[Federal Register: July 5, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 39143-39145]
[DOCID:fr05jy11-118]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64760; File No. SR-ISE-2011-34]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Increase the Position and Exercise Limit for Options on the
Standard & Poor's[supreg] Depository Receipts (SPDRs[supreg])

June 28, 2011.
    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 17, 2011, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (the
``Exchange'' or the ``ISE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed
rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the rules of the Exchange to
increase the position and exercise limit applicable to options on the
Standard and Poor's[supreg] Depositary Receipts (``SPDRs[supreg]'').\5\
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web
site http://www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``SPDRs[supreg]'', ``Standard & Poor's[supreg]'',
``S&P[supreg]'', ``S&P 500[supreg]'', ``Standard & Poor's 500'', and
``500'' are trademarks of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
SPDRs[supreg], also sometimes referred to colloquially as
``spiders'', are exchange traded funds (``ETFs'') based on the S&P
500[supreg] Index. Each share of the traditional SPDRs[supreg] ETF
(SPDRs[supreg] Trust Series 1) holds a stake in the 500 stocks
represented by the S&P 500[supreg]. SPDRs[supreg], and options
thereon, are generally used by large institutions and traders as
bets on the overall direction of the market. They are also used by
individual retail investors who believe in passive management (index
investing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposal is to amend ISE Rules 412 and 414 to
increase the position and exercise limit applicable to options on
SPDRs[supreg], which are trading under the symbol SPY, from 300,000 to
900,000 contracts on the same side of the market. The Exchange began
trading options on SPDRs[supreg] on January 10, 2005. That year, the
position limit for these options was increased to the current limit of
300,000 contracts on the same side of the market, and has remained
unchanged.\6\ However, institutional and retail traders have greatly
increased their demand for options on SPDRs[supreg] for hedging and
trading purposes, such that these options have experienced an explosive
gain in popularity and have been the most actively traded options for
the last two years. For example, options on SPDRs[supreg] (SPY), the
most actively traded options in the U.S. in terms of volume, traded a
total of 33,341,698 contracts across all exchanges from March 1, 2011
through March 16, 2011. In contrast, over the same time period, options
on the Nasdaq-100 Index[supreg] Tracking Stock
(``QQQSM''),\7\ the third most actively traded options,
traded a total of 8,730,718 contracts (less than 26.2% of the volume of
options on SPDRs[supreg]).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51042 (January 14,
2005), 70 FR 3412 (January 24, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-05) (Approval
order increasing position and exercise limits for options on
SPDRs[supreg] from 75,000 contracts to 300,000 contracts on the same
side of the market).
    \7\ QQQSM options were formerly traded under the
ticker symbol QQQQSM. QQQSM, Nasdaq-
100[supreg], Nasdaq-100 Index[supreg], Nasdaq[supreg], and Nasdaq-
100 Index Tracking StockSM are trademarks or service
marks of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (``Nasdaq'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, SPY options have a position limit of only 300,000
contracts on the same side on the market while the significantly
lesser-volume QQQSM options, which are comparable to SPY
options, have a position limit of 900,000 contracts on the same side of
the market. The Exchange believes that SPY options should, like options
on QQQSM, have a position limit of 900,000 contacts. Given
the increase in volume and continuous unprecedented demand for trading
options on SPDRs[supreg], the Exchange believes that the current
position limit of 300,000 contracts is too low and inadequate and is a
deterrent to the optimal use of the product for hedging and trading
purposes. There are multiple reasons to increase the position and
exercise limit for SPY options.
    First, traders have informed the Exchange that the current SPY
option position limit of 300,000 contracts, which has remained flat for
more than five years despite the tremendous trading volume increase, is
no longer sufficient for optimal trading and hedging purposes. SPY
options are, as noted, used by large institutions and traders as a
means to invest in or hedge the overall direction of the market.
Second, options on SPDRs[supreg] are 1/10th the size of options on the
S&P 500[supreg]Index, traded under the symbol SPX. Thus, a position
limit of 300,000 contracts in options on SPDRs[supreg] is equivalent to
a 30,000 contract position limit in options on SPX.\8\ Traders who
trade options on SPDRs[supreg] to hedge positions in SPX options (and
the SPDRs[supreg] ETF based on SPX, SPDRs[supreg] Trust Series 1) have
indicated on several occasions that the current position limit for
options on SPDRs[supreg] is simply too restrictive,\9\ which may
adversely affect their (and the Exchange's) ability to provide
liquidity in this product. And third, the products that are perhaps
most comparable to options on SPDRs[supreg], namely options on QQQ\SM\,
are subject to a 900,000 contract position limit on the same side of
the market.\10\ This has, in light of the huge run-up in SPY option
trading making them the number one nationally-ranked option in terms of
volume, resulted in a skewed and unacceptable SPY option position
limit. Specifically, the position limit for options on SPDRs[supreg] at
300,000 contracts

