[Federal Register: July 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 130)]
[Notices]
[Page 33006-33007]
[DOCID:fr09jy09-135]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60209; File No. SR-Phlx-2009-55]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
the Extension of a Pilot Program Related to a Specialist Fee Credit for
Linkage Orders

July 1, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on June 29, 2009, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been 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 extend for a one-year period until July
31, 2010, its current pilot programs relating to: (1) An option
transaction charge credit of $0.21 per contract for Exchange options
specialist units \3\ that incur Phlx option transaction charges when a
customer order is delivered electronically via Phlx XL \4\ or via the
Exchange's Options Floor Broker Management Systems (``FBMS''),\5\ and
is then executed via the Intermarket Option Linkage (``Linkage'') \6\
as a Principal Acting as Agent Order (``P/A Order''); and (2) the Floor
Broker Linkage P/A fee and Options Specialist Unit Credit, which
charges floor brokers an amount equal to the transaction fee(s)
assessed on options specialist units by another exchange in connection
with customer orders that are delivered to the limit order book via
FBMS and executed via Linkage as P/A Orders. The Exchange then provides
to options specialist units a credit in an amount equal to the
transaction fee(s) assessed on them by another exchange in connection
with executing customer orders that are delivered to the limit order
book via FBMS and executed via Linkage as P/A Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange uses the terms ``specialists'' and ``specialist
units'' interchangeably herein.
    \4\ See Exchange Rule 1080.
    \5\ FBMS is designed to enable Floor Brokers and/or their
employees to enter, route and report transactions stemming from
options orders received on the Exchange. FBMS also is designed to
establish an electronic audit trail for options orders represented
and executed by Floor Brokers on the Exchange, such that the audit
trail provides an accurate, time-sequenced record of electronic and
other orders, quotations and transactions on the Exchange, beginning
with the receipt of an order by the Exchange, and further
documenting the life of the order through the process of execution,
partial execution, or cancellation of that order. See Exchange Rule
1080, Commentary .06.
    \6\ Linkage is governed by the Options Linkage Authority under
the conditions set forth under the Plan for the Purpose of Creating
and Operating an Intermarket Option Linkage (the ``Plan'') approved
by the Commission. The registered U.S. options markets are linked
together on a real-time basis through a network capable of
transporting orders and messages to and from each market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While changes to the fee schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated the changes to be in
effect for transactions settling on or after July 31, 2009.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This proposal is scheduled to be in effect for the same time
period as a pilot program relating to fees for Linkage Principal
Orders and P/A Orders. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58144
(July 11, 2008), 73 FR 41394 (July 18, 2008) (SR-Phlx-2008-49). See
also, SR-Phlx-2009-53 filed June 29, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/NASDAQOMXPHLX/
Filings/, 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 those statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange currently provides for an option transaction charge
credit of $0.21 per contract for Exchange options specialist units that
incur Phlx option transaction charges when a customer order is
delivered electronically via Phlx XL or via FBMS and then is

executed via Linkage as a P/A Order. In addition, the Exchange charges
floor brokers an amount equal to the transaction fee(s) assessed on
options specialist units by another exchange in connection with
customer orders that are delivered to the limit order book via FBMS and
executed via Linkage as P/A Orders. Options specialist units are then
credited an amount equal to the transaction fee(s) assessed on them by
another exchange in connection with executing customer orders that are
delivered to the limit order book via FBMS and executed via Linkage as
a P/A Order.
    The purpose of extending the current pilot programs discussed above
is to encourage the use of Linkage, remain competitive with other
exchanges with respect to the assessment of Linkage-related fees and to
help alleviate the potential economic burden of multiple transaction
charges imposed on Exchange specialist units in connection with routing
these types of Linkage orders. Additionally, the purpose of assessing a
fee on floor brokers who send customer orders that are delivered to the
limit order book via FBMS and executed via Linkage as P/A Orders is to
more equitably assess the applicable transaction fee(s) on the member
originally entering the order to be executed. Floor brokers may choose
to route these orders through other systems and not place these orders
on the limit order book.
    The above-referenced pilot programs are currently scheduled to
expire on July 31, 2009.\8\ This proposal would extend the pilot
programs for another year, through July 31, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58234 (July 25,
2008), 73 FR 45263 (August 4, 2008) (SR-Phlx-2008-55).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act, \9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(4) \10\ of the Act in particular, in that it is designed
to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among Exchange members and other persons using its
facilities. The Exchange believes that these pilot programs, in part,
help alleviate the undue financial burden of multiple transaction
charges that are incurred by specialist units in connection with P/A
orders executed via Linkage. By assessing a fee on floor brokers and
giving a corresponding credit to specialist units allows for the
transaction fee(s) to be assessed on the member who submits the order
and for the credit to be given to the specialist unit that routed the
order to another exchange in order to obtain the National Best Bid or
Offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received with respect
to the proposed rule change.

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

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

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the self-regulatory organization to submit to the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2009-55 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-2009-55. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the 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-2009-55 and should be
submitted on or before July 30, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-16177 Filed 7-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 20827]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8339]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2011-E-0245 and FDA-2011-E-0246]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; TEFLARO

