not been filed:
    (a) Offerings or sales of securities upon the conversion of
outstanding convertible securities or upon the exercise of outstanding
warrants or rights;
    (b) Dividend or interest reinvestment plans;
    (c) Employee benefit plans;
    (d) Transactions involving secondary offerings; or
    (e) Sales of securities pursuant to Rule 144 (17 CFR 230.144).
* * * * *
    29. Form 10-K (referenced in Sec.  249.310) is amended to revise
Item 8.(a) of PART II to read as follows:

    Note: The text of Form 10-K does not, and this amendment will
not, appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Form 10-K

Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934

General Instructions

* * * * *
Part II. * * *

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

    (a) Furnish financial statements meeting the requirements of
Regulation S-X (Sec.  210 of this chapter), except Sec.  210.3-05,
Sec.  210.3-14, Sec.  210.6-11, Sec.  210.8-04, Sec.  210.8-05, Sec.
210.8-06 and Article 11 thereof, and the supplementary financial
information required by Item 302 of Regulation S-K (Sec.  229.302 of
this chapter). Financial statements of the registrant and its
subsidiaries consolidated (as required by Rule 14a-3(b)) shall be filed
under this item. Other financial statements and schedules required
under Regulation S-X may be filed as ``Financial Statement Schedules''
pursuant to Item 15, Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, and
Reports on Form 8-K, of this form.
* * * * *

PART 270--RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940

0
30. The general authority citation for part 270 continues to read, in
part, as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq., 80a-34(d), 80a-37, 80a-39,
and Pub. L. 111-203, sec. 939A, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010), unless
otherwise noted.
* * * * *
0
31. Revise paragraph (k) of Sec.  270.8b-2 to read as follows:
* * * * *
    (k) Significant subsidiary. The term ``significant subsidiary''
means a subsidiary, including its subsidiaries, which meets any of the
following conditions, using amounts determined under U.S. Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles and, if applicable, section 2(a)(41) of
the Act:
    (i) Investment test. The value of the registrant's and its other
subsidiaries' investments in and advances to the tested subsidiary
exceed 10 percent of the value of the total investments of the
registrant and its subsidiaries consolidated as of the end of the most
recently completed fiscal year; or
    (ii) Income test. The absolute value of the combined investment
income from dividends, interest, and other income, the net realized
gains and losses on investments, and the net change in

unrealized gains and losses on investments from the tested subsidiary,
for the most recently completed fiscal year exceeds:
    (A) 80 percent of the absolute value of the change in net assets
resulting from operations of the registrant and its subsidiaries
consolidated for the most recently completed fiscal year; or
    (B) 10 percent of the absolute value of the change in net assets
resulting from operations of the registrant and its subsidiaries
consolidated for the most recently completed fiscal year and the
Investment Test (paragraph (k)(i)) condition exceeds 5 percent.
However, if the registrant and its subsidiaries consolidated has an
insignificant change in net assets resulting from operations for its
most recently completed fiscal year, compute the test using the average
of the absolute value of such amounts for the registrant and its
subsidiaries consolidated for each of its last five fiscal years.

PART 274--FORMS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940

0
32. The general authority citation for part 274 continues to read, in
part, as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 78c(b), 78l, 78m,
78n, 78o(d), 80a-8, 80a-24, 80a-26, 80a-29, and Pub. L. 111-203,
sec. 939A, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010), unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
0
33. Form N-2 (referenced in Sec. Sec.  239.14 and 274.11a-1) is amended
as follows:
0
a. Revise Item 8.6, paragraph (a) to Instruction 1 by removing the
phrase ``Sections 210.6-01 through 210.6-10 of Regulation S-X [17 CFR
210.6-01 through 210.6-10]'' and adding in its place ``Article 6 of
Regulation S-X [17 CFR 210.6-01 et seq.]''.
0
b. Revise Item 24, paragraph (a) to Instruction 1 by removing the
phrase ``Sections 210.6-01 through 210.6-10 of Regulation S-X [17 CFR
210.6-01 through 210.6-10]'' and adding in its place ``Article 6 of
Regulation S-X [17 CFR 210.6-01 et seq.]''.