is but 33% of the position limit for the less active options on QQQ\SM\
at 900,000 contracts.\11\ The Exchange proposes that options on
SPDRs[supreg] similarly be subject to a position and exercise limit of
900,000 contracts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Chicago Board Options Exchange, which lists and trades SPX
options, has established that there is no position limit on SPX
options. See CBOE Rule 24.4 and Securities Exchange Act Release No.
44994 (October 26, 2001), 66 FR 55722 (November 2, 2001) (SR-CBOE-
2001-22) (order approving permanent elimination of SPX options
position limit).
    \9\ See supra note 3.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51295 (March 2,
2005), 70 FR 11292 (March 8, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-14).
    \11\ Similarly to options on SPDRs[supreg] (SPY) being 1/10th
the size of options on the related index S&P 500[supreg]Index (SPX),
so options on the Nasdaq-100 Index[supreg] Tracking Stock (QQQ\SM\)
are 1/10th the size of options on the related index NASDAQ-100 Index
(NDX). The position limit for QQQ\SM\ options and its related index
NDX have a comparable relationship to that of SPY options and SPX.
That is, the position limit for options on QQQ\SM\ is 900,000
contracts and there is no positions limit for NDX options. See supra
note 7 and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52650 (October 21,
2005), 70 FR 62147 (October 28, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2001-41) (order
approving elimination of NDX options position limit).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this proposal, the Exchange's options reporting requirement
would continue abated. Thus, the Exchange would require that, just like
for options on QQQSM, each member or member organization
that maintains a position in SPDRs[supreg] options on the same side of
the market, for its own account or for the account of a customer, must
report certain information. This information would include, but would
not be limited to, the option position, whether such position is hedged
and if so, a description of the hedge and if applicable, the collateral
used to carry the position. Exchange market makers would continue to be
exempt from this reporting requirement as information regarding
positions held by market makers can be accessed through the Exchange's
market surveillance systems. In addition, the general reporting
requirement for customer accounts that maintain an aggregate position
of 200 or more option contracts (``large positions'') would remain at
this level for options on SPDRs[supreg].
    The Exchange believes that position and exercise limits, at their
current levels, no longer serve their stated purpose. There has been a
steadfast and significant increase over the last decade in the overall
volume of exchange-traded options; position limits, however, have not
kept up with the volume. Part of this volume is attributable to a
corresponding increase in the number of overall market participants,
which has, in turn, brought about additional depth and increased
liquidity in exchange-traded options.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Commission has previously observed that: Since the
inception of standardized options trading, the options exchanges
have had rules imposing limits on the aggregate number of options
contracts that a member or customer could hold or exercise. These
rules are intended to prevent the establishment of options positions
that can be used or might create incentives to manipulate or disrupt
the underlying market so as to benefit the options position. In
particular, position and exercise limits are designed to minimize
the potential for mini-manipulations and for corners or squeezes of
the underlying market. In addition such limits serve to reduce the
possibility for disruption of the options market itself, especially
in illiquid options classes. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
39489 (December 24, 1997), 63 FR 276 (January 5, 1998) (SR-CBOE-97-
11) (order approving).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the anniversary of listed options trading approaches its
fortieth year, the Exchange believes that the existing surveillance
procedures and reporting requirements at ISE, other options exchanges,
and at the several clearing firms are capable of properly identifying
unusual and/or illegal trading activity. In addition, routine oversight
inspections of the Exchange's regulatory programs by the Commission
have not uncovered any material inconsistencies or shortcomings in the
manner in which the Exchange's market surveillance is conducted. These
procedures utilize daily monitoring of market movements via automated
surveillance techniques to identify unusual activity in both options
and underlying stocks.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ These procedures have been effective for the surveillance
of SPY options trading and will continue to be employed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, large stock holdings must be disclosed to the
Commission by way of Schedules 13D or 13G.\14\ Options positions are
part of any reportable positions and, thus, cannot be legally hidden.
Moreover, the Exchange's requirement that members file reports with the
Exchange for any customer who held aggregate large long or short
positions of any single class for the previous day will continue to
serve as an important part of the Exchange's surveillance efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.13d-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the current financial requirements
imposed by the Exchange and by the Commission adequately address
concerns that a member or its customer may try to maintain an
inordinately large un-hedged position in an option, particularly on
SPDRs[supreg]. Current margin and risk-based haircut methodologies
serve to limit the size of positions maintained by any one account by
increasing the margin and/or capital that a member must maintain for a
large position held by it or by its customer. In addition, the
Commission's net capital rule, Rule 15c3-1 under the Act,\15\ imposes a
capital charge on members to the extent of any margin deficiency
resulting from a higher margin requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.15c3-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that while position limit on options on
QQQsSM, which as noted are similar to options on
SPDRs[supreg], has been gradually expanded from 75,000 contracts to the
current level of 900,000 contracts in 2005, there have been no adverse
affects on the market as a result of this position limit increase.
Likewise, there have been no adverse affects on the market from
expanding the position limit for options on SPDRs[supreg] from 75,000
contracts to the current level of 300,000 contracts in 2005.
    The Exchange also believes that restrictive option position limits
prevent large customers, such as mutual funds and pension funds, from
using options to gain meaningful exposure to and hedging protection
through the use of options on SPDRs[supreg]. This can result in lost
liquidity in both the options market and the equity market. The
proposed position limit increase will remedy this situation to the
benefit of large as well as retail traders, investors, and public
customers. The Exchange believes that increasing position and exercise
limits for options would lead to a more liquid and competitive market
environment for options on SPDRs[supreg] that would benefit customers
interested in this product.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed increase in
position and exercise limits on options on SPDRs[supreg] is required
for competitive purposes as well as for purposes of consistency and
uniformity among the competing options exchanges. This, taken in
conjunction with the permanent establishment of other separate
increased position and exercise limits, all as noted above, supports
the Exchange's current proposal to increase the position and exercise
limits applicable to options on SPDRs[supreg].
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,\16\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) of the Act of 1934,\17\ in
particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, 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. Specifically, the Exchange believes
that the structure of the SPDRs[supreg] options and the considerable
liquidity of the market for SPDRs[supreg] options diminish the
opportunity to manipulate this product and disrupt the underlying
market that a lower position limit may protect against. Further, the
Exchange believes that this proposal will be beneficial to

large market makers (which generally have the greatest potential and
actual ability to provide liquidity and depth in this product), as well
as retail traders, investors, and public customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does not 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not (i)
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, provided that the self-regulatory organization has given 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,\18\ the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant
to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \19\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \20\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii), the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, because it will enable
the Exchange immediately to compete with another exchange that already
has adopted the higher position and exercise limit for options on
SPDRs[supreg]. Therefore, the Commission designates the proposal
operative upon filing.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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 No. SR-ISE-2011-34 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2011-34. 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 Commissions Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will
be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
ISE. 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-ISE-
2011-34 and should be submitted by July 26, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-16679 Filed 7-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 47 (Friday, March 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14125-14127]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05202]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-1440]

Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting;
Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming
public advisory committee meeting of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory
Committee. The general function of the committee is to provide advice
and recommendations to FDA on regulatory issues. The meeting will be
open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on
this document.

