[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29554-29555]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12296]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 758

[Docket No. 150220163-5163-01]
RIN 0694-AG51

Additional Improvements and Harmonization of Export Clearance
Provisions

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) in this advanced
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) requests comments for how the
export clearance requirements under the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR) can be improved, including how the EAR export
clearance provisions can be better harmonized with the export clearance
requirements under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations
(ITAR). This ANPR is part of Commerce's retrospective regulatory review
and ongoing harmonization efforts being undertaken by Commerce and
State as part of Export Control Reform (ECR) implementation. This ANPR
is also part of Commerce's retrospective regulatory review plan under
Executive Order (EO) 13563 (see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
availability of the plan).

DATES: The Bureau of Industry and Security will accept comments on this
advanced notice of proposed rulemaking until July 6, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     By the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. The identification number for this rulemaking is
BIS-2015-0012.
     By email directly to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include
RIN 0694-AG51 in the subject line.
     By mail or delivery to Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau
of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 2099B, 14th
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Refer to RIN
0694-AG51.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this ANPR, contact
Timothy Mooney, Regulatory Policy Division, Office of Exporter
Services, Bureau of Industry and Security, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) in this advanced notice
of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) requests comments for how the
requirements under part 758 (Export clearance) of the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 CFR parts 730-774) can be
improved, including how the EAR export clearance provisions can be
better harmonized with the export clearance requirements under the
International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR parts 120-
130). This ANPR is part of Commerce's retrospective regulatory review
and ongoing harmonization efforts being undertaken by Commerce and
State as part of Export Control Reform (ECR) implementation. Commerce's
full retrospective regulatory review plan is available at: http://open.commerce.gov/news/2011/08/23/commerce-plan-analysis-existing-rules.

Harmonization of Export Clearance Provisions

    The President's Export Control Reform (ECR) Initiative has
transferred thousands of formerly ITAR controlled defense article parts
and components, along with other items, to the Commerce Control List in
the EAR under the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce. The EAR
includes part 758, which specifies requirements for export clearance
under the EAR. As part of ECR implementation, BIS has made certain
changes to part 758 to address the addition of the 9x515 and ``600
series'' ECCNs to the CCL (see the EAR final rules published on April
16, 2013 (78 FR 22660), May 13, 2014 (79 FR 27418) and November 12,
2014 (79 FR 67055)), along with other changes to the EAR to account for
the 9x515 and ``600 series'' ECCNs being added to the EAR.
    As a general principle, under the ECR implementation that is
currently underway, wherever the ITAR and EAR have provisions that are
intended to achieve the same purpose the U.S. Government is making an
effort to harmonize those provisions, except when there is a reason why
those provisions should remain different. The export clearance
requirements under the

ITAR and the EAR are an example of requirements that may for certain
provisions be harmonized to reduce the burden on exporters, improve
compliance with the export clearance requirements, and ensure the
export clearance requirements are achieving their intended purpose for
use under the U.S. export control system, specifically under the
transactions ``subject to the ITAR'' and ``subject to the EAR.''

Request for Comments on Additional Improvement and Harmonization of
Export Clearance Provisions