    Note: The text of Form N-2 does not, and this amendment will
not, appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

    By the Commission.

    Dated: May 3, 2019.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-09472 Filed 5-24-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 69 (Thursday, April 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19896-19897]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08037]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. HB28-14-1-000]

Notice of Application for Approval of Headwater Benefits
Agreement, and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests:
El Dorado Irrigation District and Sacramento Municipal Utility District

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Headwater Benefits Agreement.
    b. Docket No.: HB28-14-1-000.
    c. Date Filed: December 30, 2013.
    d. Applicants: El Dorado Irrigation District and Sacramento
Municipal Utility District.
    e. Name of Projects: El Dorado Project No. 184 and Upper American
River Project No. 2101 in the American River Basin.
    f. Location: The El Dorado Project is located on the South Fork of
the American River and its tributaries in El Dorado, Alpine, and Amador
counties, California. The Upper American River Project is located on
Rubicon River and tributaries, Silver Creek and tributaries, and South
Fork of the American River, in El Dorado County, California.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a, et seq.
(2012); 18 CFR 11.14(a)(1) (2013); and 18 CFR 385.602 (2013).
    h. Applicants' Contacts: Mr. Jacob Eymann, Senior Civil Engineer,
El Dorado Irrigation District, 2890 Mosquito Road, Placerville,
California 95667,<PHONE_NUMBER>, and Mr. David Hansen, Project
Manager, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 6201 S St., Sacramento,
CA 95817,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Jeremy Jessup,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the
Commission. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
Please file comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters

without prior registration using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-
3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic
filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The
first page of any filing should include docket number HB28-14-1-000.
    k. Description of Request: The applicants filed the agreement
pursuant to 18 CFR 11.14(a) (2013), which provides that owners of
downstream and headwater projects may negotiate a settlement for
headwater benefits charges, and that such settlements must be filed
with the Commission for its approval, according to the provisions of 18
CFR 385.602 (2013), which governs submission of settlement offers. The
agreement provides for: (i) An annual payment of $30,000 (baselined for
2013 with payments subject to escalation in future years), and (ii) a
one-time payment of $360,000 to compensate El Dorado Irrigation
District for headwater benefits provided in years 2001 through 2012.
    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>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. 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 email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    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, Motions to Intervene, or Protests: Anyone may submit
comments, a motion to intervene, or a protest in accordance with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214 (2013). 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, motions to intervene,
or protests must be received on or before the specified comment date
for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE, or ``PROTEST'', as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the docket number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001-385.2005 (2013). All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b) (2013). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should
relate to project works which are the subject of the agreement.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any motion to intervene or protest must be served
upon each representative of the applicants specified in the particular
application. If an intervener 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 all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010 (2013).

    Dated: April 2, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-08037 Filed 4-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 225)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 70283-70284]
[DOCID:fr20no08-23]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 40

[Docket OST-2003-15245]
RIN 2105-AD55

Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On June 25, 2008, the Department issued a Final Rule amending,
among other provisions, paragraph (b) of our section pertaining to
urine specimen collections. This amendment required direct observation
collections for all return-to-duty and follow-up tests. We sought
additional comments to this provision on August 25, 2008. On October
22, 2008, the Department issued a notice responding to those comments.
The Department did not change the amendment, and determined that the
revised paragraph would go into effect, as scheduled, on November 1,
2008. On November 12, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia

Circuit issued a stay of the revised paragragh (b). This document,
therefore, returns the language of 49 CFR 40.67(b) that existed prior
to the November 1, 2008, effective date pending further order of the
Court.