DATES: The meeting will be held on April 27, 2021, from 1 p.m. to 3:45
p.m. Eastern Time, on April 28, 2021, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern
Time, and on April 29, 2021, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.

ADDRESSES: Please note that due to the impact of this COVID-19
pandemic, all meeting participants will be joining this advisory
committee meeting via an online teleconferencing platform. Answers to
commonly asked questions about FDA advisory committee meetings may be
accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.
    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting.
The docket number is FDA-2020-N-1440. The docket will close on April
26, 2021. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public
meeting by April 26, 2021. Please note that late, untimely filed
comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted
on or before April 26, 2021. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic
filing system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time

at the end of April 26, 2021. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/
courier (for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if
they are postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or
before that date.
    Comments received on or before April 20, 2021, will be provided to
the committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into
consideration by FDA. In the event that the meeting is cancelled, FDA
will continue to evaluate any relevant applications or information, and
consider any comments submitted to the docket, as appropriate. You may
submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

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

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2020-N-1440 for ``Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of
Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments.''
Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will
be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Please call<PHONE_NUMBER> ahead of
the meeting time to verify access.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' FDA will review
this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its
consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed
confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for
public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both
copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name
and contact information be made publicly available, you can provide
this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your
comments and you must identify the information as ``confidential.'' Any
information marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in
accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For
more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see
80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joyce Yu and Takyiah Stevenson, Center
for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-
800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC area). A notice in the
Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a
previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be
published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you
should always check the FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate
advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee
information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to
the meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The meeting presentations will be heard, viewed, captioned,
and recorded through an online teleconferencing platform.
    The committee will hear updates on certain supplemental biologics
license applications (sBLAs) approved under 21 CFR 601.40 (subpart E,
accelerated approval regulations) with confirmatory trial(s) that have
not verified clinical benefit. These updates will provide information
on: (1) The status and results of confirmatory clinical studies for a
given indication; and (2) any ongoing and planned trials. Confirmatory
studies are post-marketing studies to verify and describe the clinical
benefit of a drug after it receives accelerated approval. Based on the
updates provided, the committee will have a general discussion focused
on next steps for each product including whether the indications should
remain on the market while additional trial(s) are conducted.
    On April 27, 2021, the committee will receive updates on the
following product: BLA 761034/S-018, for TECENTRIQ (atezolizumab),
submitted by Genentech, Inc., indicated in combination with paclitaxel
protein-bound for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable
locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC)
whose tumors express PD-L1 (PD-L1 stained tumor-infiltrating immune
cells (IC) of any intensity covering >=1% of the tumor area), as
determined by an FDA-approved test.
    On April 28, 2021, the committee will receive updates on the
following products: (1) BLA 125514/S-017, trade name KEYTRUDA
(pembrolizumab), submitted by Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp., indicated for
the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic
urothelial carcinoma who are not eligible for cisplatin-containing
chemotherapy; and (2) BLA 761034/S-001, trade name TECENTRIQ
(atezolizumab), submitted by Genentech, Inc., indicated for patients

with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who are not
eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy.
    On April 29, 2021, the committee will receive updates on the
following products: (1) BLA 125514/S-024, trade name KEYTRUDA
(pembrolizumab), submitted by Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp., indicated for
the treatment of patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic
gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma whose tumors
express PD-L1 [Combined Positive Score (CPS) >=1] as determined by an
FDA-approved test, with disease progression on or after two or more
prior lines of therapy including fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-
containing chemotherapy and if appropriate, HER2/neu-targeted therapy;
(2) BLA 125514/S-042, trade name KEYTRUDA (pembrolizumab), submitted by
Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corp., indicated for the treatment of patients
with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who have been previously treated
with sorafenib; and (3) BLA 125554/S-041, trade name OPDIVO
(nivolumab), submitted by Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, indicated as a
single agent for the treatment of patients with hepatocellular
carcinoma (HCC) who have been previously treated with sorafenib.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available on FDA's website at
the time of the advisory committee meeting. Background material and the
link to the online teleconference meeting room will be available at
https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll
down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link. The meeting
will include slide presentations with audio components to allow the
presentation of materials in a manner that most closely resembles an
in-person advisory committee meeting.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see
ADDRESSES) on or before April 20, 2021, will be provided to the
committee. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled from
approximately 2:55 p.m. to 3:15 p.m. Eastern Time on April 27, 2021.
Oral presentations from the public will also be scheduled between
approximately 10:55 a.m. to 11:15 a.m., and 2:10 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
Eastern Time on April 28, 2021. Oral presentations from the public will
also be scheduled between approximately 10:50 a.m. to 11:10 a.m., 1:55
p.m. to 2:15 p.m., and from 4:40 p.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April
29, 2021. Those individuals interested in making formal oral
presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief
statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish
to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an
indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation
on or before April 12, 2021. Time allotted for each presentation may be
limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater
than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public
hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers
for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will
notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by April 13,
2021.
    For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Joyce Yu and Takyiah Stevenson (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT) at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: March 8, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-05202 Filed 3-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: May 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30912-30913]
[DOCID:fr29my08-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

May 21, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP99-301-208.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: ANR Pipeline Co submits an amendment to Rate Schedule
FTS-1 and gathering negotiated rate agreements with Eagle Energy
Partners I, LP.
    Filed Date: 05/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080520-0299.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 2, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP06-200-043.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC submits First Revised
Sheet 9E.01 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1, to
become effective 5/20/08.
    Filed Date: 05/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080520-0296.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 2, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-251-001.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp submits Fifty-
Third Revised Sheet 27 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume
1.
    Filed Date: 05/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080520-0295.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 2, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-381-000.
    Applicants: Questar Southern Trails Pipeline Company.
    Description: Questar Southern Trails Pipeline Co submits Third
Revised Sheet 65 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff,

