\ See NYSE Delegation Agreement at I and II.A.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the changes proposed to the disciplinary
process are consistent with the Act, in particular Sections 6(b)(6) and
6(b)(7) of the Act,\196\ in that they provide fair procedures for the
disciplining of members and persons associated with members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \196\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(6) and 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Trading Licenses; Access to NYSE Market

    Following the Merger, NYSE Market will issue Trading Licenses that
will entitle their holders to have physical and electronic access to
the trading facilities of NYSE Market, subject to the limitations and
requirements specified in the rules of the New York Stock Exchange
LLC.\197\ An organization may acquire and hold a Trading License only
if and for so long as such organization is qualified and approved to be
a member organization of New York Stock Exchange LLC. A member
organization holding a Trading License may designate a natural person
to effect transactions on its behalf on the floor of NYSE Market,
subject to such qualification and approvals as may be required in the
rules of the New York Stock Exchange LLC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \197\ The Trading Licenses will be issued pursuant to the
conditions and procedures outlined in proposed NYSE Rule 300. The
NYSE also proposed a transition rule, NYSE Rule 300T, covering the
initial sale of Trading Licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The price and number of Trading Licenses to be issued will be
determined annually by means of a Dutch auction, through which NYSE
Market will establish the clearing price (``Clearing Price'') at which
all Trading Licenses are sold.\198\ For each auction, NYSE Market will
determine the minimum price that a bidder will be required to pay for
each Trading License (``Minimum Bid Price''), which will be no greater
than 80% of the auction price at the last annual auction. Auction
participants may enter either priced bids or unpriced ``at the market''
bids. At the end of the auction, NYSE Market will select the highest
bid price that will allow it to maximize its auction revenue. The
Clearing Price, however, may not be greater than the price that will
result in the sale of at least 1,000 Trading Licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \198\ Trading Licenses for the following calendar year will be
sold annually through an auction conducted in December. The price of
a Trading License will be payable in equal monthly installments in
advance over the period in which the Trading License is in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Market will not sell in the auction more than 1,366 Trading
Licenses. If the bids at the Clearing Price would bring the total
number of licenses to be sold to more than 1,366, NYSE Market will
first sell licenses to the unpriced ``at the market'' bids and higher
priced bids, and then will allocate the remaining available Trading
Licenses among the bids at the Clearing Price by lot. NYSE Market also
may, in its discretion, sell the number of Trading Licenses determined
by the Clearing Price at a price less than the Clearing Price, but not
lower than the Minimum Bid Price.
    If there are insufficient bids at the Minimum Bid Price (including
unpriced ``at the market'' bids) for the purchase of at least 1,000
Trading Licenses, NYSE Market may sell the largest number of Trading
Licenses that can be sold at the Minimum Bid Price, even if such number
of Trading Licenses is less than 1,000. NYSE Market also may choose to
conduct another auction or auctions and set a new Minimum Bid Price
(which may be lower than the initial Minimum Bid Price) and NYSE Market
will not be required to establish a Clearing Price that will result in
the sale of at least 1,000 Trading Licenses.
    In each auction, NYSE Market will limit the number of Trading
Licenses that may be bid for by a single member organization to a
number that is the greater of (i) 35 and (ii) 125% of the number of
Trading Licenses utilized by that member organization in its business
immediately prior to the auction.
    Except for the Trading Licenses to be issued for the year in which
the Merger occurs, each Trading License will be valid for one year.
Trading Licenses will not be transferable, and may not be assigned,
sublicensed, or leased, in whole or in part.\199\ Trading Licenses may
be transferred, however, with the prior written consent of NYSE Market,
to a qualified and approved member organization that (i) is an
affiliate of the Trading License holder, or (ii) continues
substantially the same business of the Trading License holder without
regard to the form of the transaction used to achieve such continuation
(e.g., merger, sale of substantially all assets, reincorporation,
reorganization or similar transaction).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \199\ Accordingly, lease-related provisions of the NYSE
Constitution will not be carried over and any references to leases
in the NYSE Rules will be deleted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the periods between auctions, NYSE Market will make
available for sale additional Trading Licenses. The price for Trading
Licenses sold between auctions will be equal to the auction price of
the most recent auction, plus a premium of ten percent (10%), with the
total prorated to reflect the amount of time remaining in the year.
NYSE Market will not issue in any one year more than 1,366 Trading
Licenses.
    Trading Licenses will expire at the end of the calendar year for
which they are issued. However, the holder of a Trading License may
terminate the license prior to the end of the calendar year by
providing at least ten days' prior written notice to NYSE Market of
such termination and paying a termination fee equal to one monthly
installment of the Trading License Price. In addition, if a Trading
License holder has ceased to be a member organization of New York Stock
Exchange LLC for any reason, such holder will be deemed to have
terminated its Trading License as of the date it ceased to be a member
organization.
    The NYSE also proposed to establish auction procedures for the
issuance of Trading Licenses in the year in which the Merger occurs.
Under proposed NYSE Rule 300T, the first auction will be conducted in
accordance with the procedures outlined in proposed NYSE Rule 300,
except that a maximum bid price (``Maximum Bid Price'') also will be
established. The Minimum Bid Price and Maximum Bid Price will be 80%
and 120%, respectively, of the average annual lease price for leases
(including renewal leases), which leases (or renewals) commenced during
the six-month period ending on the last business day of the last
calendar month ending at least thirty days before the opening of the
auction. Trading Licenses issued in such auction will expire at the end
of the calendar year in which the Merger occurs.
    The Commission observes that the NYSE's proposal makes certain
modifications to the Dutch auction model that are designed to provide
that qualified member organizations will have fair access to NYSE
Market. In particular, the proposed rules restrict the number of
Trading Licenses that each member organization may bid for in an
auction to the greater of 35 Trading Licenses and 125% of the Trading
Licenses used by such member organization in its business immediately
prior to the auction. In addition, the Dutch auction procedure for
issuing Trading Licenses requires that the Minimum Bid Price be set at
a price that is no greater than 80% of the prior year's auction price.
    The proposal also restricts NYSE Market from selecting an auction
Clearing Price greater than the price