DATES: November 20, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim L. Swart, Director, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and
Compliance, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; (202)
366-3784 (voice),<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax), or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Robert
C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulation and
Enforcement, U.S. Department of Transportation, same address, (202)
366-9310 (voice),<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax), or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department issued a final rule on June 25, 2008 (73 FR 35961),
which included, among other things, two provisions (49 CFR 40.67(b) and
(i)) concerning the use of direct observation (DO) collections, a very
significant tool the Department uses to combat attempts by employees to
cheat on their drug tests.
    Several petitioners, including the Association of American
Railroads (AAR), joined by the American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association; the Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations
(AFL-CIO); the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; and the Air
Transport Association (ATA), joined by the Regional Airline Association
(RAA), asked the Department to delay the effective date of these two
provisions, seek further comment on them, and reconsider them. In
response, the Department issued a notice delaying the effective date of
49 CFR 40.67(b)--the provision for making DO collections mandatory for
all return-to-duty and follow-up tests--until November 1, 2008 (73 FR
50222; August 26, 2008). The Department opened a comment period on that
provision, which closed on September 25, 2008. The Department did not
delay the effective date of 49 CFR 40.67(i), and that provision went
into effect, as scheduled, on August 25, 2008.
    The Department fully considered the comments filed in the public
docket regarding the amendment to 49 CFR 40.67(b). On October 22, 2008,
at 73 FR 62910, the Department issued a notice responding to the
comments and stated ``the Department remains convinced that conducting
all return-to-duty and follow-up tests under DO is the most prudent
course from the viewpoint of safety.'' (73 FR 62918) The Department
decided not to change the amendment and announced that the revised 49
CFR 40.67(b) would go into effect, as scheduled, on November 1, 2008.
    On October 24, 2008, several of the petitioners described above
again petitioned the Department for further postponement of the final
rule regarding 49 CFR 40.67(b). On October 30, 2008, the Department
denied the petition. Several of the petitioners also filed a motion for
stay with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit. On October 31, 2008, the Court issued a temporary
administrative stay to allow more time for the court to consider the
request for stay. On November 12, 2008, the court issued a further
order to stay the effectiveness of section 40.67(b) (BNSF Railway
Company v. Department of Transportation, D.C. Circuit, September Term
2008, No. 08-1265, November 12, 2008). This stay will remain in effect
until the court issues a decision on the merits of petitioners'
challenge to the provisions of 40.67(b).
    Therefore, DO collections for return-to-duty and follow-up testing
will continue to be an employer option, rather than mandatory. All
other requirements of 49 CFR part 40 that went into effect on August
25, 2008, including the DO provision at 40.67(i) [checking for
prosthetic and other devices used to carry ``clean'' urine and urine
substitutes] will remain in effect.
    Therefore, the revised section 40.67(b), as issued in the
Department's final rule on June 25, 2008, is removed from the CFR in
order to comply with the court's stay, and the prior version of 49 CFR
40.67(b), which the department reinstates with this document, will
remain in effect until further notice.

    Issued this 17th day of November, 2008, at Washington, DC.
Jim L. Swart,
Director, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy Compliance.

49 CFR Subtitle A--Authority and Issuance

0
For reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department of Transportation
is amending part 40 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:

PART 40--PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL
TESTING PROGRAMS

0
1. The authority citation for 49 CFR part 40 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 40 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331, 20140, 31306, and
54101 et seq.

0
2. Section 40.67 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  40.67  When and how is a directly observed collection conducted?

