[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9088-9090]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02711]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68812; File No. SR-ICEEU-2012-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change To Provide for a Customer Clearing Model
for CDS Products and To Amend, Clarify, and Consolidate Certain Rules
and Procedures

February 1, 2013.

I. Introduction

    On October 22, 2012, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear
Europe'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change SR-ICEEU-2012-09 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\2\ The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on November 9, 2012.\3\ The
Commission received one comment letter to the proposed rule change.\4\
This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68152 (November 5,
2012), 77 FR 67427 (November 9, 2012).
    \4\ Letter from Kermit Kubitz (November 30, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to provide for
a Customer CDS Clearing Model whereby customers of ICE Clear Europe
Clearing Members have the ability to clear CDS products through ICE
Clear Europe. In addition, ICE Clear Europe is amending its Rules and
CDS Procedures in order to implement certain rule changes that are
unrelated to Customer CDS Clearing Model.
    Currently, ICE Clear Europe Clearing Members may clear CDS products
at ICE Clear Europe through their proprietary accounts only and not on
behalf of their customers. The Customer CDS Clearing Model extends ICE
Clear Europe's

customer clearing models that are currently available for other
products to CDS products, with certain modifications appropriate for
the nature of the product.
    The Customer CDS Clearing Model builds on the customer clearing
framework available for other products at ICE Clear Europe. US
customers must clear through a registered futures commission merchant
and/or broker-dealer (depending on whether the product is an index CDS
or single-name CDS), consistent with the requirements of the Commodity
Exchange Act and the Act, as applicable. Non-US customers may clear
through a non-US clearing member in accordance with applicable local
laws or through a registered futures commission merchant and/or broker-
dealer.
    The terms of the Customer CDS Clearing Model, as well as various
related enhancements to the clearing model, were proposed as amendments
to the ICE Clear Europe Rules and CDS Procedures. Changes to Part 1 of
the Rules clarify and conform existing definitions to the Customer CDS
Clearing Model, create new CDS-specific definitions used in new
operative provisions, clarify customer and proprietary account class
definitions that are relevant to CDS, and clarify general standards of
Clearing Member responsibility and liability. Other changes reflect the
incorporation into the Rules of provisions that had been in a separate
master agreement entered into between the Clearing Member and ICE Clear
Europe. Changes to Part 2 of the Rules provide updates related to anti-
money laundering legislation applicable to customers, clarify
membership standards for Clearing Members, clarify the obligations of
Clearing Members with respect to customer accounts and proprietary
accounts and clarify and/or restate certain provisions relating to
Clearing Member default and termination of clearing membership. Changes
to Part 3 of the Rules clarify certain payment mechanics for Clearing
Members with respect to amounts owed by their customers and include a
waiver of set-off by Clearing Members. Changes to Part 4 of the Rules
reflect amendments to the contract rights and obligations of ICE Clear
Europe and Clearing Members, particularly in the context of the
clearing of CDS on behalf of customers. Changes to Part 5 of the Rules
address the delivery of margin from customers to Clearing Members and
add provisions dealing with transfer of margin by security interest
rather than title transfer. Changes to Part 6 of the Rules clarify the
procedures for providing notice of position limits and clarify further
how position limits apply in instances where contracts arise due to
firm trades, voiding, or error policies. Changes to Parts 7 and 8 of
the Rules clarify that references in those parts of the Rules (covering
Settlement and Delivery of Futures (Part 7) and Options (Part 8)),
which relate solely to Energy contracts, do not apply to CDS Customer
Accounts or customers in the context of CDS clearing. Changes to Part 9
of the Rules consolidate and clarify the respective rights and
obligations of ICE Clear Europe and Clearing Members in the case of a
Clearing Member or ICE Clear Europe default and the procedures to be
followed in determining a net sum payable to or receivable from a
defaulting Clearing Member. Changes to Part 10 of the Rules provide
more detail regarding how a disciplinary or appeals panel could impose
a sanction on a customer and determine liability or responsibility in
any instance where there is joint misfeasance. Changes to Part 11
relate to the operation of the ICE Clear Europe guaranty funds,
including changes relating to the introduction of customer clearing.
ICE Clear Europe will continue to operate separate guaranty funds for
CDS products and for energy products. Changes to Part 12 of the Rules
conform to the new terms and definitions that are part of the Customer
CDS Customer Model. Changes to Part 15 of the Rules provide provisions
dealing with CDS contracts cleared in the customer account (including
the representation of customer transactions in relevant books and
records and treatment of customer transactions in the case of credit
events) and the elimination of the separate master agreement previously
entered into between CDS Clearing Members and ICE Clear Europe. Changes
to Part 16 of the Rules address the addition of CDS clearing to the ICE
Clear Europe FCM customer clearing model and certain other
clarifications and enhancements requested by CDS Clearing Members.
    ICE Clear Europe is also establishing in Exhibit 1 of the Rules
certain standard terms (the Customer-CM CDS Transactions Standard
Terms) that will be applicable to Customer-CM CDS Transactions, which
are CDS transactions between a Non-FCM/BD Clearing Member and a non-
U.S. customer. Under the changes to Rule 1516, all Non-FCM/BD Clearing
Members must agree to the applicability of these terms as between them
and each of their customers. The Standard Terms provisions, among other
things, ensure that the terms of Customer-CM CDS Transactions mirror
the terms of the cleared transaction, enable a clearing member to pass
on clearing-house performance (or non-performance) to their customers,
facilitate the provision of margin to ICE Clear Europe, and amend
provisions in underlying agreements relating to events of default and
close-out in order to ensure that the porting of contracts and margin
under the default rules will be effective. In addition, various
consents must be supplied for ICE Clear Europe to update customer
records in DTCC and receive other information as required relating to
customers.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As noted above, US customers must clear through an FCM/BD
Clearing Member. The Customer-CM CDS Transactions Standard Terms
will not apply to that relationship.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ICE Clear Europe is also modifying its CDS Procedures. Changes to
Part 1 of the CDS Procedures clarify and conform existing definitions
to the Customer CDS Clearing Model, as well as add new definitions used
in new operative provisions. Changes to Part 2 of the CDS Procedures
clarify and conform membership requirements to standards implemented as
a result of the Dodd-Frank Act. Changes to Part 3 of the CDS Procedures
delete a reference to CDS Operational Procedures, which document has
become obsolete in light of the changes related to customer clearing.
Changes to Part 4 of the CDS Procedures update information that must be
provided with respect to CDS contracts and procedures for submission of
CDS contracts for clearing. Changes to Part 5 of the CDS Procedures
address customer clearing in the context of the CDS Default Committee
procedures. Part 6 of the CDS Procedures was removed because it is no
longer necessary in light of ICE Clear Europe's use of determinations
made by the ISDA Determinations Committees with respect to credit and
succession events. Changes to Part 7 address restructuring as a credit
event with respect to CDS contracts cleared in the customer account,
including the processing for triggering settlement of such contracts.
Changes to Part 8 of the CDS Procedures clarify the procedures for
listing new CDS Contracts, in particular to enable ICE Clear Europe to
respond in timely fashion to any prohibition on trading in CDS imposed
under the EU Short Selling Regulation (Regulation 236/2012 dated 14
March 2012). Changes to Part 9 of the CDS Procedures include various
provisions previously included in the separate master agreement between
CDS Clearing Members and ICE Clear Europe as well as certain tax
provisions relevant to customer clearing. These updated provisions
apply to both customer