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the
regulatory review period for TEFLARO and is publishing this notice of
that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination
because of the submission of applications to the Director of Patents
and Trademarks, Department of Commerce, for the extension of patents
which claim that human drug product.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written petitions along with three copies and written comments
to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave. Bldg.
51, Rm. 6222, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug
and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide
that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as
the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical
device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory
review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a
product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the
amount of extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the
approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the human drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of Patents and
Trademarks may award (for example, half the testing phase must be
subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent
was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review
period for a human drug product will include all of the testing phase
and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA recently approved for marketing the human drug product TEFLARO
(ceftaroline fosamil). TEFLARO is indicated for the treatment of the
following infections caused by designated susceptible bacteria: Acute
bacterial skin and skin structure infections; and community-acquired
bacterial pneumonia. Subsequent to this approval, the Patent and
Trademark Office received patent term restoration applications for
TEFLARO (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,417,175 and 6,906,055) from Takeda
Pharmaceutical Company Limited, and the Patent and Trademark Office
requested FDA's assistance in determining the patents' eligibility for
patent term restoration. In a letter dated June 8, 2011, FDA advised
the Patent and Trademark Office that this human drug product had
undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of TEFLARO
represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the
product. Thereafter, the Patent and Trademark Office requested that FDA
determine the product's regulatory review period.
    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
TEFLARO is 2,118 days. Of this time, 1,814 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 304 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became
effective: January 12, 2005. FDA has verified the applicant's claim
that the date the investigational new drug application became effective
was on January 12, 2005.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human drug product under section 505(b) of the FD&C Act: December
30, 2009. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the new drug
application (NDA) for TEFLARO (NDA 200-327) was submitted on December
30, 2009.
    3. The date the application was approved: October 29, 2010. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NDA 200-327 was approved on October
29, 2010.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory limitations in
its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its
applications for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,049 days or
1,211 days of patent term extension.
    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments and ask for a
redetermination by June 5, 2012. Furthermore, any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period
by October 3, 2012. To meet its burden, the petition must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part
1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the
format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) electronic or written comments and written petitions.
It is only necessary to send one set of comments. However, if you
submit a written petition, you must submit three copies of the
petition. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in
the heading of this document.
    Comments and petitions that have not been made publicly available
on regulations.gov may be viewed in the Division of Dockets Management
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: March 19, 2012.
Jane A. Axelrad,
Associate Director for Policy, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
[FR Doc. 2012-8339 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: March 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 52)]
[Notices]
[Page 13833]
[DOCID:fr17mr06-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2503-091]

Duke Power, a Division of Duke Energy Corporation; Notice of
Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment

March 9, 2006.
    A draft environmental assessment (DEA) is available for public
review. The DEA analyzes the environmental impacts of an application
for non-project use of project lands and waters filed for the Keowee-
Toxaway Hydroelectric Project. The project is located on Lake Keowee in
Pickens County, South Carolina.
    The DEA was written by staff in the Office of Energy Projects,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and is available for review at
the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
 using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number

excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
documents. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202) 502-8659.
    Anyone may file comments on the DEA. The public as well as Federal
and state resource agencies are encouraged to provide comments. All
written comments must be filed within 30 days of the issuance date of
this notice shown above. Send an original and eight copies of all
comments marked with the project number, P-2503-091, to: The Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. 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
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    If you have any questions regarding this notice, please call Shana
High at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-3866 Filed 3-16-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28605-28608]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12905]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33509; File No. 812-14854]

Tortoise Tax-Advantaged Social Infrastructure Fund, Inc. and
Tortoise Credit Strategies, LLC

June 13, 2019.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from sections
18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) of the Act, under sections 6(c) and 23(c) of
the Act for an exemption from rule 23c-3 under the Act, and for an
order pursuant to section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the
Act.

Summary of Application: Applicants request an order to permit certain
registered closed-end management investment companies to issue multiple
classes of shares and to impose early withdrawal charges and asset-
based distribution and shareholder service fees.

Applicants: Tortoise Tax-Advantaged Social Infrastructure Fund, Inc.
(the ``Initial Fund'') and Tortoise Credit Strategies, LLC (the
``Adviser'').

Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 18, 2017 and
amended on June 14, 2018, November 5, 2018 and April 24, 2019.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on July 8, 2019, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on the applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for
lawyers, a certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act,
hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any
facts bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the
reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to
be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: Jeremy Goff, Tortoise
Credit Strategies, LLC, 11550 Ash Street, Suite 300, Leawood, KS 66211.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Asen Parachkevov, Senior Counsel, or
Andrea Ottomanelli Magovern, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division
of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://