needed to sell 1,000 Trading Licenses, provided that the Clearing Price
is at least the Minimum Bid Price. Moreover, the provision that allows
NYSE Market to sell additional Trading Licenses at a 10% premium from
the auction price, subject to the overall limitation of 1,366
outstanding Trading Licenses, will provide new member organizations,
member organizations that did not bid successfully in the auction, or
member organizations with a need for additional licenses with the
opportunity to obtain Trading Licenses outside of the auction.
    The Commission further notes that each Trading License will include
the rights to electronic and physical access to the trading facilities
of NYSE Market, which are substantially similar to the access rights of
current NYSE seat holders and lessees. In addition, the proposal
provides that the aggregate number of Trading Licenses to be issued in
any one year will be limited to 1,366, a figure that is equal to the
number of seats under the NYSE's current structure.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that proposed NYSE
Rules 300 and 300T provide fair access to member organizations with
respect to the issuance of Trading Licenses by NYSE Market and are
consistent with the Act and in particular with Sections 6(b)(2) and
6(b)(5) of the Act.\200\ The Commission believes it would not be
consistent with the Act and in particular Section 6(b)(5), which
prohibits the rules of an exchange from unfairly discriminating between
broker-dealers, to provide information about the auction to one member
that is not available to all members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \200\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(2) and 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In essence, the Dutch auction mechanism for issuing Trading
Licenses involves the setting of a fee by NYSE Market for member
organizations seeking access to the facility of an exchange. Thus, the
proposed rules governing the Dutch auction procedure also must be
examined in light of the requirement of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act
\201\ that these rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and charges among members and issuers and other
persons using the NYSE Market. The NYSE asserts that pricing Trading
Licenses through a Dutch auction will establish a reasonable price
because the price is determined by the ``market,'' that is, by member
organizations that wish to obtain Trading Licenses. The NYSE also
states that the Dutch auction mechanism will allow each member
organization to determine the price that it is willing to pay for a
Trading License, subject to the auction procedures. Moreover, the NYSE
notes that the Dutch auction mechanism for issuance of Trading Licenses
is not dissimilar from the manner in which access to the NYSE was
traditionally priced, with supply and demand governing the price at
which traditional memberships were purchased or leased.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \201\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that proposed NYSE Rules 300 and 300T are
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act.\202\ With respect to the
price for Trading Licenses that will be sold between auctions, the NYSE
states that the price for such Trading Licenses is reasonable because
it is based on the latest actual auction price, but with a 10% premium.
The NYSE asserts that this premium is necessary to encourage
participation in the annual auction as a way to promote price and
quantity discovery in the auction, and also to defray out-of-cycle
administrative costs. In the Commission's view, the Act does not
require the NYSE to charge the same fee for Trading Licenses sold
between auctions as for those licenses sold in the auction. Rather, the
Act requires that the rules of an exchange provide for an equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. The
Commission believes that it is reasonable for NYSE Market to impose a
10% premium for Trading Licenses that are sold between auctions as a
means to encourage participation in the auction and to help defray
administrative costs for issuing Trading Licenses outside of the
auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \202\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). NYSE Market conducted its first
auction and announced that following the Merger, it will issue 1,274
Trading Licenses at a price of $49,290 each. The Commission notes
that the NYSE cannot issue Trading Licenses at the price established
by such auction until the Commission approves this proposed rule
change, as amended. The NYSE represented that, at that time, New
York Stock Exchange LLC will file a proposed rule change under
Section 19(b)(1) of the Act to amend its fee schedule to set forth
the price at which Trading Licenses will be sold in the auction and
the price at which Trading Licenses will be sold before the next
auction. The NYSE also represented that New York Stock Exchange LLC
will file a similar proposed rule change following each subsequent
annual auction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission received three comment letters on the Trading
Licenses proposal.\203\ The IBAC December Letter objected to the NYSE's
plan to hold the initial Trading License auction on December 20,
2005.\204\ IBAC argued that, while the results of the initial auction
would not be effective until the approval of the proposed rule change,
the exchange's holding the auction prior to the end of the comment
period contravened the statutory process for proposed rule changes
under Section 19(b)(1) of the Act. In Amendment No. 5, the NYSE
disagreed that holding the initial auction prior to the proposal's
approval would prejudice IBAC's ability to comment. The NYSE stated
that provisionally conducting the initial auction would give members
and others increased certainty in planning for post-Merger business and
also provide the NYSE and the Commission with the opportunity to
observe whether the auction procedures resulted in a fair and orderly
pricing of the Trading Licenses and fair access to the facilities of
the exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \203\ See IBAC December Letter, IBAC February Letter, and SIA/
TBMA Letter, supra note 6.
    \204\ See IBAC December Letter, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The IBAC February Letter claimed that the proposed auction process
for Trading Licenses could have a significant burden on competition,
and noted that the NYSE failed to justify this burden in the proposal's
Form 19b-4.\205\ IBAC asserted that, the proposed rule change, along
with NYSE's Hybrid Market proposal,\206\ would unfairly disadvantage
floor brokers and their customers. IBAC also expressed concern that in
future auctions specialists and large institutional broker-dealers
could bid for an increasingly higher number of licenses (up to 125% of
their prior year's allotment) and at higher prices than the prior
year's auction price. IBAC argued that, as a result, it could be
difficult for floor brokers to purchase Trading Licenses and compete
with these larger firms. IBAC recommended that each auction for Trading
Licenses have both a minimum and maximum bid price set at 20% below and
above the prior year's auction price, respectively; that existing
holders be entitled to acquire a Trading License in the following year
at a price equal to the prior year's clearing price, plus a maximum 20%
premium; and that stricter bidding limits be imposed to prevent an
excessive concentration of Trading Licenses by one or more firms over
time.\207\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \205\ See IBAC February Letter, supra note 6, at 17-19.
    \206\ See SR-NYSE-2004-05.
    \207\ See IBAC February Letter, supra note 6, at 22-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE Response to Comments disputed that the auction procedures
to price and allocate Trading Licenses would create a burden on
competition.\208\ The NYSE noted that the IBAC February Letter
suggested that most IBAC members currently lease seats on the exchange.
The NYSE pointed out that the competitive