* * * * *
    (b) As an employer, you may direct a collection under direct
observation of an employee if the drug test is a return-to-duty test or
a follow-up test.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-27617 Filed 11-17-08; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42340-42344]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17956]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83850; File No. SR-FICC-2018-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Apply Government Securities
Division Corporation Default Rule to Sponsored Members and Make Other
Changes

August 15, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 6, 2018, Fixed Income Clearing Corporation (``FICC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the clearing agency. 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. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The proposed rule change consists of modifications to FICC's
Government Securities Division (``GSD'') Rulebook (``GSD Rules'') \3\
in order to apply GSD Rule 22B (Corporation Default) to Sponsored
Members as well as make certain other changes, as described in greater
detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Capitalized terms not defined herein are defined in the GSD
Rules, available at http://www.dtcc.com/~/media/Files/Downloads/
legal/rules/ficc_gov_rules.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the clearing agency 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 clearing agency has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend GSD Rule 3A
(Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members) in order to apply GSD Rule
22B (Corporation Default) to Sponsored Members. In addition, the
proposed rule change would make certain other changes, as described in
greater detail below.
(i) Background
    Under GSD Rule 3A (Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members), Bank
Netting Members that are well-capitalized (as defined by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation's applicable regulations) and have at
least $5 billion in equity capital (Sponsoring Members) are permitted
to sponsor qualified institutional buyers as defined by Rule 144A \4\
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (``Securities Act''),\5\
and certain legal entities that, although not organized as entities
specifically listed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of Rule 144A under the
Securities Act, satisfy the financial requirements necessary to be
qualified institutional buyers as specified in that paragraph
(Sponsored Members) into GSD membership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the onboarding of new Sponsoring Members and
their respective Sponsored Members into GSD membership, FICC has
received certain questions regarding the applicability of GSD Rule 22B
(Corporation Default) to Sponsoring Members and their respective
Sponsored Members. GSD Rule 22B provides that close out netting will be
applied to obligations between GSD and its Members in the event that a
Corporation Default occurs.\6\ GSD Rule 22B currently does not apply to
Sponsored Members but does apply to Sponsoring Members in their
capacity as Netting Members. Not applying GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored
Members creates an inconsistency with respect to the legal framework
and process applicable to the Sponsored Members versus other GSD
Members\7\ in the event that a Corporation Default occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Events that shall constitute a Corporation Default are
described in Section (b) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
    \7\ GSD Rule 1 (Definitions) defines ``Member'' as a Comparison-
Only Member or a Netting Member. Supra note 3. For purposes of this
filing, the term ``Member'' shall exclude Comparison-Only Members
because Comparison-Only Members are not relevant in the context of
Corporation Default provisions as such Members only participate in
the Comparison System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(ii) Proposed Changes to the GSD Rules
GSD Rule 3A (Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members)
    FICC is proposing to add an introductory paragraph to Section 17 of
GSD Rule 3A (Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members) which makes it
clear that for purposes of the Rules, Schedules, Interpretations and
Statements of Policy referenced in Section 17 of GSD Rule 3A,
Sponsoring Members and/or Sponsored Members, in their respective
capacities as such, would be ``Members.'' Adding this clarifying
paragraph would be helpful to Sponsoring Members and Sponsored Members
because it would enable them to know which Rules, Schedules,
Interpretations and Statements of Policy would govern their rights,
liabilities and obligations in their respective capacities as
Sponsoring Members and/or Sponsored Members.
    In order to ensure that all GSD Members are subject to a common,
transparent legal framework in a Corporation Default situation, FICC is
proposing to modify GSD Rule 3A so that GSD Rule 22B (Corporation
Default) would apply to Sponsored Members in the same manner as it
applies to all other GSD Members. Specifically, FICC proposes to add a
new subsection (a) to Section 17 of GSD Rule 3A which would provide
that GSD Rule 22B would apply to Sponsored Members. This proposed
change would necessitate a technical change to renumber all subsequent
subsections in Section 17 of GSD Rule 3A.
    GSD Rule 22B defines the term ``Corporation Default'' and sets
forth the close out netting process in the event of a Corporation
Default. Section (b)(ii) of GSD Rule 22B provides that the following
events shall constitute a Corporation Default: (A) the dissolution of
FICC (other than pursuant to a consolidation, amalgamation, or
merger),\8\ (B) the institution by FICC of a proceeding seeking a
judgment of insolvency or bankruptcy or any other relief under any
bankruptcy or insolvency law or other similar law affecting creditors'
rights, or the presentation of a petition for FICC's winding-up or
liquidation, or the making of a general assignment for the benefit of
creditors,\9\ (C) the institution of a proceeding against FICC seeking
a judgment of insolvency or bankruptcy or any other relief under any
bankruptcy or insolvency law or other similar law affecting creditors'
rights, or the presentation of a petition for FICC's winding-up or
liquidation and, in each case, such proceeding or petition resulting in
a judgement of insolvency or bankruptcy or the entry of an order for
relief or the making of an order for FICC's winding-up or
liquidation,\10\ or (D) FICC seeking or becoming subject to the
appointment of a receiver, trustee, or other similar official pursuant
to the federal securities laws or Title II of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act \11\ for FICC or for all or
substantially all of FICC's assets.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Section (b)(ii)(A) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
    \9\ See Section (b)(ii)(B) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
    \10\ See Section (b)(ii)(C) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
    \11\ 12 U.S.C. 5381 et seq.
    \12\ See Section (b)(ii)(D) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, subject to the limitations set forth therein, Section
(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22B provides that a Corporation Default is deemed to
have occurred on the eighth (8th) day after FICC receives notice from a
GSD Member of FICC's failure to make, when due, an undisputed payment
or delivery to such Member that is required to be made by FICC under
the GSD Rules; provided that, such failure remains unremedied