positions and proprietary positions of CDS Clearing Members. Changes to
Part 10 of the CDS Procedures update the cross-references and
definitions relevant to customer clearing as they relate to Index CDS
Contracts. Changes to Part 11 of the CDS Procedures update the cross-
references and definitions relevant to customer clearing as they relate
to Single Name CDS Contracts. Changes to Part 12 of the CDS Procedures
update the cross-references and the definitions relevant to customer
clearing with respect to Sovereign Contracts. Changes to Part 13 of the
CDS Procedures add certain general procedures relating to customer
clearing of CDS contracts.

III. Comment

    The Commission received one comment to the proposed rule change.
The comment concerned ICE Clear Europe's requirements under the
Exchange Act, including but not limited to recordkeeping and reporting
requirements that are outside of the scope of this proposal. The
Commission notes, however, that ICE Clear Europe, as a clearing agency
registered with the Commission, is fully subject to the Exchange Act
and all applicable rules and regulations promulgated thereto.

IV. Discussion

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \6\ requires that, among other
things, a clearing agency be organized and its rules designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions and to protect investors and the public
interest. After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder. The implementation of the Customer CDS Clearing
Model may promote the prompt and accurate clearance of securities
transactions, derivatives agreements, contracts, and transactions by
extending clearing to a broader segment of the CDS market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \7\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-ICEEU-2012-09) be,
and hereby is, approved.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \9\ In approving this proposed rule change the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact of efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-02711 Filed 2-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28735]
[FR Doc No: E9-14176]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rules 17h-1T and 17h-2T, SEC File No. 270-359, OMB Control No.
3235-0410.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
requests for extension of the previously approved collections of
information discussed below. The Code of Federal Regulation citations
to this collection of information are the following rules: 17 CFR
240.17h-1T and 17 CFR 240.17h-2T under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) (the ``Act'').
    Rule 17h-1T requires a broker-dealer to maintain and preserve
records and other information concerning certain entities that are
associated with the broker-dealer. This requirement extends to the
financial and securities activities of the holding company, affiliates
and subsidiaries of the broker-dealer that are reasonably likely to
have a material impact on the financial or operational condition of the
broker-dealer. Rule 17h-2T requires a broker-dealer to file with the
Commission quarterly reports and a cumulative year-end report
concerning the information required to be maintained and preserved
under Rule 17h-1T.
    The collection of information required by Rules 17h-1T and 17h-2T
is necessary to enable the Commission to monitor the activities of a
broker-dealer affiliate whose business activities is reasonably likely
to have a material impact on the financial and operational condition of
the broker-dealer. Without this information, the Commission would be
unable to assess the potentially damaging impact of the affiliate's
activities on the broker-dealer.
    There are currently 148 respondents that must comply with Rules
17h-1T and 17h-2T. Each of these 148 respondents require approximately
10 hours per year, or 2.5 hours per quarter, to maintain the records
required under Rule 17h-1T, for an aggregate annual burden of 1,480
hours (148 respondents x 10 hours). In addition, each of these 148
respondents must make five annual responses under Rule 17h-2T. These
five responses require approximately 14 hours per respondent per year,
or 3.5 hours per quarter, for an aggregate annual burden of 2,072 hours
(148 respondents x 14 hours). In addition, there are approximately five
new respondents per year \1\ that must draft an organizational chart
required under Rule 17h-1T and establish a system for complying with
the Rules. The staff estimates that drafting the required
organizational chart requires one hour and establishing a system for
complying with the Rules requires three hours, thus requiring an
aggregate of 20 hours (5 new respondents x 4 hours). Thus, the total
compliance burden per year is approximately 3,572 burden hours (1,480 +
2,072 + 20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ However, the staff further estimates that the number of
respondents decreases by at least that many firms per year as a
result of mergers and other business factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to Charles Boucher, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 10, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14176 Filed 6-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 29 (Thursday, February 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7899-7902]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02892]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74219; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2015-03]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Include Internet
Protocol Network Connections and Fiber Cross Connects Between a User's
Cabinet and Non-User's Equipment as Co-Location Services