concerns that the IBAC February Letter raised are similar to the
competitive risks that floor brokers and other lessees currently face
in the seat lease market. The NYSE noted that seat leases, like the
proposed Trading Licenses, are typically one-year contracts and prices
for these leases are negotiated on an annual basis. The NYSE also noted
that, under its existing structure, lessees had no assurance that they
could continue to lease seats or that the price of their leases would
not increase to a level that would be difficult for them to pay. The
NYSE noted that to the extent a member organization today expanded its
number of memberships, there could be economic pressure on the finite
supply of seats.\209\ The NYSE further contended that, under the
proposed rule change, floor brokers would have greater protection than
they currently have, because there would be a limit on the number of
Trading Licenses that a member organization may bid for in each
auction.\210\ Finally, the NYSE asserted that the exchange is not
statutorily compelled to adopt measures like the ones proposed by IBAC
to protect floor brokers or any other group of users from market
vicissitudes.\211\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \208\ See NYSE Response to Comments, supra note 7, at 16-18.
    \209\ Id. at 17.
    \210\ Id.
    \211\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to IBAC's argument that the NYSE's proposed rule
change would impose burdens on competition and would unfairly
discriminate against floor brokers, the Commission believes that the
proposed auction procedures for pricing and allocating Trading Licenses
are consistent with the Act. In particular, the Commission believes
that these proposed procedures will provide a fair opportunity for
floor brokers to acquire Trading Licenses and therefore that such
procedures are not unfairly discriminatory and will not impose a burden
on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.\212\ In addition, the exchange has represented
that after each auction it will file with the Commission a proposed
rule change that sets forth the price for Trading Licenses to be issued
in the auction and between auctions. Thus, interested persons will have
the opportunity to comment annually on the fees to be charged, and
their impact on the ability to compete, for Trading Licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \212\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) and 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIA/TBMA Letter argued that the NYSE's proposal to offer
Trading Licenses that provide full access to NYSE Market does not
provide for fair access by smaller broker-dealers that trade debt
securities.\213\ The SIA/TBMA Letter noted that the NYSE has submitted
to the Commission an exemptive request to permit unlisted debt
securities to be traded on its Automated Bond System. The SIA/TBMA
Letter contended that the proposed rule change would compel smaller
debt dealers to either forego direct access to NYSE's Automated Bond
System or apply for equity trading rights that they do not need. The
NYSE Response to Comments expressed skepticism that small debt dealers
currently are paying to own or lease NYSE memberships to access its
Automated Bond System.\214\ Thus, the NYSE surmised that the SIA/TBMA
Letter's comments pertained to its pending exemptive application to
trade unlisted debt securities on its Automated Bond System. The NYSE
stated that, if NYSE Market ultimately is able to trade unlisted debt
securities and, as a result, debt-only dealers are interested in direct
access to the Automated Bond System, NYSE Market likely would be
interested in determining how direct access can be provided with
fairness to those debt dealers, NYSE Market, and other participants in
the market for debt securities.\215\ The NYSE noted that the need for
direct access to its Automated Bond System has not been an issue for
smaller debt-only broker-dealers under its current structure and thus
the Trading License proposal is not deficient with respect to fair
access by these debt market participants.\216\ The NYSE further stated
that it may decide in the future to issue separate licenses for
electronic only access or access limited to particular products. The
Commission agrees with the NYSE and believes that the NYSE's proposal
will continue to provide fair access to trading of securities on its
market, including debt securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \213\ See SIA/TBMA Letter, supra note 6, at 20.
    \214\ See NYSE Response to Comments, supra note 7, at 18.
    \215\ Id.
    \216\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Listing and Allocation of NYSE Group's or an Affiliate's Securities