Original Volume 1, to become effective 6/11/08.
    Filed Date: 05/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080520-0298.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 2, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-382-000.
    Applicants: Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.
    Description: Wyoming Interstate Co, Ltd submits Seventh Revised
Sheet 10 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 2, to become
effective 7/1/08.
    Filed Date: 05/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080520-0297.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 2, 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
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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-11918 Filed 5-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21290-21291]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09856]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Document Labelling Guidance for Documents Submitted to
or Filed With the Commission or Commission Staff

    Take notice that, pursuant to National Archives and Records
Administration procedures for appropriate handling of documents (81 FR
63323 (Sept. 14, 2016)), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) will follow the Information Governance Policy and
Guidelines for the Protection of Sensitive Information requirements as
described in 18 CFR 388.112 and 388.113. As a result, every submission
or filing with the Commission or Commission staff that contains
sensitive material (as described below) should be labeled controlled
unclassified information (CUI). The documents described below should be
labeled as follows:

    Documents containing Critical Energy/Electric Infrastructure
Information (CEII), see 18 CFR 388.113, should include in a top
center header of each page of the document the following text: CUI//
CEII.
    Documents containing information that section 388.112 of the
Commission's regulations, 18 CFR 388.112, recognizes as privileged,
and documents containing information within the scope of protective
orders and agreements in Commission proceedings, should include in a
top center header of each page of the document the following text:
CUI//PRIV.
    Documents containing multiple information types, should
reference each

information type in a top center header of each page of the document
in the following format: CUI//[Information Type]/[Additional
Information Type], e.g., CUI//CEII/PRIV.

    For information that is CEII, filers are reminded that they must
clearly segregate those portions of the documents that contain CEII,
and indicate how long the CEII label should apply (not to exceed five
years unless redesignated by the CEII Coordinator). See Fixing
America's Surface Transportation Act, Public Law 114-94, 61,003, 129
Stat. 1312, 1773-1779 (2015); see also 18 CFR 388.113(d)(1)(i-ii).
    For information that is privileged or within the scope of a
protective order or agreement, filers are reminded that they also need
to clearly identify within the document those specific portions of the
document (i.e., lines or individual words or numbers)--containing such
material. See 18 CFR 388.112(b).
    This notice supersedes and clarifies an earlier notice issued April
14, 2017. (See Notice of Document Labelling Guidance for Documents
Submitted to or Filed with the Commission or Commission Staff, April
14, 2017)

    Dated: May 3, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-09856 Filed 5-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 27, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44794-44797]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18359]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0614]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Neches River, Beaumont, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety
zone on the navigable waters of the Neches River extending 500-feet on
either side of the Kansas City Southern Railroad Bridge that crosses
the Neches River in Beaumont, TX. The safety zone is necessary to
protect persons, bridge, and property on or near the bridge from
potential damage from passing vessels until missing and/or damaged
fendering systems are repaired or replaced. Entry of certain vessels or
persons into this zone would be prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur or
a designated representative. We

invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 11, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0614 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Scott Whalen, Marine Safety Unit
Port Arthur, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On April 19, 2018, the Coast Guard was notified that the wood
fendering systems designed to protect bridge support columns of the
Kansas City Southern Railroad Company's bridge (KSC) from strikes by
vessels transiting under the bridge had been damaged or destroyed by
Hurricane Harvey. The south bank column protection fenders are missing
and the north bank column protection fenders are severely damaged. KCS
indicated that strikes to the support columns could compromise the
bridge structure. In response, on May 7, 2018 the Coast Guard published
a temporary final rule; request for comment titled Safety Zone; Neches
River, Beaumont, TX (83 FR 19965). During the comment period that ended
on May 29, 2018, we received no comments. The safety zone was
established on May 7, 2018, extended on September 5, 2018 (83 FR 45047)
and extended again on January 31, 2019 (84 FR 530) via temporary final
rules titled Safety Zone; Neches River, Beaumont, TX. The zone is
scheduled to expire on September 30, 2019. Repairs are not yet
completed leaving the bridge structural columns vulnerable to vessel
strikes.
    The Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards posed by the unprotected bridge
columns are a safety concern to the KCS Bridge and to persons and
property on or near the bridge. The purpose of this rule is to provide
for the safety of the KCS Bridge and persons and property on or near
the bridge.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with a 15-day prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant
to section (b)(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
553). This provision authorizes an agency to publish a rule in less
than 30 days before its effective date for ``good cause found and
published with the rule.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard
finds that good cause exists for publishing this NPRM with a 15-day
comment period because it is impractical to provide a 30-day comment
period. This proposed safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of
vessels and persons during the marine events. It is impracticable to
publish an NPRM with a 30-day comment period because we must establish
this safety zone by September 30, 2019. A 15-day comment period would
allow the Coast Guard to provide for public notice and comment, but
also update the proposed regulation soon enough that the length of the
notice and comment period does not compromise public safety.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone that extends 500-
feet on either side of the KCS Bridge that crosses the Neches River in
Beaumont, TX in approximate location 30[deg] 04'54.8'' N
094[deg]05'29.4'' W. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
the bridge support columns as well as persons and property on or near
the bridge until the bridge fendering is repaired or replaced. Only
vessels less than 65 feet in length and not engaged in towing would be
authorized to enter the zone, unless otherwise permitted by the COTP or
a designated representative.
    Persons and vessels desiring to enter the safety zone would have to
request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They
may be contacted through Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) on channels 65A
or 13 VHF-FM, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Permission to transit through the bridge would be based on weather,
tide and current conditions, vessel size, horsepower, and availability
of assist vessels. All persons and vessels permitted to enter this
temporary safety zone would comply with the lawful orders or directions
given to them by COTP or a designated representative.
    Intentional or unintentional contact with any part of the bridge or
associated structure, including fendering systems, support columns,
spans or any other portion of the bridge, would be strictly prohibited.
Any contact with the bridge or associated structures would have to be
immediately reported to VTS Port Arthur on channels 65A, 13 or 16 VHF-
FM or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Coast Guard would inform the public of the effective period of
this safety zone through VTS Advisories, Broadcast Notices to Mariners
(BNMs), Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), and/or Marine Safety
Information Bulletins (MSIBs) as appropriate.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the nature of
vessel traffic in the area and the location, and duration of the safety
zone. This rule would be only affect certain vessels transiting the
upper reaches of the Neches River in Beaumont, TX, and would terminate
once the necessary repairs are completed for the bridge. The Coast
Guard would issue a VTS Advisory concerning the zone, and the rule
allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not

have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone might be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety
zone that would prohibit entry within 500-feet of either side of the
KCS Bridge that crosses the Neches River in Beaumont, TX. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
L60(d) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning
Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is included in the docket
with this rule where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0614 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0614  Safety Zone; Neches River, Beaumont, TX