February 6, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on January 26, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to provide that the co-location services
offered by the Exchange include 1 Gigabit (``Gb'') and 10 Gb Internet
Protocol (``IP'') network connections in the Exchange's data center and
fiber cross connects (``cross connects'') between a User's cabinet and
non-User's equipment. In addition, the proposed rule change reflects
changes to the Exchange's Price List related to these co-location
services. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to change its rules to provide that the co-
location \4\ services offered by the Exchange include 1 Gb and 10 Gb IP
network connections in the Exchange's data center and cross connects
between a User's cabinet and non-User's equipment. In addition, this
proposed rule change reflects changes to the the [sic] Fee Schedules
related to these co-location services.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63275 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR
70048 (November 16, 2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-100) (the ``Original Co-
location Filing''). The Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah,
New Jersey (the ``data center'') from which it provides co-location
services to Users.
    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, the
term ``User'' includes (i) ETP Holders and Sponsored Participants
that are authorized to obtain access to the NYSE Arca Marketplace
pursuant to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.29 (see NYSE Arca Equities
Rule 1.1(yy)); (ii) OTP Holders, OTP Firms and Sponsored
Participants that are authorized to obtain access to the NYSE Arca
System pursuant to NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.2A (see NYSE Arca
Options Rule 6.1A(a)(19)); and (iii) non-ETP Holder, non-OTP Holder
and non-OTP Firm broker-dealers and vendors that request to receive
co-location services directly from the Exchange. See, e.g.,
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65970 (December 15, 2011), 76
FR 79242 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEArca-2011-74) and 65971
(December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79267 (December 21, 2011) (SR-NYSEArca-
2011-75). As specified in the Fee Schedules, a User that incurs co-
location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant thereto
would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-location
service charged by the Exchange's affiliates NYSE MKT LLC and New
York Stock Exchange LLC. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
70173 (August 13, 2013), 78 FR 50459 (August 19, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-
2013-80).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IP Network Connections
    The Exchange offers Users access to the Exchange's Liquidity Center
Network (``LCN''), a local area network available in the data
center.\6\ The LCN provides Users with access to the Exchange's trading
and execution systems and to the Exchange's proprietary market data
products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Original Co-location Filing, at 70049. See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67667 (August 15, 2012), 77 FR
50743 (August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSE Arca-2012-63) (``August 2012 Rule
Change'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule change would provide that Users may also
purchase access to the IP network, a second local area network
available in the Exchange's data center.\7\ Like the LCN, the IP
network provides Users with access to the Exchange's trading and
execution systems and to the Exchanges' proprietary market data
products. The IP network also provides Users with access to away market
data products. There is greater latency in the transmission of data
between Users and the Exchange for the IP Network than for the LCN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange makes an IP network circuit available to Users
for testing and certification purposes at no charge. Such circuit
can only be used for testing and certification and is limited to
three months. The Exchange proposes to add language to the Price
List to include this practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A User is currently able to select from two ``bundled''
connectivity options, at 1 Gb and 10 Gb, when connecting to the data
center.\8\ Both options include two connections referred to as ``SFTI''
connections. These bundled ``SFTI'' connections are IP network
connections; the reference to ``SFTI'' is a reflection of the fact that
the IP network is sometimes referred to as the ``SFTI IP'' network. To
conform the references to the IP network in the Fee Schedules, the
Exchange proposes to revise the description of the bundled connectivity
options to remove the reference to ``SFTI'' and update it to ``IP
network.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72720 (July 30,
2014), 79 FR 45577 (August 5, 2014) (SR-NYSEArca-2014-81).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to change its rules to provide
that the co-location services offered by the Exchange include 1 Gb and
10 Gb IP network connections in the Exchange's data center. The
Exchange also proposes to revise the Fee Schedules to reflect fees
related to these IP network connections as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Type of service                           Description                      Amount of charge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IP Network Access.........................  1 Gb Circuit.......................  $2,500 per connection initial
                                                                                charge plus $2,500 monthly per
                                                                                connection.
IP Network Access.........................  10 Gb Circuit......................  $10,000 per connection initial