    NYSE Group intends to list its shares of common stock for trading
on New York Stock Exchange LLC. The Commission believes that such
``self-listing'' raises questions as to an SRO's ability to
independently and effectively enforce its own and the Commission's
rules against itself or an affiliated entity, and thus comply with its
statutory obligations under the Act.\217\ For instance, an SRO might be
reluctant to vigorously monitor for compliance with its initial and
continued listing rules by the securities of an affiliated issuer or
its own securities, and may be tempted to allow its own securities, or
the securities of an affiliate, to be listed (and continue to be
listed) on the SRO's market even if the security is not in full
compliance with the SRO's listing rules. Similar conflicts of interest
could arise in which the SRO might choose to selectively enforce, or
not enforce, its trading rules with respect to trading in its own stock
or that of an affiliate so as to benefit itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \217\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51123 (February
2, 2005), 70 FR 6743 (February 8, 2005) (SR-NASD-2004-169), and
50171 (August 9, 2004), 69 FR 50427 (August 16, 2004) (SR-PCX-2004-
76).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In an effort to minimize any potential conflicts involving the
listing of its own securities or those of an affiliate (together,
``Affiliated Securities''), the NYSE has proposed that an Affiliated
Security may not be approved for listing on New York Stock Exchange LLC
unless NYSE Regulation finds that such security satisfies New York
Stock Exchange LLC's rules for listing, and such finding is approved by
the NYSE Regulation board of directors prior to such listing.\218\
However, such proposed procedure will not apply to the initial listing
of the common stock of NYSE Group because proposed NYSE Rule 497 will
not be in effect, the Merger will not have closed, and the NYSE
Regulation board of directors will not have been constituted as
contemplated in proposed NYSE Rule 497 prior to the time by which the
initial listing of the NYSE Group common stock must be approved.
Instead, the initial listing of NYSE Group common stock will be
reviewed by the regulatory staff of NYSE and approved by the Regulatory
Oversight Committee of the current board of directors of NYSE, as the
most logical predecessor to the NYSE Regulation board.\219\ In light of
these circumstances, the Commission finds that the proposed procedure
for the initial listing of the NYSE Group common stock is consistent
with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \218\ See proposed NYSE Rule 497. In Amendment No. 8, the NYSE
proposes to clarify that such approval by the NYSE Reguolation board
of directors must be prior to initial listing.
    \219\ See Notice, supra note 5, at note 38 and accompanying
text, and proposed NYSE Rule 4971, as included in Amendment No. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To minimize any potential conflicts that could arise relating to
the selective enforcement, or non-enforcement, of the listing or
trading rules of New York Stock Exchange LLC with respect to continued
listing of and trading in any Affiliated Security, the NYSE has

proposed to prepare and send to the Commission a quarterly report
summarizing NYSE Regulation's monitoring of an Affiliated Security's
compliance with listing standards and its monitoring of trading in such
securities.\220\ The NYSE has proposed that any notification of lack of
compliance with any applicable listing standard from NYSE Regulation to
NYSE Group or an affiliate, and any corresponding plan of compliance,
must be reported to the Commission.\221\ Proposed NYSE Rule 497(d) also
will require an annual audit of compliance by NYSE Group or the
affiliated issuer with the listing standards by an independent
accounting firm. The Commission believes that the proposed procedures
for monitoring of the listing of and trading in Affiliated Securities
are consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \220\ See proposed NYSE Rule 497(c).
    \221\ See proposed NYSE Rule 497(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the NYSE proposes to amend NYSE Rule 103B, the
Allocation Policy, with respect to the allocation of NYSE Group stock
to (i) give NYSE Group the right to determine the number and identity
of specialist firms that will be included in the group from which it
shall choose its specialist, provided the group consists of at least
four specialist firms, and (ii) provide NYSE Group with the same
material with respect to each specialist firm applicant as would have
been reviewed by the Allocation Committee in allocating other
securities. All other aspects of the policy will continue to apply. The
NYSE stated in the Notice, that it expects that the independent
directors of NYSE Group will select the specialist for NYSE Group
common stock.\222\ The NYSE also stated in the Notice that it proposed
this change to the Allocation Policy in recognition of the special
circumstances involved in determining which of its specialist firms
will be the specialist for the NYSE Group's stock. The Commission finds
this proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \222\ See Notice, supra note 5, at 2094.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Regulatory Funding