www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Initial Fund is a Maryland corporation that is registered
under the Act as a continuously offered, non-diversified, closed-end
management investment company that operates as an interval fund. The
Initial Fund's investment objective is to seek to generate attractive
total return with an emphasis on tax-advantaged income.
    2. The Adviser is a Delaware limited liability company and is
registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940. The Adviser serves as investment adviser to the Initial Fund.
    3. The applicants seek an order to permit the Funds (as defined
below) to issue multiple classes of shares and to impose early
withdrawal charges and asset-based distribution and shareholder service
fees with respect to certain classes.
    4. Applicants request that the order also apply to any
continuously-offered registered closed-end management investment
company that has been previously organized or that may be organized in
the future for which the Adviser or any entity controlling, controlled
by, or under common control with the Adviser, or any successor in
interest to any such entity,\1\ acts as investment adviser, distributor
or underwriter and which operates as an interval fund pursuant to rule
23c-3 under the Act and/or provides periodic liquidity with respect to
its shares pursuant to rule 13e-4 under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Exchange Act'') (each, a ``Future Fund'' and together with the
Initial Fund, each a ``Fund'' and collectively, the ``Funds'').\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A successor in interest is limited to an entity that results
from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change in the
type of business organization.
    \2\ Any Fund relying on this relief in the future will do so in
compliance with the terms and conditions of the application.
Applicants represent that each entity presently intending to rely on
the requested relief is listed as an applicant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. The Initial Fund is currently conducting a continuous offering
of its Institutional Class I common stock (the ``Class I shares'').
Additional offerings by the Initial Fund or any Future Fund relying on
the order may be on a private placement or public offering basis.
Shares of the Funds will not be listed on any securities exchange nor
publicly traded. There is currently no secondary market for the shares
and the Funds expect that no secondary market will develop.
    6. If the requested relief is granted, the Initial Fund anticipates
it will continuously offer additional classes of shares, with each
class having its own fee and expense structure. Because of the
different distribution and/or shareholder services fees, services and
any other class expenses that may be attributable to each class of
shares of the Initial Fund, the net income attributable to, and the
dividends payable on, each class of shares may differ from each other.
    7. Applicants state that shares of a Fund may be subject to a
repurchase fee at a rate no greater than 2% of a shareholder's
repurchase proceeds if the interval between the date of purchase of the
shares and the valuation date with respect to the repurchase of those
shares is less than one year. To the extent a Fund determines to waive,
impose scheduled variations of, or eliminate a repurchase fee, it will
do so consistently with the requirements of rule 22d-1 under the Act
and as if such fund were an open-end investment company and the Fund's
waiver of, scheduled variation in, or elimination of, the repurchase
fee will apply uniformly to all shareholders of such Fund regardless of
class. Repurchase fees will apply equally to all classes of shares of a
Fund, consistent with section 18 of the Act and rule 18f-3 thereunder.
    8. The Initial Fund has adopted a fundamental policy to offer to
repurchase between 5% and 25% of its outstanding shares at net asset
value on a quarterly basis. Such repurchase offers will be conducted
pursuant to rule 23c-3 under the Act. Each of the Future Funds will
likewise adopt fundamental investment policies in compliance with rule
23c-3 and make repurchase offers to its shareholders at periodic
intervals and/or provide periodic liquidity with respect to its shares
pursuant to rule 13e-4 under the Exchange Act.\3\ Any repurchase offers
made by the Funds will be made to all holders of shares of each such
Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Applicants submit that rule 23c-3 and Regulation M under the
Exchange Act permit an interval fund to make repurchase offers to
repurchase its shares while engaging in a continuous offering of its
shares pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Applicants represent that any asset-based service and
distribution fees for each class of shares will comply with the
provisions of FINRA Rule 2341(d) (``FINRA Sales Charge Rule'').\4\
Applicants also represent that each Fund will disclose in its
prospectus the fees, expenses and other characteristics of each class
of shares offered for sale by the prospectus, as is required for open-
end multiple class funds under Form N-1A. As is required for open-end
funds, each Fund will disclose its expenses in shareholder reports, and
describe any arrangements that result in breakpoints in or elimination
of sales loads in its prospectus.\5\ In addition, applicants will
comply with applicable enhanced fee disclosure requirements for fund of
funds, including registered funds of hedge funds.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ All references in the application to the FINRA Sales Charge
Rule include any Financial Industry Regulatory Authority successor
or replacement rule to the FINRA Sales Charge Rule.
    \5\ See Shareholder Reports and Quarterly Portfolio Disclosure
of Registered Management Investment Companies, Investment Company
Act Release No. 26372 (Feb. 27, 2004) (adopting release) (requiring
open-end investment companies to disclose fund expenses in
shareholder reports); and Disclosure of Breakpoint Discounts by
Mutual Funds, Investment Company Act Release No. 26464 (June 7,
2004) (adopting release) (requiring open-end investment companies to
provide prospectus disclosure of certain sales load information).
    \6\ Fund of Funds Investments, Investment Company Act Rel. Nos.
26198 (Oct. 1, 2003) (proposing release) and 27399 (June 20, 2006)
(adopting release). See also Rules 12d1-1, et seq. of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Each Fund will comply with any requirements that the Commission
or FINRA may adopt regarding disclosure at the point of sale and in
transaction confirmations about the costs and conflicts of interest
arising out of the distribution of open-end investment company shares,
and regarding prospectus disclosure of sales loads and revenue sharing
arrangements, as if those requirements applied to each Fund. In
addition, each Fund will contractually require that any distributor of
the Fund's shares comply with such requirements in connection with the
distribution of such Fund's shares.
    11. Each Fund will allocate all expenses incurred by it among the
various classes of shares based on the net assets of the Fund
attributable to each class, except that the net asset value and
expenses of each class will reflect the expenses associated with the
distribution and/or shareholder services plan of that class (if any),
shareholder services fees attributable to that class (if any),
including transfer agency fees, and any other incremental expenses of
that class. Expenses of a Fund allocated to a particular class of
shares will be borne on a pro rata basis by each outstanding share of
that class. Applicants state that each Fund will comply with the
provisions of rule 18f-3 under the Act as if it were an open-end
investment company.
    12. Applicants state that each Fund may impose an early withdrawal
charge on shares submitted for repurchase that have been held less than
a specified

period and may waive the early withdrawal charge for certain categories
of shareholders or transactions to be established from time to time.
Applicants state that each Fund will apply the early withdrawal charge
(and any waivers or scheduled variations of the early withdrawal
charge) uniformly to all shareholders in a given class and consistently
with the requirements of rule 22d-1 under the Act as if the Funds were
open-end investment companies.
    13. Each Fund operating as an interval fund pursuant to rule 23c-3
under the Act may offer its shareholders an exchange feature under
which the shareholders of the Fund may, in connection with the Fund's
periodic repurchase offers, exchange their shares of the Fund for
shares of the same class of (i) registered open-end investment
companies or (ii) other registered closed-end investment companies that
comply with rule 23c-3 under the Act and continuously offer their
shares at net asset value, that are in the Fund's group of investment
companies (collectively, ``Other Funds''). Shares of a Fund operating
pursuant to rule 23c-3 that are exchanged for shares of Other Funds
will be included as part of the amount of the repurchase offer amount
for such Fund as specified in rule 23c-3 under the Act. Any exchange
option will comply with rule 11a-3 under the Act, as if the Fund were
an open-end investment company subject to rule 11a-3. In complying with
rule 11a-3, each Fund will treat an early withdrawal charge as if it
were a contingent deferred sales load.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