                                                                                charge plus $10,000 monthly
                                                                                per connection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By comparison, the 1 Gb LCN circuit costs $6,000 per connection
initial charge plus $5,000 monthly per connection. The 10 Gb LCN
circuit costs $10,000 per connection initial charge plus $12,000
monthly per connection, while the LCN 10 Gb LX, a second LCN option
that has a lower latency than the 10 Gb LCN circuit, costs $15,000 per
connection initial charge plus $20,000 monthly per connection.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70887 (November 15,
2013), 78 FR 69897 (November 21, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-123).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The IP network provides Users that do not need the lower latency of
the LCN with a less costly data center network option. Having another
data center network also provides Users with the option to create
redundancy in their infrastructure. The offering of either a 1 Gb or 10
Gb IP network connection provides Users more choices regarding the
bandwidth of their network connections.
Cross Connects
    Cross connects are fiber connections used to connect cabinets
within the data center. Cross connects may be used between a User's own
cabinets or between its cabinet(s) and those of another User.\10\ A
cross connect may be used to connect cabinets of separate Users when,
for example, a User receives technical support, order routing and/or
market data delivery services from another User in the data center. A
User is able to purchase cross connects individually or in bundles
(i.e., multiple cross connects within a single sheath) of six, 12, 18
or 24 cross connects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Commission approved the fee for cross connects between
a single User's cabinets within the data center in the Original Co-
Location Filing. See Original Co-Location Filing, at 70050. The use
of cross connects was subsequently revised to allow each User to
purchase cross connects between its cabinet(s) and the cabinets of
separate Users. See August 2012 Rule Change, at 50744.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedules for individual and
bundled cross connects to include cross-connects between a User's
cabinet and a non-User's equipment within the data center. Non-Users
with equipment in the data center include the Exchange and third-party
carriers. For example, a User may utilize a cross connect with a non-
User to connect to a carrier's equipment in order to access the
carrier's network outside the data center. Such cross connects do not
provide direct access to the Exchange's trading and execution systems
and do not change the fact that only Users that are authorized to
obtain access to the Exchange trading and execution systems can do so.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the existing cross connect fee in
the Fee Schedules accordingly. Specifically, the existing Fee Schedule
text that describes cross connects as being ``between cabinets within
the data center'' would be removed. The existing pricing for individual
and bundled cross connects would not change.
General
    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i)
neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to
submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is
a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof
(e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of
the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary
and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; \11\ and
(iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location
service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only
to the Exchange or to the Exchange and one or both of its
affiliates.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is
co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users
do not receive any market data or data service product that is not
available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location
services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders
to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.
    \12\ See SR-NYSEArca-2013-80, supra note 5 at 50459. The
Exchange's affiliates have also submitted the same proposed rule
change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSEMKT-2015-
08 and SR-NYSE-2015-05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the
Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the IP network connections are not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers because the IP network connections provide an
alternative to Users that do not require the lower latency levels of
the LCN for all of their business operations. Users that do require
lower latency levels for all of their business operations may utilize
only LCN connections. The Exchange believes that this removes
impediments to, and perfects the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protects investors and
the public interest because it provides Users with additional choices
with respect to both the optimal latency and, by including 1 Gb and 10
Gb IP network connection options, the optimal bandwidth option for
their network connections. Having data center networks to choose from
also provides Users with the option to create redundancy in their
infrastructure. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed
revision of the description of the bundled connectivity options to
remove the reference to ``SFTI'' and update it to ``IP network''
removes impediments to, and perfects the mechanisms of, a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, protects investors
and the public interest because conforming the references to the IP
network will add clarity to the Fee Schedules. The Exchange believes
that providing Users with an IP network circuit solely for testing and
certification purposes for three months