    The NYSE has identified several different sources of revenue for
its regulatory program. An exchange has the authority to assess its
members to cover its costs of regulation, subject to the requirements
of the Act. New York Stock Exchange LLC has delegated this authority to
NYSE Regulation with respect to regulatory and certain other fees.
Subject to Commission approval, NYSE Regulation will determine, assess,
collect, and retain examination, access, registration, qualification,
continuing education, arbitration, dispute resolution, and other
regulatory fees. The NYSE has represented that NYSE Regulation expects
to continue to fund its examination programs for assuring financial
responsibility and compliance with sales practice rules, testing, and
continuing education through fees assessed directly on member
organizations.
    NYSE Regulation also will receive funding independently from the
markets for which it will provide regulatory services. The NYSE has
represented the services agreement between NYSE Regulation and the
Pacific Exchange will ensure the provision of adequate funding to NYSE
Regulation to carry out the regulatory services it will provide to the
Pacific Exchange. In addition, the NYSE has represented that there will
be an explicit agreement among NYSE Group, New York Stock Exchange LLC,
NYSE Market, and NYSE Regulation to provide adequate funding to NYSE
Regulation.\223\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \223\ See Amendment No. 6, supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter questions whether NYSE Regulation will have to
generate sufficient sanctions and penalties to fund its own operations,
or, alternatively, whether NYSE Group and New York Stock Exchange LLC
will be willing to adequately fund NYSE Regulation's expenses without
regard to the impact on NYSE Group's ``bottom line.'' \224\ This
commenter does not believe that the undertaking by the NYSE that there
will be an explicit agreement among NYSE Group, New York Stock Exchange
LLC, NYSE Market, and NYSE Regulation to provide adequate funding for
NYSE Regulation is sufficient.\225\ Another commenter believes that the
governing documents of NYSE Regulation should explicitly provide the
sources of its funding.\226\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \224\ IBAC February Letter, supra note 6, at 5.
    \225\ Id. at 6.
    \226\ SIA/TBMA Letter, supra note 6, at 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that SROs are required to enforce their own
rules and the federal securities laws against their members, and that
any disciplinary action taken by an SRO (including the assessment of a
fine or penalty) must be done in compliance with its rules as approved
by the Commission. The Commission also notes that a member has a right
of appeal of a disciplinary determination by its SRO to the
Commission.\227\ In addition, as noted above, NYSE Regulation has been
delegated the authority to raise revenue through member and regulatory
fees.\228\ The NYSE states that, as is currently the case, a large
portion of NYSE Regulation's revenues will continue to be derived from
member fees paid as a percentage of gross revenues.\229\ The Commission
does not believe that the absence of specificity in an exchange's rules
regarding regulatory funding precludes the Commission from finding that
the exchange is so organized and has the capacity to be able to carry
out the purposes of the Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by
its members and persons associated with its members, with the
provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the
rules of the exchange.\230\ The Commission finds that the proposed
funding of NYSE Regulation's regulatory responsibilities, which
includes the assessment of member and other fees, as well as funding
from other entities for which NYSE Regulation will be providing
regulatory services, is designed to provide sufficient funding to NYSE
Regulation to enable it and New York Stock Exchange LLC to carry out
their responsibilities consistent with the Act.\231\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \227\ Section 19(d)(2) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78s(d)(2).
    \228\ New York Stock Exchange LLC will be prohibited from using
any regulatory fees, fines, or penalties for commercial purposes,
and NYSE Regulation may not distribute such funds to NYSE Group or
any entity other than NYSE Regulation. See supra note 144 and
accompanying text.
    \229\ NYSE Response to Comments, supra note 7, at 10.
    \230\ The issue of what further steps, if any, should be taken
with respect to transparency of an exchange's regulatory revenues
and expenses is part of a Commission proposal relating to SRO
governance and administration, and is better addressed in the
context of the larger proposal. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 50699 (November 18, 2004), 69 FR 71126 (December 8, 2004) (``SRO
Governance Proposal'').
    \231\ The NYSE represents that no provision of this proposed
rule change, including any grant of authority from New York Stock
Exchange LLC to NYSE Regulation to assess, collect, and retain
regulatory fees, fines, or penalties, or any limitation on the use
by NYSE Regulation of such regulatory monies, will prohibit NYSE
Regulation from making charitable donations if its board of
directors determines such donations would be consistent with its and
New York Stock Exchange LLC's obligations under the Act. The NYSE
also represents that, in the future, it will file with the
Commission a proposed rule change as to NYSE Regulation's use of
regulatory fees, fines, and penalties. Telephone conversation
between Richard P. Bernard, Executive Vice President and General
Counsel, NYSE, and Elizabeth K. King, Associate Director, Division,
Commission, on February 27, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Options Trading Rights

    The Commission received a comment letter on the proposed rule
change from a group of individuals who own NYSE Option Trading Rights
(``OTRs'') that are separate from full NYSE seat ownership

(``Separated OTRs'').\232\ These commenters argue that they held on to
their Separated OTRs, even after the NYSE exited the options business
in 1997, with the expectation that their ownership of the Separated
OTRs would afford them full rights to trade options under the auspices
of the NYSE or its successor entity. They now argue that such ownership
does, and should continue to after the Merger, give them such right.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \232\ See OTR Investors Letter, supra note 6. See also OTR
Investors Letter II, supra note 6, filed in response to the NYSE
Response to Comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE has not traded options since 1997, when the Commission
approved the transfer of NYSE's options business to the Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE'').\233\ At that time, the NYSE
and CBOE put in place a program to provide certain persons that traded
options on the NYSE with trading permits to trade options on CBOE.
Benefits from the leasing of the CBOE options trading permits not so
issued (``lease pool'') were distributed to a group of approximately 92
persons that owned OTRs.\234\ The CBOE trading permits and lease pool
had a duration of seven years. The Commission found the 1997 proposal
to be consistent with the Act, noting that there is nothing in the Act
that compels the NYSE to continue to trade a particular product line
and the NYSE was free to terminate its options business entirely (in
which case OTR holders would not have received any lease
payments).\235\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \233\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38542 (April 23,
1997), 62 FR 23521 (April 30, 1997).
    \234\ Holders of Separated OTRs were included in this group, and
were allowed to participate in the lease pool without surrendering
their OTRs.
    \235\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38542 (April 23,
1997), 62 FR 23521 (April 30, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It has been over eight years since the NYSE operated an options
business. The Commission notes, as do the OTR investors in their
comment letter, that holders of Separated OTRs do not have any
membership vote and do not have ownership in the assets of the NYSE. As
a result, the Commission finds it is consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of
the Act \236\ and the NYSE's rules for the NYSE to eliminate its rules
that provide for options trading rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \236\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Market Data