Multiple Classes of Shares

    1. Section 18(a)(2) of the Act provides that a closed-end
investment company may not issue or sell a senior security that is a
stock unless certain requirements are met. Applicants state that the
creation of multiple classes of shares of the Funds may violate section
18(a)(2) because the Funds may not meet such requirements with respect
to a class of shares that may be a senior security.
    2. Section 18(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that a
closed-end investment company may not issue or sell any senior security
if, immediately thereafter, the company has outstanding more than one
class of senior security. Applicants state that the creation of
multiple classes of shares of the Funds may be prohibited by section
18(c), as a class may have priority over another class as to payment of
dividends because shareholders of different classes would pay different
fees and expenses.
    3. Section 18(i) of the Act provides that each share of stock
issued by a registered management investment company will be a voting
stock and have equal voting rights with every other outstanding voting
stock. Applicants state that multiple classes of shares of the Funds
may violate section 18(i) of the Act because each class would be
entitled to exclusive voting rights with respect to matters solely
related to that class.
    4. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt
any person, security or transaction or any class or classes of persons,
securities or transactions from any provision of the Act, or from any
rule or regulation under the Act, if and to the extent such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Act. Applicants request an exemption under
section 6(c) from sections 18(a)(2), 18(c) and 18(i) to permit the
Funds to issue multiple classes of shares.
    5. Applicants submit that the proposed allocation of expenses
relating to distribution and voting rights among multiple classes is
equitable and will not discriminate against any group or class of
shareholders. Applicants submit that the proposed arrangements would
permit a Fund to facilitate the distribution of its securities and
provide investors with a broader choice of shareholder services.
Applicants assert that the proposed closed-end investment company
multiple class structure does not raise the concerns underlying section
18 of the Act to any greater degree than open-end investment companies'
multiple class structures that are permitted by rule 18f-3 under the
Act. Applicants state that each Fund will comply with the provisions of
rule 18f-3 as if it were an open-end investment company.

Early Withdrawal Charges

    1. Section 23(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that no
registered closed-end investment company shall purchase securities of
which it is the issuer, except: (a) On a securities exchange or other
open market; (b) pursuant to tenders, after reasonable opportunity to
submit tenders given to all holders of securities of the class to be
purchased; or (c) under other circumstances as the Commission may
permit by rules and regulations or orders for the protection of
investors.
    2. Rule 23c-3 under the Act permits an ``interval fund'' to make
repurchase offers of between five and twenty-five percent of its
outstanding shares at net asset value at periodic intervals pursuant to
a fundamental policy of the interval fund. Rule 23c-3(b)(1) under the
Act permits an interval fund to deduct from repurchase proceeds only a
repurchase fee, not to exceed two percent of the proceeds, that is paid
to the interval fund and is reasonably intended to compensate the fund
for expenses directly related to the repurchase.
    3. Section 23(c)(3) provides that the Commission may issue an order
that would permit a closed-end investment company to repurchase its
shares in circumstances in which the repurchase is made in a manner or
on a basis that does not unfairly discriminate against any holders of
the class or classes of securities to be purchased.
    4. Applicants request relief under section 6(c), discussed above,
and section 23(c)(3) from rule 23c-3 to the extent necessary for the
Funds to impose early withdrawal charges on shares of the Funds
submitted for repurchase that have been held for less than a specified
period.
    5. Applicants state that the early withdrawal charges they intend
to impose are functionally similar to contingent deferred sales loads
imposed by open-end investment companies under rule 6c-10 under the
Act. Rule 6c-10 permits open-end investment companies to impose
contingent deferred sales loads, subject to certain conditions.
Applicants note that rule 6c-10 is grounded in policy considerations
supporting the employment of contingent deferred sales loads where
there are adequate safeguards for the investor and state that the same
policy considerations support imposition of early withdrawal charges in
the interval fund context. In addition, applicants state that early
withdrawal charges may be necessary for the distributor to recover
distribution costs. Applicants represent that any early withdrawal
charge imposed by the Funds will comply with rule 6c-10 under the Act
as if the rule were applicable to closed-end investment companies. The
Funds will disclose early withdrawal charges in accordance with the
requirements of Form N-1A concerning contingent deferred sales loads.

Asset-Based Distribution and Shareholder Service Fees

    1. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit
an affiliated person of a registered investment company, or an
affiliated person of such person, acting as principal, from
participating in or effecting any transaction in connection

with any joint enterprise or joint arrangement in which the investment
company participates unless the Commission issues an order permitting
the transaction. In reviewing applications submitted under section
17(d) and rule 17d-1, the Commission considers whether the
participation of the investment company in a joint enterprise or joint
arrangement is consistent with the provisions, policies and purposes of
the Act, and the extent to which the participation is on a basis
different from or less advantageous than that of other participants.
    2. Rule 17d-3 under the Act provides an exemption from section
17(d) and rule 17d-1 to permit open-end investment companies to enter
into distribution arrangements pursuant to rule 12b-1 under the Act.
Applicants request an order under section 17(d) and rule 17d-1 under
the Act to the extent necessary to permit the Fund to impose asset-
based distribution and shareholder service fees. Applicants have agreed
to comply with rules 12b-1 and 17d-3 as if those rules applied to
closed-end investment companies, which they believe will resolve any
concerns that might arise in connection with a Fund financing the
distribution of its shares through asset-based distribution fees.
    For the reasons stated above, applicants submit that the exemptions
requested under section 6(c) are necessary and appropriate in the
public interest and are consistent with the protection of investors and
the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
Applicants further submit that the relief requested pursuant to section
23(c)(3) will be consistent with the protection of investors and will
insure that applicants do not unfairly discriminate against any holders
of the class of securities to be purchased. Finally, applicants state
that the Funds' imposition of asset-based distribution and shareholder
service fees is consistent with the provisions, policies and purposes
of the Act and does not involve participation on a basis different from
or less advantageous than that of other participants.

Applicants' Condition

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following condition:
    Each Fund relying on the order will comply with the provisions of
rules 6c-10, 12b-1, 17d-3, 18f-3, 22d-1, and, where applicable, 11a-3
under the Act, as amended from time to time, as if those rules applied
to closed-end management investment companies, and will comply with the
FINRA Sales Charge Rule, as amended from time to time, as if that rule
applied to all closed-end management investment companies.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-12905 Filed 6-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 46)]
[Notices]
[Page 12406-12408]
[DOCID:fr07mr08-70]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

March 3, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP08-223-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Equitrans LP submits Twentieth Revised Sheet 5,
Thirtieth Revised Sheet 6 and Seventeenth Revised Sheet 10 to its FERC
Gas Tariff, Original Volume, to be effective April 1, 2008.