at no charge protects investors and the public interest because it
encourages Users to conduct testing and certification.
    The Exchange believes that the cross connects between Users and
non-Users are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because the proposed change
makes a third use for cross connections available to Users, but Users
that do not require such connections may continue to utilize existing
cross connects as they need. The Exchange believes that this removes
impediments to, and perfects the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protects investors and
the public interest because cross connects between Users' cabinets and
non-Users' equipment assist Users in meeting the growing needs of their
business operations by facilitating connections with non-Users.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\15\ in particular, because
it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Overall, the Exchange believes that the proposed change is
reasonable because the Exchange proposes to offer the co-location
services described herein (i.e., the IP network connections and
additional cross connects) as a convenience to Users, but in doing so
will incur certain costs, including costs related to the data center
facility, hardware and equipment and costs related to personnel
required for initial installation and monitoring, support and
maintenance of such services. In addition, the Exchange believes that
the proposed revision of the description of the bundled connectivity
options to remove the reference to ``SFTI'' and update it to ``IP
network'' is reasonable because conforming the references to the IP
network will add clarity to the Fee Schedules.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed pricing for IP network
connections is reasonable because IP network connections are a more
economical option for certain Users that do not require the lower
latency levels of the LCN for all of their business operations. The
proposed pricing for IP network connections is also reasonable because
it allows Users to select network options that are better suited for
their needs. Some Users do not need lower latency levels for all of
their business operations, and IP network connections provide them the
option to utilize network connections with higher latency levels but
lower fees than the LCN. The availability of 1 Gb and 10 Gb options
allow Users to select the bandwidth option that suits their needs. In
addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed revision of the
description of the bundled connectivity options to remove the reference
to ``SFTI'' and update it to ``IP network'' is reasonable because it
will conform the references to the IP network in the Fee Schedules. The
Exchange believes that providing Users with an IP network circuit
solely for testing and certification purposes for three months at no
charge is reasonable because providing the IP network circuit at no
charge encourages Users to conduct testing and certification.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to charge the same
amount for cross connects regardless of whether the cross connects are
between the cabinets of a single User, between the cabinets of separate
Users or between a User and non-User, because the cross connect
hardware and costs the Exchange incurs are substantially the same in
each case.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it will result in fees being charged
only to Users that voluntarily select to receive the corresponding
services and because those services will be available to all Users.
Furthermore, the Exchange believes that the services and fees proposed
herein are not unfairly discriminatory and are equitably allocated
because, in addition to the services being completely voluntary, they
are available to all Users on an equal basis (i.e., the same products
and services are available to all Users).
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\16\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because, in addition to the proposed services being
completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis
(i.e. the same products and services are available to all Users).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that allowing Users to purchase access to the
IP network will not impose any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because such access will satisfy User demand for more cost-effective,
higher latency connections. The proposed changes also enhance
competition by helping Users tailor their data center network
connections to the growing needs of their business operations and by
adding clarity to the Fee Schedules by conforming the references to the
IP network. The Exchange also believes that the cross connects between
Users' cabinets and non-Users' equipment will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the cross connects will satisfy User demand
for more flexibility in the Users' use of cross connects. The proposed
change also enhances competition by helping Users tailor their co-
located systems to the varying needs of their business operations.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its services and related fees and
credits to remain competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons
described above, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
reflects this competitive environment.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\18\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
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, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \19\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\20\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \21\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2015-03 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-NYSEARCA-2015-03. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2015-03, and should
be submitted on or before March 5, 2015.