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters extending 500-feet on either side of the Kansas City Southern
Railroad Bridge that crosses the Neches River in Beaumont, TX in
approximate location 30[deg]04'54.8'' N 094[deg]05'29.4'' W.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 1 a.m. on
October 1, 2019

through midnight on January 31, 2020, or until missing and/or damaged
fendering systems are repaired or replaced, whichever occurs first.
    (c) Regulations. (1) No vessel may enter or remain in the safety
zone except:
    (i) A vessel less than 65 feet in length and not engaged in towing;
or
    (ii) A vessel authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety
Unit Port Arthur (COTP) or a designated representative
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter the safety zone must
request permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They
may be contacted through Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) on channels 65A
or 13 VHF-FM, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Permission to transit through the bridge will be based on
weather, tide and current conditions, vessel size, horsepower, and
availability of assist vessels. All persons and vessels permitted to
enter this temporary safety zone shall comply with the lawful orders or
directions given to them by COTP or a designated representative.
    (4) Intentional or unintentional contact with any part of the
bridge or associated structure, including fendering systems, support
columns, spans or any other portion of the bridge, is strictly
prohibited. Report any contact with the bridge or associated structures
immediately to VTS Port Arthur on channels 65A, 13 or 16 VHF-FM or by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The Coast Guard will inform the
public through public of the effective period of this safety zone
through VTS Advisories, Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), Local
Notice to Mariners (LNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins
(MSIBs) as appropriate.

    Dated: July 22, 2019.
Jacqueline Twomey,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit Port
Arthur.
[FR Doc. 2019-18359 Filed 8-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52749-52750]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21593]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 8015-004]

North Eastern Wisconsin Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application for
Temporary Amendment and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Temporary Amendment.
    b. Project No.: 8015-004.
    c. Date Filed: August 13, 2015.
    d. Applicant: North Eastern Wisconsin Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Shawano Paper Mills Dam Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Wolf River in Shawano
County, Wisconsin.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Robert A. Gates, EVP of Operations, Eagle
Creek Renewable Energy, 116 N. State St., P.O. Box 167, Neshkoro, WI
54960; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Christopher Chaney, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, and
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is 15 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site 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>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail a copy to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include
the project number (P-8015-004) on any comments or motions filed.
    k. Description of Request: The exemptee is seeking a temporary
amendment to operate the project at a target elevation of 802.9 feet
mean sea level (msl), or 0.4 foot above the authorized target elevation
of 802.5 feet msl. The exemptee would continue to operate within the
authorized elevation range of 801.83 feet msl and 803.17 feet msl. The
exemptee states it has been operating at the 802.9 feet elevation and
that the amendment is necessary to address public concerns about
recreation and possible public safety issues when operating the project
at the authorized target elevation. During the proposed temporary
amendment, which would end on September 1, 2017, the exemptee plans to
study the feasibility of permanently amending the exemption to operate
at the higher target elevation.
    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. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.
    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, contact FERC
Online Support.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project 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 through 385.2005. 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). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the amendment application.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant 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.

    Dated: August 26, 2015.
Kimberly Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-21593 Filed 8-31-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 132-136]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31465]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68537; File No. SR-BSECC-2012-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change With Respect to
the Amendment of the By-Laws of Its Parent Corporation, The NASDAQ OMX
Group, Inc.

December 26, 2012.
    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 December 19, 2012, Boston Stock Exchange Clearing Corporation
(``BSECC'') 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 BSECC. 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