    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-224-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC submits First
Revised Sheet 1, Eight Revised Sheet 7, Seventh Revised Sheet 8 and
First Revised Sheet 15 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1,
to be effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-225-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP.
    Description: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP submits Ninth Revised
Sheet 11 and Eight Revised Sheet 12 of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original
Volume 1, to be effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.
    Docket Numbers: RP08-226-000.
    Applicants: High Island Offshore System, L.L.C.
    Description: High Island Offshore System, LLC submits Seventh
Revised Sheet 11 to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, proposed
to be effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.
    Docket Numbers: RP08-227-000.
    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.
    Description: Guardian Pipeline, LLC submits Fourth Revised Sheet 1
et al to its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be effective April
1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0111.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-228-000.
    Applicants: Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co.
    Description: Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co submits Sixty-
Eighth Revised Sheet 15 et al to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume
1 to its Annual Fuel and Electric Power Reimbursement Adjustment,
effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-229-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP.
    Description: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP submits Tenth Revised
Sheet 10 and Seventh Revised Sheet 12 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Original
Volume 1, to be effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0109.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-230-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Florida Gas Transmission Co, LLC submits Ninth Revised
Sheet 7 et al to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1, to be
effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0108.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-231-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Florida Gas Transmission Co, LLC submits Tenth Revised
Sheet 7 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1, to be
effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0107.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-232-000.
    Applicants: Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Transwestern Pipeline Co, LLC submits Second Revised
Sheet 0 et al to its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, to be
effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-233-000.
    Applicants: Colorado Interstate Gas Company.
    Description: Colorado Interstate Gas Company submits reimbursement
percentage for Lost, Unaccounted-For and Others Fuel Gas.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0116.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-234-000.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits Twenty-Third
Revised Sheet 25 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1,
to be effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.
    Docket Numbers: RP08-235-000.
    Applicants: Cheyenne Plains Gas Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Cheyenne Plains Gas Pipeline Company, LLC submit the
tariff sheet updates CPG's contract extension language to provide the
negotiation and continuation of an existing transportation service
agreement, tariff sheet become effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-236-000.
    Applicants: Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP.
    Description: Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP submits the
revised tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to its FERC Gas Tariff,
Third Revised Volume 1 proposed to be effective April 1, 2008.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080303-0119.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 12, 2008.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's

eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list.
They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference
Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site
that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document
is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC
Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-4482 Filed 3-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 156 (Wednesday, August 12, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48687-48689]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17610]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235; FRL-10013-37]

1-Bromopropane; Final Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Risk
Evaluation; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing the
availability of the final Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) risk
evaluation of 1-Bromopropane (1-BP). The purpose of conducting risk
evaluations under TSCA is to determine whether a chemical substance
presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment
under the conditions of use, including an unreasonable risk to a
relevant potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation, without
consideration of costs or other nonrisk factors. EPA has determined
that specific conditions of use of 1-BP present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health. For those conditions of use for which EPA has found
an unreasonable risk, EPA must take regulatory action to address that
unreasonable risk through risk management measures enumerated in TSCA.
EPA has also determined that specific conditions of use do not present
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. For those
conditions of use for which EPA has found no unreasonable risk to
health or the environment, the Agency's determination is a final Agency
action and is issued via order in the risk evaluation.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235, is available online
at http://www.regulations.gov or in-person at the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is
(202) 566-0280.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Public Reading Room is closed to visitors
with limited exceptions. The EPA/DC staff continue to provide remote
customer service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information contact: Dr. Stan Barone, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (7403M), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may
be of interest to persons who are or may be interested in risk
evaluations of chemical substances under TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Since other entities may also be interested in this final risk
evaluation, the EPA has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action.

B. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?

    TSCA section 6, 15 U.S.C. 2605, requires EPA to conduct risk
evaluations to ``determine whether a chemical substance presents an
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without
consideration of costs or other nonrisk factors, including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant to the risk evaluation by the Administrator,
under the conditions of use.'' 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4)(A). TSCA sections
6(b)(4)(A) through (H) enumerate the deadlines and minimum requirements
applicable to this process, including provisions that provide
instruction on chemical substances that must undergo evaluation, the
minimum components of a TSCA risk evaluation, and the timelines for
public comment and completion of the risk evaluation. TSCA also
requires that EPA operate in a manner that is consistent with the best
available science, make decisions based on the weight of the scientific
evidence and consider reasonably available information. 15 U.S.C.
2625(h), (i), and (k). TSCA section 6(i) directs that a determination
of ``no unreasonable risk''

shall be issued by order and considered to be a final Agency action,
while a determination of ``unreasonable risk'' is not considered to be
a final Agency action. 15 U.S.C. 2605(i).
    The statute identifies the minimum components for all chemical
substance risk evaluations. For each risk evaluation, EPA must publish
a document that outlines the scope of the risk evaluation to be
conducted, which includes the hazards, exposures, conditions of use,
and the potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations that EPA
expects to consider. 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4)(D). The statute further
provides that each risk evaluation must also: (1) Integrate and assess
available information on hazards and exposures for the conditions of
use of the chemical substance, including information that is relevant
to specific risks of injury to health or the environment and
information on relevant potentially exposed or susceptible
subpopulations; (2) describe whether aggregate or sentinel exposures
were considered and the basis for that consideration; (3) take into
account, where relevant, the likely duration, intensity, frequency, and
number of exposures under the conditions of use; and (4) describe the
weight of the scientific evidence for the identified hazards and
exposures. 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4)(F)(i)-(ii) and (iv)-(v). Each risk
evaluation must not consider costs or other nonrisk factors. 15 U.S.C.
2605(b)(4)(F)(iii).
    The statute requires that the risk evaluation process be completed
within a specified timeframe and provide an opportunity for public
comment on a draft risk evaluation prior to publishing a final risk
evaluation. 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4).
    Subsection 5.4.1 of the final risk evaluation for 1-BP constitutes
the order required under TSCA section 6(i)(1), and the ``no
unreasonable risk'' determinations in that subsection are considered to
be a final Agency action effective on the date of issuance of the
order. In conducting risk evaluations, ``EPA will determine whether the
chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or
the environment under each condition of use within the scope of the
risk evaluation . . .'' 40 CFR 702.47. Under EPA's implementing
regulations, ``[a] determination by EPA that the chemical substance,
under one or more of the conditions of use within the scope of the risk
evaluation, does not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health
or the environment will be issued by order and considered to be a final
Agency action, effective on the date of issuance of the order.'' 40 CFR
702.49(d). For purposes of TSCA section 19(a)(1)(A), the date of
issuance of the section 6(i)(1) order for 1-BP shall be at 1:00 p.m.
Eastern time (standard or daylight, as appropriate) on the date that is
two weeks after the date when this notice is published in the Federal
Register, which is in accordance with 40 CFR 23.5.

C. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is announcing the availability of the risk evaluation of the
chemical substance identified in Unit II. In this risk evaluation EPA
has made unreasonable risk determinations on some of the conditions of
use within the scope of the risk evaluation for this chemical. For
those conditions of use for which EPA has found an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment, EPA must take regulatory action to
address those risks through risk management measures enumerated in 15
U.S.C. 2605(a).
    EPA is also announcing the availability of the information required
to be provided publicly with each risk evaluation, which is available
online at http://www.regulations.gov in the dockets identified. 40 CFR
702.51. Specifically, EPA has provided:
     The scope document and problem formulation (in Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0741);
     Draft risk evaluation, and final risk evaluation (in
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235);
     All notices, determinations, findings, consent agreements,
and orders (in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235);
     Any information required to be provided to the Agency
under 15 U.S.C. 2603 (in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0741 and Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235);
     A nontechnical summary of the risk evaluation (in Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235);
     A list of the studies, with the results of the studies,
considered in carrying out each risk evaluation (Risk Evaluation for 1-
Bromopropane in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235);
     The final peer review report, including the response to
peer review and public comments received during peer review (in Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235); and
     Response to public comments received on the draft scope
and the draft risk evaluation (in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235).

II. TSCA Risk Evaluation

A. What is EPA's risk evaluation process for existing chemicals under
TSCA?

    The risk evaluation process is the second step in EPA's existing
chemical process under TSCA, following prioritization and before risk
management. As this chemical is one of the first ten chemical
substances undergoing risk evaluation, the chemical substance was not
required to go through prioritization (81 FR 91927, December 19, 2016)
(FRL-9956-47). The purpose of conducting risk evaluations is to
determine whether a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment under the conditions of use,
including an unreasonable risk to a relevant potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulation. As part of this process, EPA must evaluate
both hazard and exposure, not consider costs or other nonrisk factors,
use reasonably available information and approaches in a manner that is
consistent with the requirements in TSCA for the use of the best
available science, and ensure decisions are based on the weight of
scientific evidence.
    The specific risk evaluation process that EPA has established by
rule to implement the statutory process is set out in 40 CFR part 702
and summarized on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluations-existing-chemicals-under-tsca. As explained in the preamble to EPA's final rule on
procedures for risk evaluation (82 FR 33726, July 20, 2017) (FRL-9964-
38), the specific regulatory process set out in 40 CFR part 702,
subpart B is being followed for the first ten chemical substances
undergoing risk evaluation to the maximum extent practicable.
    Prior to the publication of this final risk evaluation, a draft
risk evaluation was subject to peer review and public comment. EPA
reviewed the report from the peer review committee and public comments
and has amended the risk evaluation in response to these comments as
appropriate. The public comments, peer review report, and EPA's
response to comments is in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0235. Prior
to the publication of the draft risk evaluation, EPA made available the
scope and problem formulation, and solicited public input on uses and
exposure. EPA's documents and the public comments are in Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0741. Additionally, information about the scope,
problem formulation, and draft risk evaluation phases of the TSCA risk

evaluation for this chemical is at https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-1-bromopropane-1-bp.

B. What is 1-Bromopropane?

    1-BP, also known as n-propyl bromide, is a volatile chemical used
as a solvent for cleaning and degreasing (including vapor degreasing,
cold cleaning, and aerosol degreasing). Other uses for 1-BP are for
consumer and commercial products as adhesives and sealants, in
furniture care products, in dry cleaning, spot cleaning and other
liquid, spray, and aerosol cleaners, and in automotive care products.
Information from the 2016 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) for 1-BP
indicates the reported production volume is between 10 million and 26
million lbs/year (manufacture and import).

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-17610 Filed 8-11-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 78 (Friday, April 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21385-21386]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0023]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of
information.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections. This
document describes one collection of information for which NHTSA
intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 22, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to U.S. Department of
Transportation Dockets, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590. Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Laurie Flaherty, Program Analyst,
Office of Emergency Medical Services, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, NTI-
140, Room W44-322,Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulations (at 5 CFR
1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
    (i) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the

validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (iv) How to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submissions of responses. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA
asks public comment on the following proposed collection of
information:

Request for Information, National 9-1-1 Program

    Type of Request: New information collection requirement.
    OMB Clearance Number: N/A.
    FORM Number: This collection of information uses no standard forms.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from date of
approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information: NHTSA is proposing to
issue annual RFIs seeking comments from all sources (public, private,
governmental, academic, professional, public interest groups, and other
interested parties) on operational priorities for the National Program.
    The National 9-1-1 Program currently provides:
    Program and policy coordination across Federal agencies. Support to
Public Safety Answering Points and related State and local agencies for
9-1-1 deployment and operations. NHTSA intends to use the National 9-1-
1 Program to work cooperatively with public and private 9-1-1
stakeholders to establish a vision for the future of 9-1-1 services in
the Nation. The RFIs will solicit comments on the priorities and
strategies of the National 9-1-1 Program to accomplish its functions,
goals and vision. In addition, the RFIs will obtain expressions of
interest in participating as partners and will request responses to
specific questions, including critical 9-1-1 issues, benefits to
stakeholders, available data and methods of collection, etc. These RFIs
will NOT seek comment on the 9-1-1 grant program administered by the
NHTSA. The RFIs will not include requests for proposals or invitations
for bids.
    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information: The 9-1-1 constituency is a diverse group of entities,
including:
    Government Agencies:
     Local, State and Federal policy, regulation, and funding
agencies.
     Local and State emergency communications agencies.
     Local, State and Federal emergency response agencies.
    Non-Governmental Organizations:
     Professional and industry associations.
     Standards Development Organizations.
     Citizen and special interest advocacy organizations.
     Private emergency response and recovery organizations.
     Research and academic organizations.
    IT/Telecommunications Service Providers:
     ``Traditional'' telecommunication service providers.
     ``Public Safety/emergency'' service providers.
     ``Other'' IT/telecommunication application service
providers.
     IP-network access infrastructure/service providers.
    IT/Telecommunications Equipment Providers:
     Equipment and support service suppliers to ``traditional''
telecommunication companies.
     Equipment and support service suppliers to IT network
providers.
     ``Public Safety/emergency services network'' equipment
providers.
     Personal communication device providers.
    Third Party Emergency Call Centers:
     Third party service providers such as telematics, poison
control, medical alert, central alarm monitoring, relay services, and
N9-1-1 services.
    In order to collect information needed to develop and implement
effective strategies for the National 9-1-1 Program to provide
leadership, coordination, guidance and direction to the enhancement of
the Nation's 9-1-1 services, NHTSA must utilize efficient and effective
means of eliciting the input and opinions of its constituency groups.
If approved, the proposed annual RFIs would assist the National 9-1-1
Program in addressing the myriad of issues posed by implementing new
technologies in 9-1-1 services in a systematic, prioritized fashion,
with active involvement of its constituency in this process. The
results of the proposed annual RFIs would be used to:
    (1) Identify areas to target programs and activities to achieve the
greatest benefit;
    (2) Develop programs and initiatives aimed at cooperative efforts
to enhance 9-1-1 services nationwide; and
    (3) to provide informational support to States, regions, and
localities in their own efforts to enhance 9-1-1 services.
    Description of the Likely Respondents (Including Estimated Number,
and Proposed Frequency of Response to the Collection of Information):
Under this proposed effort, the National 9-1-1 Program would issue
annual RFIs, seeking responses to specific questions and soliciting
comments on the priorities and strategies used by the National 9-1-1
Program to accomplish its functions, goals and vision, and to obtain
expressions of interest in participating as partners. The various
entities included in the constituency of the National 9-1-1 Program
would be notified of the issuance of each RFI. Likely respondents would
include companies, agencies and organizations from all of the
constituency groups listed above, particularly local and State
emergency communications agencies, professional and industry
associations, ``traditional'' telecommunication service providers,
``public safety/emergency'' service providers and special interest
advocacy organizations. The total number of respondents is estimated at
30 to 40.
    Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden
Resulting From the Collection of Information: NHTSA estimates that
responses to the questions included in the proposed RFIs would require
an average of one hour to complete, for a total of 40 to 50 hours. The
respondents would not incur any reporting costs from the information
collection. The respondents also would not incur any recordkeeping
burden or recordkeeping costs from the information collection.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A); 47 U.S.C. 942.

    Issued on April 19, 2010.
Jeffrey P. Michael,
Associate Administrator for Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-9379 Filed 4-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26711-26712]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11933]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86017; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2019-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Certain
Generic Listing Standards for Managed Fund Shares Applicable to
Holdings of Fixed Income Securities

June 3, 2019.

I. Introduction

    On February 14, 2019, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend certain generic listing standards for
Managed Fund Shares applicable to holdings of fixed income securities.
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on March 6, 2019.\3\ On April 18, 2019, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the Commission designated a longer period
within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the
proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\ On May 15, 2019, the Exchange
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change, which amended and
superseded the original filing in its entirety.\6\ The Commission has
received no comments on the proposed rule change. This order approves
the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85220 (February 28,
2019), 84 FR 8138.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85690, 84 FR 17204
(April 24, 2019). The Commission designated June 4, 2019 as the date
by which the Commission shall approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.
    \6\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange: (1) Clarified that non-
agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued mortgage-related and other
asset-backed securities in the portfolio of a series of generically-
listed Managed Fund Shares would satisfy all of the generic listing
standards of Commentary .01(b) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E, as
amended; (2) modified its argument supporting its proposed change;
and (3) made other technical changes. Because Amendment No. 1 does
not materially alter the substance of the proposed rule change or
raise unique or novel regulatory issues, Amendment No. 1 is not
subject to notice and comment. Amendment No. 1 is available at
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2019-06/srnysearca201906-5524002-185227.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1 7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For a more detailed description of the proposal, see
Amendment No. 1, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commentary .01 to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E sets forth the generic
listing standards for Managed Fund Shares.\8\ Commentary .01(b) to NYSE
Arca Rule 8.600-E sets forth the generic listing standards applicable
to fixed income securities \9\ in the portfolio of a series of Managed
Fund Shares. Commentary .01(b)(5) currently provides that non-agency,
non-GSE, and privately-issued mortgage-related and other asset-backed
securities components of a portfolio shall not account, in the
aggregate, for more than 20% of the weight of the fixed income portion
of the portfolio. The Exchange proposes to amend Commentary .01(b)(5)
by deleting the reference to the ``fixed income portion of the''
portfolio, such that non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued
mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities components of a
portfolio may not account, in the aggregate, for more than 20% of the
weight of the whole portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The term ``Managed Fund Share'' means a security that (a)
represents an interest in a registered investment company
(``Investment Company'') organized as an open-end management
investment company or similar entity, that invests in a portfolio of
securities selected by the Investment Company's investment adviser
consistent with the Investment Company's investment objectives and
policies; (b) is issued in a specified aggregate minimum number in
return for a deposit of a specified portfolio of securities and/or a
cash amount with a value equal to the next determined net asset
value; and (c) when aggregated in the same specified minimum number,
may be redeemed at a holder's request, which holder will be paid a
specified portfolio of securities and/or cash with a value equal to
the next determined net asset value. See NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-
E(c)(1).
    \9\ Commentary .01(b) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E provides that
fixed income securities are debt securities that are notes, bonds,
debentures or evidence of indebtedness that include, but are not
limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury securities, government-
sponsored entity (``GSE'') securities, municipal securities, trust
preferred securities, supranational debt and debt of a foreign
country or a subdivision thereof, investment grade and high yield
corporate debt, bank loans, mortgage and asset backed securities,
and commercial paper.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\10\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\
which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the generic listing standards for
Managed Fund Shares, as proposed to be amended, would continue to be
designed to prevent manipulation. As noted above, the Exchange proposes
to amend Commentary .01(b)(5) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E to allow non-
agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued mortgage-related and other asset-
backed