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

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-02892 Filed 2-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 149 (Friday, August 4, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36332]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16425]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0715]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Isthmus Slough at Coos Bay, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs Oregon Department of Transportation's
(ODOT) Isthmus Slough Bridge, mile 1.0 across Isthmus Slough at Coos
Bay, OR. This deviation is necessary to accommodate painting and
preservation and upgrading electrical systems. The deviation allows the
bridge to operate in single leaf mode or one half of the bascule span,
and reduce the vertical clearance of the non-functional leaf.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on September 1, 2017 to
6 a.m. on February 26, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0715 is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Danny McReynolds, Bridge
Management Specialist, Thirteenth Coast Guard District; telephone 206-
220-7234, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ODOT, bridge owner, has requested a
temporary deviation from the operating schedule for the Isthmus Slough
Bridge, mile 1.0 across Isthmus Slough at Coos Bay, OR. The requested
deviation is to accommodate painting and preservation and upgrading
electrical systems. To facilitate this event, the double bascule bridge
will operate in single leaf mode (half of the span), and reduce the
vertical clearance of the non-functioning leaf. Isthmus Slough Bridge
provides a vertical clearance of 28 feet in the closed-to-navigation
position referenced to the vertical clearance above mean high water
tide level. Ten feet of containment will be installed under the closed-
to-navigation leaf only, and will reduce the vertical clearance to 18
feet. Vessels that do not require an opening may transit under the
bridge at any time.
    The normal operating schedule for the subject bridge is 33 CFR
117.879. This deviation allows the Isthmus Bridge to operate in single
leaf, half opening, and reduce the vertical clearance of the non-
functioning leaf by 10 feet to 18 feet; and need not open for maritime
traffic from 6 a.m. on September 1, 2017 to 6 a.m. on February 26,
2018. The functional bascule leaf shall open on signal if at least 24
hours notice is given. Waterway usage on Isthmus Slough includes
vessels ranging from small commercial tugs, commercial fishing vessels,
police search and rescue to small pleasure craft.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed-to-navigation
position may do so at any time. The bridge will be able open half of
the double bascule in single leaf mode for emergencies as soon as
possible, and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to
pass. The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterway, through
our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners, of the change in operating
schedule for the bridges so that vessels can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
their regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the
effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the
operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: July 25, 2017.
Steven Michael Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-16425 Filed 8-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5615-5616]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01928]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1998-3637; FMCSA-2000-8203; FMCSA-2002-12844]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
2 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from
the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not compromise
safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemption renewals
will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than
the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective February 7, 2015. Comments must be
received on or before March 4, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [Docket No. FMCSA-1998-
3637; FMCSA-2000-8203; FMCSA-2002-12844], using any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, R.N., Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

II. Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 2 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 2 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Thomas J. Boss (IL)
Robert J. Johnson (MN)

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption

will be valid for two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The
exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the
terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted
in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted;
or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the
goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

III. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 2 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (63 FR 30285; 63 FR 54519; 65 FR 66293; 67 FR 68719; 68 FR
1654; 68 FR 2629; 69 FR 71100; 72 FR 1054; 74 FR 980; 76 FR 4414; 78 FR
798). Each of these 2 applicants has requested renewal of the exemption
and has submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye
continues to meet the requirement specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and
that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each
record of safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies
over the past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the
vision exemption requirements. These factors provide an adequate basis
for predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in
interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the
exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

IV. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-1998-3637; FMCSA-2000-8203; FMCSA-2002-12844), indicate
the specific section of this document to which each comment applies,
and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You may
submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that
you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
phone number in the body of your document so the Agency can contact you
if it has questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, got to http://www.regulations.gov
and put the docket number, ``FMCSA-1998-3637; FMCSA-2000-8203; FMCSA-
2002-12844'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and click ``Search.'' When the new
screen appears, click on ``Comment Now!'' button and type your comment
into the text box in the following screen. Choose whether you are
submitting your comment as an individual or on behalf of a third party
and then submit. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by
mail and would like to know that they reached the facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change this notice based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number,
``FMCSA-1998-3637; FMCSA-2000-8203; FMCSA-2002-12844'' in the
``Keyword'' box and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' button choose the document listed to review. If you do not
have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting
the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

    Issued on: January 23, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-01928 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27326-27327]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12397]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR19-26-000]

American Aviation Supply LLC, Delta Air Lines, Inc., JetBlue
Airways Corporation United Airlines, Inc. v. Buckeye Pipe Line Company,
L.P.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on June 5, 2019, pursuant to sections 1(5), 6, 8,
9, 13, 15 and 16 of the Interstate Commerce Act,\1\ section 1803 of the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct),\2\ Rule 206 of the Rules of Practice
and Procedures of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission),\3\ and Rules 343.1(a) 343.2(c) of the Commission's
Procedural Rules Applicable to Oil Pipeline Proceedings,\4\ American
Aviation Supply LLC, Delta Air Lines, Inc., JetBlue Airways
Corporation, and United Airlines, Inc. (collectively, Joint
Complainants) filed a formal complaint against Buckeye Pipe Line
Company, L.P. (Buckeye or Respondent) challenging the lawfulness of the
rates charged by Buckeye for transportation of jet and/or aviation
turbine fuel from Linden, New Jersey to the New York City market,
specifically Newark International Airport, New Jersey, J.F. Kennedy
International Airport, New York and LaGuardia Airport, New York, all as
more fully explained in the complaint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 49 U.S.C. App. 1(5), 6, 8, 9, 13, 15 and 16.
    \2\ Public Law 102-486, 106 Stat. 2772 (1992).
    \3\ 18 CFR 385.206 (2018).
    \4\ 18 CFR 343.1(a) and 343.2(c) (2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts listed for Respondent on the Commission's list of
Corporate Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person
wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion
to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all
interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be
served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on July 5, 2019.