throughout the seven (7) day period following FICC's receipt of the
notice.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Section (b)(i) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC's provision of clearance and settlement services, including
the timely settlement of Transactions in the ordinary course of
business, are a part of FICC's fundamental directive as a registered
clearing agency under the Act. The seven (7) day period provided by
Section (b)(i) of GSD Rule 22B is intended to address the circumstance
where FICC experiences an operational issue that prevents it from
completing such clearance and settlement services. In this
circumstance, if FICC is not able to rectify the failure and satisfy
its obligations in seven (7) days, GSD Rule 22B requires that all
Transactions which have been subject to Novation pursuant to the GSD
Rules but have not yet settled and any rights and obligations of the
parties thereto to be immediately terminated.\14\ The seven (7) day
period is designed to avoid a systemic disruption in such circumstance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B
to Sponsored Members, FICC is also proposing to add language to clarify
that the commencement of the seven (7) day period preceding a potential
Corporation Default, as provided by Section (b)(i) of GSD Rule 22B,
would not modify FICC's obligations to satisfy any undisputed payment
or delivery obligation to a Sponsored Member under the GSD Rules,
including any undisputed interest payment obligation owing to the
Sponsored Member on an open Sponsored Member Trade, and that such
obligation would continue to accrue in favor of the Sponsored Member
for the duration of the seven (7) day period. Specifically, FICC is
proposing to include in the proposed new subsection (a) to Section 17
of GSD Rule 3A language that makes it clear that FICC would be
responsible for satisfying any undisputed payment or delivery
obligation required to be made by FICC to a Sponsored Member under the
GSD Rules, including, but not limited to, any undisputed interest
payment obligation that accrues in favor of a Sponsored Member on a
Sponsored Member Trade that has been subject to Novation pursuant to
the GSD Rules but has not yet settled and for which FICC has received
notice from such Sponsored Member of FICC's failure to make, when due,
such undisputed interest payment to such Sponsored Member within the
meaning of Section (b)(i) of GSD Rule 22B.
GSD Rule 22B (Corporation Default)
    FICC is proposing to amend the wording of the third sentence of
Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B to provide greater clarity regarding the
close out netting process upon a Corporation Default. Specifically,
FICC is proposing to delete a reference to Section 2(a) of GSD Rule 22A
in that sentence and modify the reference to Section 2(b) of GSD Rule
22A to specifically refer to Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22A.
    FICC is proposing to delete the reference to Section 2(a) of GSD
Rule 22A in the third sentence of Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B because
this reference is unnecessary and potentially confusing to GSD Members.
The reference to Section 2(a) of GSD Rule 22A is meant to set forth
Transactions that would not be subject to the close out netting process
in the event of a Corporation Default by referring (by way of analogy)
to Transactions that FICC would not close out in the event FICC ceases
to act for a GSD Member. However, Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B already
contains a statement that makes it clear which Transactions are subject
to the close out netting process in the event of a Corporation Default:
``all Transactions which have been subject to Novation pursuant to