    BIS is considering further revisions to part 758 of the EAR as part
of Commerce's retrospective regulatory review and ongoing harmonization
efforts being undertaken by Commerce and State as part of ECR
implementation. As part of this review effort for how part 758 can be
improved to make these provisions more effective and to assist BIS in
developing regulatory changes to improve these provisions of the EAR,
BIS requests comments on these potential future changes described under
paragraphs (A) through (E). Export control documents in paragraphs (A)
through (C) include the commercial invoice and contractual
documentation.
    A. Require ECCNs on export control documents. The ECCN for all
9x515 and ``600 series'' items is currently required to be identified
on the export control documents, along with the destination control
statement. BIS is considering requiring that the ECCN be identified for
all items on the Commerce Control List. This would not include items
that are designated EAR99.
    B. Require identification of country of ultimate destination on
export control documents. BIS is considering requiring that the country
of ultimate destination be identified on the export control documents.
This requirement would mirror the requirement in the ITAR and BIS
believes that this would only impact a small number of exports where
additional actions would be needed by exporters, because in most cases,
the export control documents already identify the country of ultimate
destination.
    C. Require license number or export authorization symbol on export
control documents. BIS is also considering requiring that the license
number or export authorization symbol be identified on export control
documents. This proposed revision would require that the license
number, license exception code, or no license required designation be
entered on the export control documents. BIS specifically requests
comments on the application of this requirement to mixed authorization
and mixed jurisdiction shipments.
    D. Require AES filing for exports to Canada for items controlled
for NS, MT, NP and CB. BIS seeks comments on the potential impact and
feasibility of changing section 758.1 under paragraph (b) to require
EEI filing in the AES for all exports to Canada of items controlled for
National Security (NS), Missile Technology (MT), Nuclear
Nonproliferation (NP), and Chemical & Biological Weapons (CB) reasons,
regardless of license requirements (meaning regardless of whether the
export was authorized under a license, license exception, or designated
as no license required). Because of the AES filing exemption for non-
licensed items to Canada, BIS currently has little visibility into the
movement of these items into Canada, except for exports to Canada that
involve a licensed item (see paragraph (b)(2) of section 758.1), a
9x515 or ``600 series'' item (see paragraph (b)(3) of section 758.1) or
are to be transhipped to a third country (see paragraph (b)(6) of
section 758.1) which do require EEI filing in the AES. Therefore, BIS
is seeking information that would help us determine:

--The volume of trade that would be impacted by this filing
requirement;
--if this filing requirement would be beneficial and practical or
detrimental and burdensome for industry;
--if this filing requirement would have a commercial impact on
exporters; and
--if there are alternative methods to collecting or accessing this
data.

    E. Other suggestions for improving and harmonizing export clearance
requirements. Any other suggestions for improving the EAR export
clearance requirements, including suggestions where additional
harmonization should be considered for the export clearance
requirements under the EAR and ITAR to ease the regulatory burden on
exporters and make the provisions more effective would be helpful to
receive in response to this ANPR. These suggestions can apply to any
export clearance provision under part 758 of the EAR or any other EAR
provisions that relate to export clearance requirements.
    Comments should be submitted to BIS as described in the ADDRESSES
section of this ANPR by July 6, 2015. BIS will consider all comments
submitted in response to this ANPR that are received before the close
of the comment period. Comments received after the end of the comment
period will be considered if possible, but their consideration cannot
be assured. BIS will not accept public comments accompanied by a
request that a part or all of the material be treated confidentially
because of its business proprietary nature or for any other reason. BIS
will return such comments and materials to the persons submitting the
comments and will not consider them. All public comments in response to
this ANPR must be in writing and will be a matter of public record, and
will be available for public inspection and copying on the BIS Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) Reading Room at http://efoia.bis.doc.gov/index.php/electronic-foia/index-of-documents.

    Dated: May 13, 2015.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-12296 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register: March 8, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 45)]
[Notices]
[Page 11602-11603]
[DOCID:fr08mr06-61]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EC06-86-000, et al.]

Mirant Corporation and Its Public Utility Subsidiaries, et al.;
Electric Rate and Corporate Filings

March 1, 2006.
    The following filings have been made with the Commission. The
filings are listed in ascending order within each docket
classification.