    Dated: June 6, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-12397 Filed 6-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 89)]
[Notices]
[Page 26352-26353]
[DOCID:fr09my07-60]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-417-000]

Trunkline Gas Company, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes In FERC
Gas Tariff

May 2, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 30, 2007, Trunkline Gas Company, LLC
(Trunkline) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective
June 1, 2007:

Second Revised Sheet No. 6
First Revised Sheet No. 7

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing 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). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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 docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-8849 Filed 5-8-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 24 (Monday, February 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 5813]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2460]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001]

Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on March 21, 2012, from 8
a.m. to 12:45 p.m.
    Location: FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31,
Conference Center, the Great Room (rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002. Information regarding special accommodations due to a disability,
visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm; under the heading
``Resources for You,'' click on ``Public Meetings at the FDA White Oak
Campus.'' Please note that visitors to the White Oak Campus must enter
through Building 1.
    Contact Person: Caleb Briggs, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
31, rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax: (301)
847-8533, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee
Information Line, 1-(800) 741-8138 ((301) 443-0572 in the Washington,
DC area), and follow the prompts to the desired center or product area.
Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information on this
meeting. 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 Agency's Web site and
call the appropriate advisory committee hot line/phone line to learn
about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: The committee will discuss new drug application (NDA)
202497, MARQIBO (vincristine sulfate liposomes injection), application
submitted by Talon Therapeutics, Inc. The proposed indication (use) for
this product is for the treatment of adult patients with Philadelphia
chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia in second or greater
relapse or whose disease has progressed following two or more treatment
lines of anti-leukemia therapy.
    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 Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
March 6, 2012. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 10:45 a.m. and 11:45 a.m. 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 February 27, 2012.
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 February 28, 2012.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Caleb Briggs at
least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://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: January 31, 2012.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-2460 Filed 2-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 66 (Monday, April 7, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18997-18999]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07560]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0117; FRL-9907-50-Region 5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Illinois; 10-Year FESOP Amendments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
Illinois' rule revision to extend the term for an initial permit or
renewal of a Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) from
five years to ten years. Illinois submitted this rule revision for
approval on January 9, 2014. FESOPs apply to non-major sources that
obtain enforceable limits to avoid being subject to certain Clean Air
Act (Act) requirements, including the Title V operating permit program.
This revision meets the Federal requirements found in the June 28,
1989, rule addressing Federal enforceability of FESOPs. This rule
revision is expected to reduce the administrative costs of the
permitting process for both the affected sources and the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA). It will also allow IEPA to
devote more resources to major source Title V permitting actions and
permit modifications for both Title V and FESOP sources.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective June 6, 2014, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by May 7, 2014. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2014-0117, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Genevieve Damico, Chief, Air Permits Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Genevieve Damico, Chief, Air Permits Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2014-0117. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Constantine Blathras, Environmental
Engineer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Constantine Blathras, Environmental
Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving the revisions to Illinois Administrative Code
(Ill. Adm. Code) Section 201.162(a) regarding the permit terms for
FESOPs. Ill. Adm. Code Section 201.162(a) is a general provision in the
Illinois permitting rules that cites the term of a permit. This section
has been modified to add a provision stating that a FESOP permit is
effective for a permit term not to exceed ten years. IEPA retains the
discretion that it currently has under Section 201.162 to issue permits
for a term that is shorter than the maximum. This provision does not
apply to Title V permits issued by the IEPA.
    EPA approved the Illinois FESOP program into the state
implementation plan (SIP) on December 17, 1992 (57 FR 59928). In its
approval of Illinois' FESOP program, EPA determined that Illinois'
program was consistent with those requirements. On January 9, 2014,
IEPA submitted a revision to the FESOP regulations at 35 Ill. Adm. Code
Section 201.162 requesting EPA approval as a revision to the SIP to
increase the FESOP term from five years to ten years. EPA's
requirements for FESOPs are contained in a June 28, 1989, rule
addressing Federal enforceability (54 FR 27274). As such, EPA finds the
modifications to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Section 201.162 acceptable.
    Granting FESOP permits for no longer than ten years will not affect
implementation of air pollution control programs or enforcement of air
quality standards in the State of Illinois. Sources must comply with
all applicable requirements of the Act regardless of the length of a
FESOP's term or the timing of its issuance. FESOPs generally contain
limits on the operations of the plant, e.g., materials used and hours
of operation, which effectively restrict the source's potential to
emit. Illinois' FESOP program requires the permits to undergo public
notice and be subject to public comment. A FESOP does not impact any
previously or newly applicable substantive requirements of the Act,
such as new maximum achievable control technology standards under
Section 112. Such provisions remain independently enforceable.
Similarly, FESOP holders will still need to meet all applicable
requirements under the Act, including those related to new
construction. As such, an extension of FESOP initial or renewal terms
from five to ten years does not delay the obligation of a source to
comply with all applicable requirements.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective June 6, 2014
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by May 7, 2014. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw
this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective
June 6, 2014.