these [GSD] Rules . . . .'' \15\ Therefore, the reference to Section
2(a) of GSD Rule 22A is not necessary and potentially confusing to GSD
Members, and FICC proposes to delete it from the third sentence of
Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B. Supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, FICC is proposing to modify the reference to Section
2(b) of GSD Rule 22A in the third sentence of Section (a) of GSD Rule
22B to specifically refer to Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22A. Section
(a) of GSD Rule 22B provides, in relevant part, that ``the Board shall
determine a single net amount owed by or to each Member . . . by
applying the close out . . . procedures of Section 2(a) and (b) of
[GSD] Rule 22A . . . .'' \16\ The reference to the entirety of Section
2(b) of GSD Rule 22A could cause confusion for GSD Members. This is
because only subsection (i) of Section 2(b) of GSD Rule 22A, which
speaks specifically to final net settlement positions, is relevant in
the context of GSD Rule 22B. The rest of Section 2(b) of GSD Rule 22A
is not relevant. Therefore, FICC is proposing to amend the reference to
point specifically to Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC is also proposing to delete the ``, to the extent
applicable,'' and ``and application'' language from the third sentence
of Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B. FICC is proposing to delete the ``, to
the extent applicable,'' language because Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule
22A would always be applicable for purposes of the Board determining a
single net amount owed by or to each Member under GSD Rule 22B after a
Corporation Default has occurred. Likewise, FICC is proposing to
streamline the wording of the third sentence of Section (a) of GSD Rule
22B by deleting the ``and application'' language because it is
extraneous wording that is unnecessary and not relevant in the context
of Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22A.
    Lastly, FICC is proposing a change to the third sentence of Section
(a) of GSD Rule 22B to make it clear that, although GSD Rule 22B would
apply to Sponsored Members pursuant to this proposal, the loss
allocation provisions of GSD Rule 4 (Clearing Fund and Loss Allocation)
referenced in GSD Rule 22B would not apply to Sponsored Members.
Specifically, FICC is proposing a clarifying change in that sentence to
add ``, to the extent such provisions are otherwise applicable to such
Member'' following the reference in that sentence to the loss
allocation provisions in GSD Rule 4. This proposed change is consistent
with Section 12(a) of GSD Rule 3A, which provides that Sponsored
Members are not obligated for allocations, pursuant to GSD Rule 4, of
loss or liability incurred by FICC.
2. Statutory Basis
    FICC believes this proposal is consistent with the requirements of
the Act, and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a
registered clearing agency. Specifically, FICC believes this proposal
is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \17\ and Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(23)(i),\18\ as promulgated under the Act, for the reasons
described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, in part, that the GSD
Rules be designed to ``promote the prompt and accurate clearance and
settlement of securities transactions.'' \19\ FICC believes that the
proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members in the
same manner as it applies to all other GSD Members would help to ensure
that all GSD Members are subject to a common, transparent legal
framework in a Corporation Default situation. Having a common,
transparent legal framework in a