1. Mirant Corporation and Its Public Utility Subsidiaries

[Docket No. EC06-86-000]

    Take notice that on February 24, 2006, Mirant Corporation (Mirant)
and its public utility subsidiaries (collectively, Applicants), on
their own behalf and on behalf of any future acquirer of voting equity
interests in Mirant that meets the criteria set forth therein, filed
with the Commission an application (Application) requesting that the
Commission grant blanket authorization for any future disposition or
issuance of voting equity interests in Mirant with a value in excess of
$10 million to any party, provided that any such disposition or
issuance would neither: (i) Result in the acquiring party, together
with its affiliates, holding a 5% or greater voting equity interest in
Mirant, nor (ii) confer upon the acquiring party, together with its
affiliates, any right to control (positively or negatively) the
management or operations of any Mirant Public Utility (Future
Transactions). Applicant states that no future transaction will have
any adverse effect on competition, rates or regulation or will result
in the cross-subsidization of a non-utility associate company or the
pledge or encumbrances of utility assets for the benefit of an
associate company.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 17, 2006.

2. San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Seller of Energy and Ancillary
Services Into Markets Operated by the California Independent System
Operator Corporation and the California Power Exchange; Investigation
of Practices of the California Independent System Operator Corporation
and the California Power Exchange

[Docket Nos. EL00-95-174 and EL00-98-160]

    Take notice that on February 10, 2006, Portland General Electric
Company (Portland) filed testimony in support of revised cost recovery
inputs to be used in Portland's cost recovery analysis, along with an
updated version of the cost recovery template and supporting tables
previously submitted in this proceeding in compliance with the
Commission's Order issued January 26, 2006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 13, 2006.

3. San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Seller of Energy and Ancillary
Services Into Markets Operated by the California Independent System
Operator Corporation and the California Power Exchange; Investigation
of Practices of the California Independent System Operator Corporation
and the California Power Exchange

[Docket No. EL00-95-175, Docket No. EL00-98-161]

    Take notice that on February 10, 2006, Powerex Corp. (Powerex)
pursuant to

Commission Order issued on January 26, 2006, filed a Cost Recovery
Report.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 13, 2006.

4. Pinnacle West Capital Corporation

[Docket Nos. ER00-2268-005, ER00-2268-006, ER00-2268-007, EL05-10-000,
ER99-4124-003, ER99-4124-004, ER99-4124-005, EL05-11-000, ER00-3312-
004, ER00-3312-005, ER00-3312-006, EL05-12-000, ER99-4122-006, ER99-
4122-007, ER99-4122-008, EL05-13-000]

    Take notice that on February 24, 2006, Pennacle West Capital
Corporation, et al., brings additional authority in connection with it
review of market-base rate authority and in particular use of a
combined APS/SRP area as a relevant geographic market.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 8, 2006.

5. Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.; Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.

[Docket No. PH06-5-000]

    Take notice that, on February 21, 2006, Hawaiian Electric
Industries, Inc. (HEI) and Hawaiian Electric, Company, Inc. (HECO)
jointly filed, on behalf of themselves and each of the holding
companies in their holding company system Form 65B a petition seeking,
pursuant to 18 CFR 366.3(c)(1) and 18 CFR 366.4(c)(1), a waiver of the
Commission's regulations under the Public Utility Holding Company Act
of 2005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 14, 2006.

6. Broad Street Contract Services, Inc.

[Docket No. PH06-7-000]

    Take notice that on February 27, 2006, Broad Street Contract
Services, Inc. (Broad Street) tendered for filing an Exemption
Notification on behalf of itself and each of the holding companies in
the same holding company system identified in FERC-65, seeking
exemption from the requirements of the Public Utility Holding Company
Act of 2005, 18 CFR 366.3(a) or 18 CFR 366.3(b).
    Broad Street states that the Holding Companies include one power
marketer authorized to sell energy at market-based rates.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 20, 2006.