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

    Under the Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 6, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the

time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties
with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a
comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for
this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal
Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of
this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 24, 2014.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart O--Illinois

0
2. Section 52.720 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(198) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.720  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (198) On January 9, 2014, Illinois submitted modifications to its
Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits rules as a revision to
the state implementation plan. The revision extends the maximum permit
term of Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits from five years
to ten years.
    (i) Incorporation by reference. Illinois Administrative Code Title
35: Environmental Protection; Subtitle B: Air Pollution; Chapter I:
Pollution Control Board; Subchapter a: Permits and General Provisions;
Part 201: Permits and General Provisions; Subpart D: Permit
Applications and Review Process; Section 201.162: Duration; Subsection
201.162(a). Effective December 1, 2010.
[FR Doc. 2014-07560 Filed 4-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 102 (Friday, May 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25793-25795]
[FR Doc No: E9-12446]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59967; File No. SR-BATS-2009-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
BATS Rule 11.13, Entitled ``Order Execution''

May 21, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 19, 2009, BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'' or the
``Exchange'') 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
has designated this 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)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with
the Commission. 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 is proposing to amend BATS Rule 11.13, entitled
``Order Execution,'' to provide Users \5\ of the Exchange with another
option with respect to the Exchange's method of processing the unfilled
balance of a limit order that returns to the Exchange and is posted to
the BATS Book after being routed away to one or more away Trading
Centers \6\ for execution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As defined in BATS Rule 1.5(bb).
    \6\ As defined in BATS Rule 2.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the

proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to provide Users of the
Exchange with another option with respect to the Exchange's method of
processing the unfilled balance of a limit order that returns to the
Exchange and is posted to the BATS Book after being routed away to one
or more away Trading Centers for execution. Specifically, the Exchange
will allow Users to designate an order as eligible for re-routing after
being posted to the BATS Book if another Trading Center has locked or
crossed the posted order.
    The Exchange currently allows Users to submit various types of
limit orders to the Exchange that are processed pursuant to Rules
11.13(a)(1) and 11.13(a)(2)(B), as set forth below. Rule 11.13(a)(1)
describes the process by which an incoming order would execute against
the BATS Book.\7\ To the extent an order has not been executed in its
entirety against the BATS Book, Rule 11.13(a)(2)(B) then describes the
process of routing marketable limit orders \8\ to one or more Trading
Centers, including a description of how the Exchange treats any
unfilled balance that returns to the Exchange following the first
attempt to fill the order through the routing process. If not filled
through routing, and based on the order instructions, the unfilled
balance of the order may be posted to the BATS Book. The Exchange is
proposing to permit Users to designate the order as eligible to be
routed away from the Exchange, after being posted, to the extent
another Trading Center locks or crosses the posted order. The Exchange
believes that the proposed change to Rule 11.13 will give additional
flexibility with respect to the treatment of their orders and may
result in such orders being executed more quickly. The proposed option
to route a posted order to a locking or crossing market is offered by
at least one of the Exchange's competitors.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As defined in BATS Rule 1.5(d).
    \8\ Market orders are also routed away, pursuant to Rule
11.13(a)(2)(A), however the Exchange is not proposing any changes to
the treatment of routed market orders at this time.
    \9\ See, e.g., NASDAQ Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The rule change proposed in this submission is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\10\ Specifically, the
proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\
because it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and
the public interest, by allowing Users to instruct the Exchange to
route a posted order away from the Exchange to the extent another
market has locked or crossed such order. This functionality will allow
the Exchange to seek to execute the resting order if market conditions
have changed since such order was originally posted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes
any burden on competition.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b 4(f)(6) thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally may
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\14\
However, Rule 19b 4(f)(6)(iii)\15\ permits the Commission to designate
a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission notes that
BATS' proposal is substantially similar to the rules of another
national securities exchanges and does not raise any new substantive
issues.\16\ BATS expects to have operational and technological changes
in place to support the proposed rule change on May 22, 2009.\17\ In
addition, BATS states that the proposed functionality is completely
optional, and will not require any programming changes by Users of the
Exchange unless they choose to use the new functionality. Based on the
foregoing, the Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative
delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest and hereby designates the proposal operative upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing
of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by
the Commission. The Commission deems this requirement to have been
satisfied.
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ See supra note 9.
    \17\ See SR-BATS-2009-015, Item 7.
    \18\ For the 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 such proposed rule
change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-BATS-2009-015 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 No. SR-BATS-2009-015. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of BATS. 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 No. SR-BATS-2009-015 and should be
submitted on or before June 19, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-12446 Filed 5-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P