    BSECC proposes a rule change with respect to the amendment of the
by-laws of its parent corporation, The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. (``NASDAQ
OMX'' or the ``Corporation''). The text of the proposed rule change is
available at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com/, at BSECC's
principal office, 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 Corporation 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 Corporation has prepared summaries, set
forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of
such statements.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission staff has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by the Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ OMX is proposing amendments to provisions of its By-Laws
pertaining to the compositional requirements of the NASDAQ OMX Board.
The changes are primarily focused on amending the definition of
``Industry Director'' (and ``Industry committee member'') \4\ to make
the definition less restrictive, but in a manner that BSECC believes
will continue to serve the purpose of ensuring that members and member
organizations of Self-Regulatory Subsidiaries \5\--the self-regulatory
organizations owned by NASDAQ OMX--do not have disproportionate
influence on its governance. In making the change, NASDAQ OMX is
adapting concepts already approved by the Commission in its review of
the Independence Policy of the NYSE Euronext Board of Directors (the
``Independence Policy'').\6\ The proposed rule change also makes
several other changes to provisions pertaining to the Board's
compositional requirements and categorization of Directors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The term ``committee member'' in the By-Laws refers to
membership in the committees authorized under Section 4.13 of the
By-Laws, such as the Executive Committee and the Audit Committee.
Under the By-Laws and the Delaware General Corporation Law, all
members of committees with the power and authority to act on behalf
of the Board in the management of the business and affairs of NASDAQ
OMX must themselves be Directors. Accordingly, the definitions of
``Industry Director'' and ``Industry committee member'' are
coterminous as applied to any member of these committees. The By-
Laws do not presently contemplate any committees with non-Director
members.
    \5\ The By-Laws define each of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(``NASDAQ''), NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX''), NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC
(``Phlx''), BSECC, and the Stock Clearing Corporation of
Philadelphia (``SCCP'') as a ``Self-Regulatory Subsidiary.''
    \6\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51217 (February 16,
2005), 70 FR 9688 (February 28, 2005) (SR-NYSE-2004-54); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 55293 (February 14, 2007), 72 FR 8033
(February 22, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2006-120); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 67564 (August 1, 2012), 77 FR 47161) (SR-NYSE-2012-17;
SR-NYSEArca-2012-59; SR-NYSEMKT-2012-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitions
    The By-Laws require Directors to be assigned to certain defined
categories, based on their current and past affiliations.\7\
Specifically, Directors may be categorized as ``Industry Directors,''
``Non-Industry Directors,'' ``Public Directors,'' and/or ``Staff
Directors.'' Currently, an Industry Director is defined as a Director
who:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As discussed above, the categories also govern the
classification of members of committees of NASDAQ OMX, as provided
for in the By-Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Is or has served in the prior three years as an officer,
director, or employee of a broker or dealer, excluding an outside
director or a director not engaged in the day-to-day management of a
broker or dealer;
    (2) Is an officer, director (excluding an outside director), or
employee of an entity that owns more than ten percent of the equity of
a broker or dealer, and the broker or dealer accounts for more than
five percent of the gross revenues received by the consolidated entity;
    (3) Owns more than five percent of the equity securities of any
broker or dealer, whose investments in brokers or dealers exceed ten
percent of his or her net worth, or whose ownership interest otherwise
permits him or her to be engaged in the day-to-day management of a
broker or dealer;
    (4) Provides professional services to brokers or dealers, and such
services constitute 20 percent or more of the professional revenues
received by the Director or 20 percent or more of the gross revenues
received by the Director's firm or partnership;
    (5) provides professional services to a director, officer, or
employee of a broker, dealer, or corporation that owns 50 percent or
more of the voting stock of a broker or dealer, and such services
relate to the director's, officer's, or employee's professional
capacity and constitute 20 percent or more of the professional revenues
received by the Director or 20 percent or more of the gross revenues
received by the Director's firm or partnership; or
    (6) Has a consulting or employment relationship with or provides
professional services to the Corporation or any affiliate \8\ thereof
(including any Self-Regulatory Subsidiary) or to the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') (or any predecessor) or has had any
such relationship or provided any such services at any time within the
prior three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ NASDAQ OMX is adding a definition of ``affiliate'' as
follows: ``An `affiliate' of, or a person `affiliated' with, a
specified person, is a person that directly, or indirectly through
one or more intermediaries, controls, or is controlled by, or is
under common control with, the person specified.'' The definition is
identical to the definition of the term in SEC Rule 12b-2, 17 CFR
240.12b-2.

Thus, the current definition focuses on a Director's affiliation with
any broker-dealer, regardless of whether the broker-dealer is a member
or member organization of a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary. The definition
also features a three-year ``look-back'' period during which a Director
formerly associated with a broker-dealer would continue to be deemed an
Industry Director.
    In lieu of this definition, NASDAQ OMX is proposing to adopt a
definition that focuses on whether a Director is affiliated with a
member or a member organization of a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary. Under
the revised definition, an Industry Director will be defined as a
Director who:
    (1) Is, or within the last year was, or has an immediate family
member \9\ who is, or within the last year was, a member of a Self-
Regulatory Subsidiary; \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ NASDAQ OMX is adding a definition of ``immediate family
member'' as follows: '' `Immediate family member' means a person's
spouse, parents, children and siblings, whether by blood, marriage
or adoption, or anyone residing in such person's home.'' The
definition is identical to the definition of ``family member''
contained in NASDAQ listing standards, as provided in NASDAQ Rule
5605.
    \10\ This provision would apply to an individual that was a
member of Phlx, the only Self-Regulatory Subsidiary that allows
natural persons to become members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Is, or within the last year was, employed by a member or a
member organization of a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary;\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A broker-dealer that is admitted to membership in Phlx is
referred to as a ``member organization;'' broker-dealers admitted to
membership in the other Self-Regulatory Subsidiaries are referred to
as ``members.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) Has an immediate family member who is, or within the last year
was, an executive officer of a member or a member organization \12\ of
a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ An ``Executive Officer'' of a member or member organization
means those officers covered in Rule 16a-1(f) under the Act, as if
the member or member organization were an issuer within the meaning
of such Rule. 17 CFR 240.16a-1(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) Has within the last year received from any member or member
organization of a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary more than $100,000 per
year in direct compensation, or received from such members or member
organizations in the aggregate an amount of direct compensation that in