7. Mitsubishi Corporation; Diamond Generating Corporation; Diamond
Frontier, LLC; Diamond Gateway, LLC; Diamond Georgia, LLC; Diamond
Alabama, LLC; Diamond Washington, LLC; Diamond Oklahoma, LP; Diamond
Alabama II, LLC; Wildflower Development LLC; Wildflower Generating
Partners I LLC; Wildflower Energy, LP

[Docket No. PH06-9-000]

    Take notice that on February 23, 2006, Mitsubishi Corporation;
Diamond Generating Corporation; Diamond Frontier, LLC; Diamond Gateway,
LLC; Diamond Georgia, LLC; Diamond Alabama, LLC; Diamond Washington,
LLC; Diamond Oklahoma, LP; Diamond Alabama II, LLC; Wildflower
Development LLC; Wildflower Generating Partners, I LLC; and Wildflower
Energy, LP (collectively, Mitsubishi Companies), filed an Exemption
Notification (FERC-65) seeking exemption from the requirements of the
Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005, 18 CFR 366.3(a) or 18 CFR
366.3(b).
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 16, 2006.

8. Tennessee Valley Authority

[Docket No. TX05-1-007]

    Take notice that on February 21, 2006, Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) filed a revised Transmission Impact Study Agreement, Facilities
Study Agreement and an Interconnection Agreement with East Kentucky
Power Cooperative, Inc. pursuant to the Commission's ``Final Order
Directing Interconnection and Accepting Interconnection Agreement,''
issued January 19, 2006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 14, 2006.

9. Louisiana Energy and Power Authority v. Entergy Services, Inc.;
Louisiana Energy and Power Authority v. Cleco Power

[Docket No. TX06-1-000]

    Take notice that on February 17, 2006, Louisiana Energy and Power
Authority (LEAP) hereby petitions, on behalf of itself and the Pool
Members for which it operates a control area, the Commission to order
Entergy Services, Inc. and Cleco Power to provide Network Integration
Transmission Service under the respective Entergy and Cleco Open Access
Transmission Tariffs that will enable LEPA to gain access to generation
resources that are necessary to serve LEPA's load on a reasonable
economic basis.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 10, 2006.

10. Aero Energy LLC

[Docket No. TX06-2-000]

    Take notice that on February 16, 2006, Aero Energy LLC (Aero
Energy) filed an application for interconnection and transmission
service on the Sagebrush Line pursuant to sections 210, 211 and 212 of
the Federal Power Act. Aero Energy states that Sagebrush, a California
general partnership, has refused Aero Energy access to the Sagebrush
Line to interconnect with Southern California Edison Company's
interstate transmission system.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 10, 2006.

Standard Paragraph

    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. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to 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 online 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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-3185 Filed 3-7-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82117-82119]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32734]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63601; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2010-124]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Amex LLC Extending the
Operation of the Pilot Program That Allows Nasdaq Stock Market
Securities to be Traded on the Exchange Pursuant to a Grant of Unlisted
Trading Privileges

December 22, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on December 20, 2010, NYSE Amex LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Amex'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule 500 to
extend the operation of the pilot program that allows Nasdaq Stock
Market (``Nasdaq'') securities to be traded on the Exchange pursuant to
a grant of unlisted trading privileges. The pilot is currently
scheduled to expire on January 31, 2011; the Exchange proposes to
extend it until the earlier of Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') approval to make such pilot permanent or
August 1, 2011. The text of the proposed rule change is available at
the principal office of the Exchange, on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.sec.gov, at the Commission's Public Reference Room, and
http://www.nyse.com.

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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    NYSE Amex Equities Rules 500-525, as a pilot program, govern the
trading of any Nasdaq-listed security on the Exchange pursuant to
unlisted trading privileges (``UTP Pilot Program'').\3\ The Exchange
hereby seeks to extend the operation of the UTP Pilot Program,
currently scheduled to expire on January 31, 2011, until the earlier of