Corporation Default situation would facilitate an orderly close out
netting of obligations between FICC and the GSD Members in the event
that a Corporation Default occurs. An orderly close out netting of
obligations between FICC and the GSD Members would provide clarity and
certainty to market participants in a time of distress regarding their
rights and obligations and the rights and obligations of FICC. Clarity
and certainty of the rights and obligations of market participants as
well as rights and obligations of FICC would in turn promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
Therefore, FICC believes that the proposed rule change to apply GSD
Rule 22B to Sponsored Members in the same manner as it applies to all
other GSD Members is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) under the Act requires FICC to establish,
implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to publicly disclose all relevant rules and
material procedures.\20\ FICC believes that the proposed rule changes
to (i) amend the third sentence of Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B by (A)
deleting the unnecessary and potentially confusing reference to Section
2(a) of GSD Rule 22A and (B) modifying the reference to Section 2(b) of
GSD Rule 22A to specifically refer to Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22A,
and (ii) make clarifying and/or technical changes in GSD Rule 3A and
GSD Rule 22B, would ensure that the GSD Rules remain clear and accurate
to GSD Members. Having clear and accurate GSD Rules would facilitate
GSD Members' understanding of those rules and provide GSD Members with
increased predictability and certainty regarding their obligations. As
such, FICC believes that these proposed rule changes are consistent
with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(23)(i) under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(23)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    FICC believes that the proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B
to Sponsored Members could have an impact on competition. This is
because the proposed change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members
would (i) provide for the immediate termination upon a Corporation
Default of all Transactions to which a Sponsored Member is a party and
which have been subject to Novation pursuant to GSD Rules but have not
yet settled and (ii) require a Sponsored Member to provide FICC with a
7-day period under the circumstances described in Section (b)(i) of GSD
Rule 22B before such termination can occur. FICC believes this proposed
rule change could both promote competition and burden competition. The
proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members could
promote competition by ensuring that GSD Members are subject to a
common, transparent legal framework in a Corporation Default. Applying
the close out netting process and the 7-day period requirement to
Sponsored Members in the same manner as they apply to all other GSD
Members would help ensure that, in the unlikely event that FICC becomes
insolvent or defaults in its obligations to GSD Members, all GSD
Members follow the same procedures in closing out their positions and
netting them against FICC's obligations to the GSD Members. Requiring
that all GSD Members follow the same procedures in closing out their
positions in a Corporation Default would help promote competition
because all GSD Members would be treated alike during a stressed market
condition. Conversely, the propose rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to
Sponsored Members could burden competition by subjecting the Sponsored
Members to the close out netting process and the 7-day period
requirement. However, FICC believes any burden on competition that is
created by this proposed rule change would be necessary and appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as permitted by Section
17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC believes any burden on competition that is created by the
proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members would
be necessary in furtherance of the purposes of the Act \22\ because the
GSD Rules are required to be designed to ``promote the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.'' \23\ As
described above, the proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to
Sponsored Members would help to ensure that all GSD Members are subject
to a common, transparent legal framework in a Corporation Default.
Having a common, transparent legal framework in a Corporation Default
situation would facilitate an orderly close out netting of obligations
between FICC and the GSD Members in the event that a Corporation
Default occurs. An orderly close out netting of obligations between
FICC and the GSD Members would provide clarity and certainty to market
participants in a time of distress regarding their rights and
obligations and the rights and obligations of FICC. Clarity and
certainty of the rights and obligations of market participants as well
as the rights and obligations of FICC would in turn promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions.
Therefore, FICC believes any burden that is created by the proposed
rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members would be
necessary in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as permitted by
Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id.
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC also believes any burden on competition that is created by the
proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members would
be appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\25\ As
described above, the proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to
Sponsored Members would subject Sponsored Members to the close out
netting process and the 7-day period requirement. Subjecting Sponsored
Members to the close out netting process would facilitate an orderly
close out netting of obligations between FICC and all GSD Members
(including the Sponsored Members) in the event that a Corporation
Default occurs. Requiring Sponsored Members to provide FICC with a 7-
day period under the circumstances described in Section (b)(i) of GSD
Rule 22B would help to avoid a systemic disruption under such
circumstances. Therefore, FICC believes any burden that is created by
the proposed rule change to apply GSD Rule 22B to Sponsored Members
would be appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as
permitted by Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FICC does not believe that the proposed rule changes to (i) amend
the third sentence of Section (a) of GSD Rule 22B by (A) deleting the
unnecessary and potentially confusing reference to Section 2(a) of GSD
Rule 22A and (B) modifying the reference to Section 2(b) of GSD Rule
22A to specifically refer to Section 2(b)(i) of GSD Rule 22A, and (ii)
make clarifying and/or technical changes in GSD Rule 3A and GSD Rule
22B, would have an impact on competition.\27\ These changes would
simply provide specificity, clarity and additional transparency within
the GSD Rules and not affect GSD Members' rights and obligations. As
such, FICC believes that these