    One commenter raises a concern about the market data function of
the NYSE being within the control of a for-profit entity.\237\ This
commenter believes that all market data fees should be cost-based and
that market data revenue should not be used to cross-subsidize the
costs of regulation, and that a for-profit entity may be motivated to
engage in profit-motivated market data pricing.\238\ The Commission
notes that the fees charged for consolidated market data (i.e., the
``top-of-book'' quotations of SROs and all reported trades) are
established by the joint SRO plans that govern the collection,
consolidation, and dissemination of such market data, and that all such
fees must be filed with the Commission pursuant to the Act. In
addition, ``depth-of-book'' quotations can be disseminated by all SROs,
as well as non-SRO entities, such as ATSs.\239\ The question of what
steps, if any, should be taken by the Commission to address the level
and use of market data revenue, as well as transparency of regulatory
revenue and expenses, is part of a larger Commission review of the
self-regulatory structure of our markets, and is better addressed in
the context of this larger review.\240\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \237\ See SIA/TBMA Letter, supra note 6, at 19.
    \238\ Id. The commenter believes that tying market data fees to
the cost of producing the data, while keeping costs of regulation
separate, will enable full and transparent funding of regulation
without overcharging for market data. Id.
    \239\ The NYSE notes in its response to comments that each of
the members of Consolidated Tape Association can compete with the
NYSE (and each other) by providing its own depth-of-book data. NYSE
Response to Comments, supra note 7, at 19.
    \240\ See Concept Release Concerning Self-Regulation, supra note
26. See also SRO Governance Proposal, supra note 230.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as amended, is consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\241\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2005-77), as amended, is
approved, and Amendment Nos. 6 and 8 are approved on an accelerated
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \241\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore further ordered, pursuant to Section 11A(b)(1) of
the Act, that NYSE Market shall be exempt from registration as a
securities information processor for a period of thirty (30) days
following the date of closing of the Merger.
    It is therefore further ordered, pursuant to Section 11A(b)(1) of
the Act, that upon the filing by NYSE Market of an application for
registration or an exemption from registration as a securities
information processor within the 30-day period prescribed above, NYSE
Market shall be exempt from registration as a securities information
processor for an additional period of ninety (90) days following the
end of the original 30-day period.

    By the Commission (Chairman Cox and Commissioners Glassman,
Atkins, Campos, and Nazareth).
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-2033 Filed 3-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 199 (Monday, October 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 62601]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25350]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Sunshine Act Meetings; Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of
Directors

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

ACTION: Notice of Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors
Meeting.

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

Time and Date: The meeting will be held on October 25, 2012, from 12:00
noon to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time.

Place: This meeting will be open to the public via conference call. Any
interested person may call 1-877-820-7831, passcode, 908048 to listen
and participate in this meeting.

Status: Open to the public.

Matters to be Considered: The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board
of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and
implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to
that end, may consider matters properly before the Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified
Carrier Registration Board of Directors at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on: September 21, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator, Office of Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-25350 Filed 10-11-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1341-1344]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00176]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0990]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Blue Water Resort and Casino Southwest Showdown 4;
Parker, AZ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone within
the Lake Moolvalya region of the navigable waters of the Colorado River
in Parker, Arizona in support of the Arizona Drag Boat Association
sponsored race event, the Blue Water Resort and Casino Southwest
Showdown. This safety zone is established to ensure the safety of
participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other
vessels and users of the waterway. Unauthorized persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within
this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or their
designated representative. The Coast Guard requests public comments on
the temporary safety zone.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. on February 20, 2015 through
6 p.m. February 22, 2015. This rule will be enforced from 9 a.m. until
6 p.m. February 20, 2015, February 21, 2015, and February 22, 2015.
Public comments must be received by February 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments using one of the listed methods, and see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for more information on public comments.
     Online--http://www.regulations.gov following Web site
instructions.
     Fax--202-493-2251.
     Mail or hand deliver--Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Hand
delivery hours: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket [USCG-2014-
0990]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being available
in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number
in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder
on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Nick Bateman, Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing
or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
TFR Temporary Final Rule

A. Public Participation and Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments (or related material) on this
temporary final rule. We will consider all submissions and may adjust
our final

action based on your comments. Comments should be marked with docket
number USCG-2014-0990 and should provide a reason for each suggestion
or recommendation. You should provide personal contact information so
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your comments;
but please note that all comments will be posted to the online docket
without change and that any personal information you include can be
searchable online (see the Federal Register Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets, 73 FR 3316, Jan. 17, 2008).
    Mailed or hand-delivered comments should be in an unbound 8\1/2\ x
11 inch format suitable for reproduction. The Docket Management
Facility will acknowledge receipt of mailed comments if you enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope with your submission.
    Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in
our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by
following the Web site's instructions. You can also view the docket at
the Docket Management Facility (see the mailing address under
ADDRESSES) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    The Blue Water Resort and Casino Southwest Showdown is an annual
recurring marine event in March, and is listed in 33 CFR 100.1102
(table 1, number 7) for annual marine events on the Colorado River,
between Davis Dam and Headgate Dam. Special local regulations exist for
the marine event to allow for high speed boat racing in a no-wake zone.
For 2015, the event dates have been shifted from the listed weekend in
March, to February. As such, a temporary safety zone will be
established to ensure the safety of event participants and spectators.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.''
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with
respect to this rule because an NPRM would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest in ensuring safety. We did not receive
confirmation of the February event dates until November 15, 2014, which
left insufficient time to draft, publish, and receive public comment on
an NPRM. We wish to take immediate action to help protect the safety of
the participants, crew, spectators, and participating vessels from
other vessels during this three day annual event. However, because
publication of this rule in the Federal Register will precede the event
by several weeks, we are requesting public comment on the need for and
sufficiency of our safety zone, and on whether it should be adjusted in
any way. In light of public comment, and with actual notice by on-scene
personnel, we may modify the safety zone during its periods of
enforcement.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis and authorities for this rule are found in 33
U.S.C. 1231, 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard to propose, establish, and
define regulatory safety zones.
    Because of the date change, this annual recurring marine event
requires promulgation of a limited access area safety zone to ensure
the safety of the event and support the safety of event participants
and the public, who may not be aware of the event date change from
March to February.