securities to account for no more than 20% of the weight of the whole
portfolio (rather than the fixed income portion of the portfolio).
Therefore, the proposed rule change would allow the Exchange to
generically list and trade series of Managed Fund Shares that hold more
non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued mortgage-related and other
asset-backed securities than is currently allowed under the generic
listing standards (if assets other than fixed income securities are in
the portfolio).\12\ According to the Exchange, the proposal would allow
increased portfolio diversification.\13\ The Exchange also states that
it has in place surveillance procedures that are adequate to properly
monitor trading in series of Managed Fund Shares in all trading
sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and
applicable federal securities laws.\14\ The Commission notes that, as
proposed, non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued mortgage-related
and other asset-backed securities must meet all the generic listing
standards in Commentary .01(b) to NYSE Arca Rule 8.600-E.\15\ In
addition, the Commission notes that it has previously approved the
listing and trading of Managed Fund Shares that could hold up to 20% of
their total assets in non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued asset-
backed and mortgage-backed securities.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ As the Exchange notes, currently, a fund holding 100% of
its assets in fixed income securities could hold 20% of its entire
portfolio's weight in non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued
mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities. See Amendment
No. 1, supra note 6, at 5. In contrast, a fund holding 25% of its
assets in fixed income securities, 25% in U.S. component stocks, and
50% in cash and cash equivalents could only hold 5% its entire
portfolio's weight in non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued
mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities. See id. Under
the proposal, each of these funds could hold 20% of its entire
portfolio's weight in non-agency, non-GSE, and privately-issued
mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities.
    \13\ See id., at 4-5.
    \14\ See id., at 6. The Exchange or the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''), on behalf of the Exchange, or
both, would communicate as needed regarding trading in Managed Fund
Shares with other markets and other entities that are members of the
Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG''), and the Exchange or FINRA,
on behalf of the Exchange, or both, could obtain trading information
regarding trading in Managed Fund Shares from such markets and other
entities. See id. In addition, the Exchange could obtain information
regarding trading in Managed Fund Shares from markets and other
entities that are members of ISG or with which the Exchange has in
place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement. See id.
    \15\ See id., at 5.
    \16\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 83319 (May
24, 2018), 83 FR 25097 (May 31, 2018) (SR-NYSEArca-2018-15); 80946
(June 15, 2017), 82 FR 28126 (June 20, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2017-039);
74814 (April 27, 2015), 80 FR 24986 (May 1, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2014-
107).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\17\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2019-06), as
modified by Amendment No. 1, be, and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11933 Filed 6-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 54495-54496]
[DOCID:fr25se07-86]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56460; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-84]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend CBOE's Rule
Pertaining to Verification Requests for Trade Reporting Minor Rule
Violations

September 18, 2007.
    On July 18, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend CBOE Rule 17.50
(Imposition of Fines for Minor Rule Violations) Interpretation and
Policy .02(b) regarding verification requests for fines imposed
pursuant to the provisions of CBOE Rule 17.50(g)(4) (Failure to Submit
Trade Information on Time and Failure to Submit Trade Information to
the Price Reporter). The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on August 17, 2007.\3\ The Commission received
no comments regarding the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56239(August 10,
2007), 72 FR 46257.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\4\ In particular, the
Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ which requires that the rules of an exchange be
designed to, among other things, protect investors and the public
interest. The Commission believes that the proposed rule change, by
extending the ``look-back'' period for determining the maximum number
of verification requests for trade reporting violations, would make a
reasonable adjustment to its MRVP review process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In approving this proposed rule change, theCommission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also believes that handling violations of trade
reporting rules pursuant to the MRVP is consistent with Sections
6(b)(1) and 6(b)(6) of the Act,\6\ which require that the rules of an
exchange enforce compliance with, and provide appropriate discipline
for, violations of Commission and Exchange rules. The Commission also
finds that the proposal is consistent with the public interest, the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act, as required by Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act,\7\ which
governs minor rule violation plans. The Commission believes that the
proposed change to the MRVP should strengthen the Exchange's ability to
carry out its oversight and enforcement responsibilities as a self-
regulatory organization in cases where full disciplinary proceedings
are unsuitable in view of the minor nature of the particular violation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and 78f(b)(6).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission in no way
minimizes the importance of compliance with CBOE rules and all other
rules subject to the imposition of fines under the MRVP. The Commission
believes that the violation of any self-regulatory organization's
rules, as well as Commission rules, is a serious matter.

However, the MRVP provides a reasonable means of addressing rule
violations that do not rise to the level of requiring formal
disciplinary proceedings, while providing greater flexibility in
handling certain violations. The Commission expects that CBOE will
continue to conduct surveillance with due diligence and make a
determination based on its findings, on a case-by-case basis, whether a
fine of more or less than the recommended amount is appropriate for a
violation under the MRVP or whether a violation requires formal
disciplinary action under CBOE Rules 17.1-17.10.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\8\ and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act,\9\ that the proposed rule
change (SR-CBOE-2007-84), as amended, be, and hereby is, approved and
declared effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-18824 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P