proposed rule changes would not have any impact on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    FICC reviewed the proposed rule change with its Sponsoring Members
in order to benefit from their expertise on the Sponsored Members.
Written comments relating to this proposed rule change have not been
received from the Sponsoring Members or any other person. FICC will
notify the Commission of any written comments received by FICC.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-FICC-2018-008 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2018-008. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of FICC and on DTCC's website
(http://dtcc.com/legal/sec-rule-filings.aspx). All comments received
will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-FICC-2018-008 and should be submitted on
or before September 11, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-17956 Filed 8-20-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48223-48224]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22473]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14227-003]

Nevada Hydro Company, Inc.; Notice of Application Tendered for
Filing With the Commission and Soliciting Additional Study Requests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Major Unconstructed Project.
    b. Project No.: P-14227-003.
    c. Date filed: October 2, 2017.
    d. Applicant: Nevada Hydro Company, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Lake Elsinore Advanced Pumped Storage (LEAPS)
Project.
    f. Location: On Lake Elsinore and San Juan Creek near the town of
Lake Elsinore in Riverside and San Diego counties, California. The
project would occupy about 845 acres of federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 4 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Rexford Wait, Nevada Hydro Company, Inc.,
2416 Cades Way Vista, California<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Jim Fargo at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item m below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC
61,076 (2001).
    k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the
application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person
must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60
days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of
the request on the applicant.
    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for
cooperating agency status: December 1, 2017
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status
using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202)
502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy
to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14227-003.
    m. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    n. The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A new
upper reservoir (Decker Canyon) with a 200-foot-high main dam and a
gross storage volume of 5,750 acre-feet at a normal reservoir surface
elevation of 2,792 feet above mean sea level (msl); (2) a single 21-
foot-diameter concrete power shaft and power tunnel with two steel
lined penstocks; (3) an underground powerhouse with two reversible
pump-turbine units with a total installed capacity of 500 megawatts;
(4) an existing lower reservoir (Lake Elsinore) with a gross storage
volume of 54,500 acre-feet at a normal reservoir surface elevation of
1,245 feet above msl; (5) about 32 miles of 500-kV transmission line
connecting the project to an existing transmission line owned by
Southern California Edison located north of the proposed project and to
an existing San Diego Gas & Electric Company transmission line located
to the south.
    o. The license application and associated filings are available for
review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov), using the eLibrary
link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection
and reproduction at the address in paragraph m.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    p. With this notice, we are designating Nevada Hydro, Inc. as the
Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal
consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and
section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act; and consultation pursuant to section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act.
    q. Post-filing process: The major milestones of the post-filing
process for the LEAPS Project are provided below. The issuance of the
Ready for Environmental Analysis (REA) Notice and subsequent milestones
will not occur until the additional information needs of Commission
staff on the final license application have been satisfied, which may
include the completion of any needed additional studies. The milestones
that provide opportunities for stakeholder input are highlighted in
bold.

 Additional study requests due
 Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments
 Public Scoping Meetings
 Comments on Scoping Document 1 due
 Issue Scoping Document 2 (if necessary)
 Issue REA Notice soliciting comments, recommendations, terms
and conditions, and prescriptions
 Comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and
prescriptions due
 Issue updated EIS
 Comments on updated EIS due
 Issue final EIS (if necessary)

    Dated: October 11, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-22473 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P