D. Discussion of the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone that will
be enforced from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on February 20, 2015, February 21,
2015, and February 22, 2015. The effect of the temporary safety zone
will be to restrict navigation in the vicinity of the boat race site
until the conclusion of the races. The limits of the safety zone will
support the Coast Guard issued marine event permit special local
regulations to include all the navigable waters of the Colorado River
between Headgate Dam and 0.5 miles north of the Blue Water Marina in
Parker, Arizona.
    The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crew,
spectators, participants, and other vessels and users of the waterway.
Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting
through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port, or his designated representative, during the
proposed times. The three day event will include racing on Friday,
Saturday, and Sunday. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will
publish a local notice to mariners (LNM).

E. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. We expect the economic
impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation
is unnecessary. This determination is based on the size, location,
limited duration of the safety zone and that the boat race is an annual
recurring marine event. Additionally, to the maximum extent
practicable, the event sponsor will assist with the movement of boaters
desiring to transit the racing area during non-racing times throughout
the three days.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in the impacted portion of the Colorado
River from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on February 20, 2015, February 21, 2015 and
February 22, 2015.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone would apply to the entire width of the river,
traffic would be allowed to pass through the zone with the permission
of the Captain of the

Port, or his designated representative. The event sponsor will also to
their maximum extent assist boaters wishing to transit the racing area
during non-racing times throughout the three days. Before the effective
period, the Coast Guard will publish a Local Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves establishment of a safety zone on the
navigable waters of Moovalya Lake. This rule is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting
this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-677 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-677  Safety zone; Blue Water Resort and Casino Southwest
Showdown 4; Parker, AZ.

    (a) Location. The limits of the safety zone will include all the
navigable waters of the Colorado River on Moovalya Lake between
Headgate Dam and 0.5 miles north of the Blue Water Marina in Parker,
Arizona.
    (b) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9 a.m.
to 6 p.m. on February 20, 2015, February 21, 2015, and February 22,
2015.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
designated representative, means any commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast

Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, or local, state, and federal law
enforcement vessels who have been authorized to act on the behalf of
the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in 33 CFR part
165, subpart C, entry into, transit through or anchoring within this
safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
of San Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative.
    (3) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard or designated patrol
personnel by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator
of a vessel shall proceed as directed.
    (4) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, state, or
local agencies in patrol and notification of the regulation.

    Dated: December 15, 2014.
J.A. Janszen,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2015-00176 Filed 1-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 21333]
[DOCID:fr21ap08-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2055-053]

Idaho Power Company; Notice of Application for Amendment of
License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

April 14, 2008.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Amendment of License to Remove a Portion of
the Project's Transmission Line.
    b. Project No.: 2055-053.
    c. Date Filed: March 10, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Idaho Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: C.J. Strike Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Snake and Bruneau rivers, in Owyhee and Elmore
counties, Idaho. The project occupies federal lands managed by the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Tom R. Saldin, Senior Vice President and
General Counsel, and Nathan F. Gardiner Attorney, Idaho Power Company,
1221 West Idaho Street, P.O. Box 70, Boise, Idaho 83707,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax (208) 388-
6935.
    i. FERC Contact: Mrs. Anumzziatta Purchiaroni, Telephone (202) 502-
6191, and e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protest:
May 14, 2008.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy
of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee indicates in the filing
that, the portion of the 13-kV Strike-Mt. Home Line between Mountain
Home and the point where the Danskin Power Plant connects to the
Strike-Mt. Home Line is now part of a distribution system and no longer
considered part of the project's primary transmission line. Therefore,
the licensee is requesting an amendment to remove from the license that
portion of the project's transmission line. The filing includes a
right-of-way grant from the BLM for the segments of the line that cross
federal lands.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information about this filing
may also 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. You may
also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item (h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable,
and the Project Number of the particular application to which the
filing refers.
    p. Agency Comments: Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
    q. Comments, protests and interventions 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 at http://www.ferc.gov
under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-8501 Filed 4-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 227)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 70930-70931]
[DOCID:fr24no08-27]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0590; FRL-8732-5]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Imperial
County Air Pollution Control District, Mojave Desert Air Quality
Management District, South Coast Air Quality Management District, and
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Imperial County
Air Pollution Control District (ICAPCD), Mojave Desert Air Quality
Management District (MDAQMD), South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD), and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
(VCAPCD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP).
These revisions concern volatile organic compound emissions from
storage of reactive organic compound liquids, polyester resin
operations, coatings of metal parts and products, and adhesives and
sealants. We are proposing to approve local rules that regulate these
emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the
Act).