any one year is more than 10 percent of the Director's annual gross
compensation for such year, excluding in each case director and
committee fees and pension or other forms of deferred compensation for
prior service (provided such compensation is not contingent in any way
on continued service); or
    (5) Is affiliated, directly or indirectly, with a member or member
organization of a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary.
    NASDAQ OMX believes that the change is warranted to ensure that the
definition of Industry Director is appropriately focused on the
mitigation of potential conflicts of interest associated with Directors
who are currently or were very recently employed by members or member
organizations of Self-Regulatory Subsidiaries, or that otherwise have
material affiliations with such members or member organizations. The
current definition covers individuals who are employed by broker-
dealers that are not members of Self-Regulatory Subsidiaries, or who
retired from service at a broker-dealer more than one, but less than
three years in the past. The Corporation believes that by deeming such
potential Directors to be Industry Directors, the current By-Laws
unnecessarily restrict highly qualified individuals with extensive
knowledge of the financial services industry from serving on the Board.
    In addition to this change, NASDAQ OMX is also proposing the
following additional changes to the definitions applicable to
categories of Directors:
    (1) NASDAQ OMX proposes a new definition of ``Staff Director.''
Currently, the definition of ``Staff Director'' is included within the
definition of ``Industry Director,'' and is defined as ``any two
officers of the Corporation, selected at the sole discretion of the
Board, amongst those officers who may be serving as Directors.'' By
virtue of being designated as Staff Directors, these Directors are not
considered to be Industry Directors for purposes of the compositional
requirements of the By-Laws. Instead, NASDAQ OMX proposes a separate
definition of ``Staff Director'' as ``an officer of the Corporation
that is serving as a Director.'' \13\ As discussed below, however,
Section 4.3 of the By-Laws is to be amended to provide that only one
Staff Director may serve on the Board, unless the Board consists of ten
or more Directors, in which case no more than two Staff Directors may
serve. Thus, the change will further restrict the number of possible
Staff Directors in instances where the Board is smaller than ten
Directors, while retaining the current limit for a larger Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The definition of ``Industry Director'' will continue to
exclude Staff Directors, who might otherwise be considered Industry
Directors by virtue of affiliation with NASDAQ Exchange Services LLC
and NASDAQ Options Services, LLC, registered broker-dealers that are
members or NASDAQ and BX and member organizations of Phlx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) NASDAQ OMX is adopting a new definition of ``Issuer Director''
and ``Issuer committee member.'' The By-Laws currently provide that the
number of ``Non-Industry Directors'' (i.e., Directors who are not
Industry Directors) must equal or exceed the number of Industry
Directors, and shall include at least one ``issuer representative,''
unless the Board consists of ten or more Directors, in which case it
must include at least two issuer representatives. The Corporation
believes that requiring the representation of issuers on the Board is
consistent with the goal of promoting a diversity of viewpoints and
skills among Directors and the requirement of Section 6(b)(3) of the
Act \14\ to provide for representation of issuers among the directors
of a national securities exchange. The term ``issuer representative''
is not directly defined in the By-Laws, but is implicitly defined in
the definition of ``Non-Industry Director'' as ``an officer, director,
or employee of an issuer of securities listed on a national securities
exchange operated by any Self-Regulatory Subsidiary.'' The new proposed
definition is ``a Director (excluding any Staff Director) or committee
member who is an officer or employee of an issuer of securities listed
on a national securities exchange operated by any Self-Regulatory
Subsidiary, excluding any Director or committee member who is a
director of such an issuer but is not also an officer or employee of
such an issuer.'' The exclusion of Staff Directors from the definition
is necessary because NASDAQ OMX is listed on NASDAQ, but the purposes
of the By-Laws in requiring issuer representation to promote a
diversity of viewpoints among Directors would not be well served by
deeming Staff Directors also to be Issuer Directors. The definition is
also being changed to exclude persons who are directors of issuers but
not also officers or employees. This change is intended to make it
clear that a Director is not barred from being considered a Public
Director \15\ merely because the Director serves as an independent
director of another listed company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3).
    \15\ The definition of Public Director is discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) The definition of ``Public Director'' and ``Public committee
member'' is being restated as follows: ``a Director or committee member
who (1) is not an Industry Director or Industry committee member, (2)
is not an Issuer Director or Issuer committee member, and (3) has no
material business relationship with a member or member organization of
a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary, the Corporation or its affiliates, or
FINRA.'' The definition currently covers a person who ``has no material
business relationship with a broker or dealer, the Corporation or its
affiliates, or FINRA.'' Thus, the changes make it clear that any
Industry Director or Issuer Director would not be considered a Public
Director. As noted above, however, an independent director of an issuer
of securities listed on NASDAQ could be considered a Public Director.
In addition, in keeping with the change to the definition of Industry
Director discussed above, the final clause of the definition is being
revised to focus on the existence of a material business relationship
with a member or member organization of a Self-Regulatory Subsidiary,
rather than any broker or dealer. Thus, for example, a Director that
had a material business relationship with a non-U.S. broker or dealer
that was not a member or a member organization of a Self-Regulatory
Subsidiary might be eligible to be a Public Director.
    (4) The definition of ``Non-Industry Director'' or ``Non-Industry
committee member'' is proposed to be amended to cover any ``Director
(excluding any Staff Director) or committee member who is (1) a Public
Director or Public committee member; (2) an Issuer Director or Issuer
committee member; or (3) any other individual who would not be an
Industry Director or Industry committee member.'' The revised
definition is generally consistent with the current definition, but
reflects the adoption of a definition for ``Issuer Director or Issuer
committee member.''
    (5) NASDAQ OMX is making conforming changes to the letter
designations of paragraphs in Article I of the By-Laws.
Qualifications of Directors
    NASDAQ OMX is proposing to amend Section 4.3 of the By-Laws, which
governs the qualifications and compositional requirements of the Board
of Directors, to (i) increase the required number of Public Directors
from one to two, (ii) replace the requirement to include at least one
issuer representative (or at least two issuer representatives if the
Board consists of ten or more Directors) with

a requirement to include at least one, but no more than two, Issuer
Directors, and (iii) provide that the number of Staff Directors may not
exceed one, unless the Board consists of ten or more Directors, in
which case the number may not exceed two. The section will continue to
require that the number of Non-Industry Directors equals or exceeds the
number of Industry Directors. Although these changes will not
significantly modify the Board's compositional requirements, they will
continue to ensure a diversity of representation among Industry, Staff,
Issuer, and Public Directors, will place more stringent caps on the
number of Issuer and Staff Directors, and will increase the requirement
for Public Directors. NASDAQ OMX also proposes to make a conforming
change to add the term ``Issuer Director'' to Section 4.8 and Section
4.13(h), which govern the filling of vacancies on the Board and the
determination of Directors' qualifications by NASDAQ OMX's Secretary.
    The changes to the compositional requirements imposed specifically
by the By-Laws do not alter in any respect the compositional
requirements imposed by NASDAQ listing standards on NASDAQ OMX as a
public company. Specifically, NASDAQ Rule 5605 requires that the board
of directors of a company listed on NASDAQ must have a majority of
directors that are ``independent'' within the meaning of that rule. As
provided in NASDAQ Rule 5605(a)(2) with respect to a company listed on
NASDAQ (a ``Company''), `` `Independent Director' means a person other
than an Executive Officer \16\ or employee of the Company or any other
individual having a relationship which, in the opinion of the Company's
board of directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent
judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.'' The rule
goes on to provide that directors having certain defined relationships
with a Company may not be considered independent. Thus, while Staff
Directors are clearly not independent within the meaning of Rule 5605,
other Directors may or may not be considered independent, depending on
the specific facts of their relationship to NASDAQ OMX. The proposed
rule change does not alter in any respect the obligations of the NASDAQ
OMX Board under NASDAQ Rule 5605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ NASDAQ Rule 5605(a)(1) provides that '' `Executive Officer'
means those officers covered in Rule 16a-1(f) under the Act.'' 17
CFR 240.16a-1(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Composition of Executive Committee
    NASDAQ OMX is proposing a minor amendment to the compositional
requirements of its Executive Committee. Currently, Section 4.13(d) of
the By-Laws provides that the percentage of Public Directors on the
Executive Committee must be at least as great as the percentage of
Public Directors on the whole Board. As noted above, however, the By-
Laws currently require only one Public Director on the whole Board (a
requirement that NASDAQ OMX is proposing to raise to two Public
Directors). Thus, the By-Laws currently reflect a standard under which
voluntary inclusion of additional Public Directors on the full Board
translates into a requirement to include ever increasing numbers of
Public Directors on the Executive Committee, even though the
requirements for the full Board itself may be satisfied with only one
Public Director. Accordingly, NASDAQ OMX is proposing to make the
requirements consistent by requiring at least two Public Directors on
the Executive Committee.
Composition of the Audit Committee
    Earlier this year, the Commission approved changes to the
provisions of NASDAQ OMX's By-Laws pertaining to the composition of the
Management Compensation Committee of its Board of Directors. NASDAQ OMX
is now proposing comparable changes to the compositional requirements
of its Audit Committee. Specifically, NASDAQ OMX is proposing to amend
Section 4.13(g) to replace a requirement that the Audit Committee be
composed of a majority of Non-Industry Directors with a requirement
that the number of Non-Industry Directors on the committee equal or
exceed the number of Industry Directors. Thus, in the case of a
committee composed of four Directors, the current By-Law provides that
only one Director may be an Industry Director, while the amended By-Law
would allow up to two Directors to be Industry Directors. The proposed
compositional requirement for the committee with regard to the balance
between Industry Directors and Non-Industry Directors would be the same
as that already provided for in the By-Laws with respect to the
Executive Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee, the
Management Compensation Committee, and the full Board of Directors.
    The Corporation believes that the change will provide greater
flexibility to NASDAQ OMX with regard to populating a committee that
includes Directors with relevant expertise and that is not excessively
large in relation to the size of the full Board of Directors, while
continuing to ensure that Directors associated with members and member
organizations of the Self-Regulatory Subsidiaries do not exert
disproportionate influence of the governance of NASDAQ OMX. As required
by Section 10A of the Act,\17\ SEC Rule 10A-3 thereunder,\18\ and
NASDAQ Rule 5605(c), the committee would continue at all times to be
composed solely of Directors who are independent within the meaning of
those provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78j-1.
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Corporation believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with provisions of Section 17A of the Act.\19\ In
particular, the Corporation believes that the change to the definition
of Industry Director is warranted to ensure that it is appropriately
focused on the mitigation of potential conflicts of interest associated
with Directors who are currently or were very recently employed by
members or member organizations of Self-Regulatory Subsidiaries, or
that otherwise have material affiliations with such members or member
organizations, without unnecessarily restricting highly qualified
individuals with extensive knowledge of the financial services industry
from serving on the Board. The Corporation further believes that the
other definitional changes and the changes to the compositional
requirements of the NASDAQ OMX Board and the Executive Committee will
enhance the clarity of these provisions and promote a diversity of
backgrounds and viewpoints on the NASDAQ OMX Board. The Corporation
believes that these changes will collectively promote the capacity of
the NASDAQ OMX Board to fulfill its responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the proposed changes to the Audit Committee's
compositional requirements, the Corporation believes that the change
will provide greater flexibility to NASDAQ OMX with regard to
populating a committee that includes Directors with relevant expertise
and that is not excessively large in relation to the size of the full
Board of Directors, while continuing to ensure that Directors
associated with members and member organizations of Self-Regulatory
Subsidiaries do not exert disproportionate influence of the governance
of NASDAQ OMX. The change would not affect NASDAQ OMX's compliance with
Section 10A of

the Act,\20\ SEC Rule 10A-3 thereunder,\21\ and NASDAQ Rule 5605(c), as
the committee would continue at all times to be composed solely of
Directors who are independent within the meaning of those provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78j-1.
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Corporation does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes the Act. Specifically, the Corporation
believes that the By-Laws of its holding company, NASDAQ OMX, do not
directly affect competition, since they do not affect the availability
or pricing of goods and services. Moreover, the Corporation is not
currently operational, so the change will not in any event have any
impact on its competitive standing. To the extent that the proposed
change to the By-Laws may be construed to have any bearing on
competition, the Corporation believes that the change will promote
competition, since the change will allow NASDAQ OMX to have greater
flexibility in the selection of its Directors in a manner similar to
the flexibility available to NYSE Euronext under its Independence
Policy.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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 the 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 Commissions Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BSECC-2012-002 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-BSECC-2012-002. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal offices of BSECC.
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-BSECC-2012-002, and
should be submitted on or before January 23, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-31465 Filed 12-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 17710]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06287]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 230

General Rules and Regulations, Securities Act of 1933

CFR Correction

    This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register
to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most
recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    In Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 200 to 239,
revised as of April 1, 2022, make the following corrections:

Sec.  230.482  [Corrected]

0
1. Amend Sec.  230.482 in paragraph (a) by removing the note with the
heading ``Note to Paragraph (a)''.

Sec.  230.498  [Corrected]

0
2. Amend Sec.  230.498 in paragraph (f)(2) by removing the phrase ``a
Notice under Sec.  270.30e-3 of this chapter,'' after ``Summary
Prospectus'', and adding ``a Notice under Sec.  270.30e-3 of this
chapter,'' after the phrase ``Statutory Prospectuses,''.

[FR Doc. 2023-06287 Filed 3-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0099-10-P