DATES: Any comments on this proposal must arrive by December 24, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2008-0590, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
    www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will
not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in
the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-
mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions regarding ICAPCD Rule
414, contact Mae Wang, EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
For questions regarding MDAQMD Rule 1162, contact Jerald Wamsley, EPA
Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>For questions
regarding SCAQMD Rule 1107 or VCAPCD Rule 74.20, contact Francisco
D[oacute][ntilde]ez, EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal addresses the following local
rules:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Agency                  Rule No.                    Rule title                Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICAPCD...............  414......................  Storage of Reactive Organic           05/18/04        07/19/04
                                                   Compound Liquids.
MDAQMD...............  1162.....................  Polyester Resin Operations....        08/27/07        03/07/08
SCAQMD...............  1107.....................  Coating of Metal Parts and            01/06/06        05/08/07
                                                   Products.
VCAPCD...............  74.20....................  Adhesives and Sealants........        01/11/05        07/15/05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, we
are approving these local rules in a direct final action without prior
proposal because we believe these SIP revisions are not controversial.
If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in
subsequent action based on this proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment.
    We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not
receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further
information, please see the direct final action.

    Dated: October 2, 2008.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E8-27737 Filed 11-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10787-10788]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4148]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66407; File No. SR-Phlx-2012-21]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Correction of Exchange Rule 705 (Fidelity Bonds)

 February 16, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on February 13, 2012, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' 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 substantially
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to delete certain extraneous language from
Exchange Rule 705 to amend an inadvertent error in the rule text that
arose in connection with a recent rule filing which replaces the
current text of Exchange Rule 705.\3\ The Exchange intends for this
Rule to be operative on April 2, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66362 (February 9,
2012) (SR-Phlx-2012-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to correct the text of
Exchange Rule 705, entitled ``Members Must Carry,'' by deleting certain
text which was not deleted when the Exchange filed to replace Rule 705
\4\ with a rule in

substantially the same form as the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') Rule 4360.\5\ The Supplementary Material to
Exchange Rule 705 is being replaced, along with the remainder of Rule
705, by a new Rule 705, as of April 2, 2012. The title of Exchange Rule
705 will also be changed from ``Members Must Carry'' to ``Fidelity
Bonds.'' The Exchange intended to delete the current Rule 705 in its
entirety and rename the rule and add new text similar to that in FINRA
Rule 4360. The Exchange inadvertently did not place the Supplementary
Material section of the Rule in that filing to be deleted. The Exchange
proposes to delete the current Supplementary Material to Exchange Rule
705 as of April 2, 2012, to correspond with the operative date of SR-
Phlx-2012-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66362 (February 9,
2012) (SR-Phlx-2012-13).
    \5\ See FINRA Rule 4360 ``Fidelity Bonds.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \7\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest,
by correcting an error in the Exchange's Rules in order that the Rule
properly reflect the correct text. The Exchange's proposal will correct
the text of the Rule so that the new text will be properly reflected as
of April 2, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition 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

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(1)
\9\ thereunder, the Exchange has designated this proposal as one that
constitutes a stated policy, practice or interpretation with respect to
the meaning, administration, or enforcement of an existing rule of the
self-regulatory organization, and therefore has become effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange intends for Rule 705 to become operative on April 2,
2012. This operative delay will allow members or member organizations
that are not exempt from the Rule to comply with the requirements set
forth under the Rule.
    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2012-21 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-Phlx-2012-21. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2012-21 and
should be submitted on or before March 15, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-4148 Filed 2-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 218 (Thursday, November 12, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69873-69874]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28792]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100.701

[Docket No. USCG-2015-0955] Special Local

Regulations; Recurring Marine Events in the Seventh Coast Guard
District

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the regulation pertaining to the
Savannah Harbor Boat Parade of Lights

and Fireworks taking place on November 28, 2015. This action is
necessary to ensure safety of life on navigable waters of the United
States during the Savannah Harbor Boat Parade of Lights and Fireworks.
During the enforcement period, the special local regulation establishes
a regulated area which will prohibit all people and vessels from
entering. No person or vessel may enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the area without permission of the Captain of the Port
Savannah, or a designated representative.

DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 100.701 Table 1 will be enforced from 5
p.m. to 10 p.m. on November 28, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email MST1 Cliffton Hendry, Marine Safety Unit Savannah Office
of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension
243, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special
local regulation for the Savannah Parade of Lights and Fireworks in 33
CFR 100.701 Table 1 from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m. on November 28, 2015.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.701 no person or vessel may
enter the regulated area, unless they receive permission to do so from
the Captain of the Port Savannah, or a designated representative. This
temporary rule creates a regulated area that will encompass the entire
Savannah River in Savannah, GA beginning at the Talmadge Bridge near
River Street, coordinates 32[deg]05'20'' N., 081[deg]05'56.3'' W., and
proceeding down river to a line drawn at 146 degrees true from day
board 62, approximate coordinates are: 32[deg]04'48.7'' N.,
081[deg]04'47.9'' W.
    Spectator vessels may safely transit outside the regulated area,
but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of festival
participants or official patrol vessels. The Coast Guard may be
assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in
enforcing this regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.701 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated
areas by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and
on-scene designated representatives.

    Dated: October 26, 2015.
A.M. Beach,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Savannah.
[FR Doc. 2015-28792 Filed 11-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P