Commission approval to make such pilot permanent or August 1, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62479 (July 9,
2010), 75 FR 41264 (July 15, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-31) (Notice of
Filing of Amendment Nos. 2 and 3, and Order Granting Accelerated
Approval to a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1,
2, and 3 Thereto, To Adopt as a Pilot Program a New Rule Series for
the Trading of Securities Listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market Pursuant
to Unlisted Trading Privileges). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 62857 (September 7, 2010), 75 FR 55837 (September 14,
2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-89) (Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend the Pilot Program
That Allows Nasdaq Stock Market Securities To Be Traded on the
Exchange Pursuant to UTP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The UTP Pilot Program includes any security listed on Nasdaq that
(i) is designated as an ``eligible security'' under the Joint Self-
Regulatory Organization Plan Governing the Collection, Consolidation
and Dissemination of Quotation and Transaction Information for Nasdaq-
Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privilege
Basis, as amended (``UTP Plan''),\4\ and (ii) has been admitted to
dealings on the Exchange pursuant to a grant of unlisted trading
privileges in accordance with Section 12(f) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''),\5\ (collectively, ``Nasdaq
Securities'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58863 (October 27,
2008), 73 FR 65417 (November 3, 2008) (Notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness of Amendment No. 20 to the UTP Plan). The
Exchange's predecessor, the American Stock Exchange LLC, joined the
UTP Plan in 2001. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55647
(April 19, 2007), 72 FR 2091 (April 27, 2007) (S7-24-89). In March
2009, the Exchange changed its name to NYSE Amex LLC. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 59575 (March 13, 2009), 74 FR 11803 (March
19, 2009) (SR-NYSEALTR-2009-24).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78l.
    \6\ ``Nasdaq Securities'' is included within the definition of
``security'' as that term is used in the NYSE Amex Equities Rules.
See NYSE Amex Equities Rule 3. In accordance with this definition,
Nasdaq Securities are admitted to dealings on the Exchange on an
``issued,'' ``when issued,'' or ``when distributed'' basis. See NYSE
Amex Equities Rule 501.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that its New Market Model Pilot (``NMM Pilot''),
which, among other things, eliminated the function of specialists on
the Exchange and created a new category of market participant, the
Designated Market Maker (``DMM''),\7\ is also scheduled to end on
January 31, 2011.\8\ The timing of the operation of the UTP Pilot
Program was designed to correspond to that of the NMM Pilot. In
approving the UTP Pilot Program, the Commission acknowledged that the
rules relating to DMM benefits and duties in trading Nasdaq Securities
on the Exchange pursuant to the UTP Pilot Program are consistent with
the Act \9\ and noted the similarity to the NMM Pilot, particularly
with respect to DMM obligations and benefits.\10\ Furthermore, the UTP
Pilot Program rules pertaining to the assignment of securities to DMMs
are substantially similar to the rules implemented through the NMM
Pilot.\11\ The Exchange has similarly filed to extend the operation of
the NMM Pilot until the earlier of Commission approval to make the NMM
Pilot permanent or August 1, 2011.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See NYSE Amex Equities Rule 103.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60758 (October 1,
2009), 74 FR 51639 (October 7, 2009) (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-65). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 61030 (November 19, 2009), 74
FR 62365 (November 27, 2009) (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-83); 61725 (March 17,
2010), 75 FR 14223 (March 24, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-28); and 62820
(September 1, 2010), 75 FR 54935 (September 9, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-
2010-86).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78.
    \10\ See supra note 1, at 41271.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ See SR-NYSEAmex-2010-122.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Extension of the UTP Pilot Program in tandem with the NMM Pilot,
both from January 31, 2011 until the earlier of Commission approval to
make such pilots permanent or August 1, 2011, will provide for the
uninterrupted trading of Nasdaq Securities on the Exchange on a UTP
basis and thus continue to encourage the additional utilization of, and
interaction with, the NYSE Amex Equities market, and provide market
participants with improved price discovery, increased liquidity, more
competitive quotes and greater price improvement for Nasdaq Securities.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange. In particular,
the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with (i) Section
6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest; (ii)
Section 11A(a)(1) of the Act,\15\ in that it seeks to ensure the
economically efficient execution of securities transactions and fair
competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange markets; and
(iii) Section 12(f) of the Act,\16\ which governs the trading of
securities pursuant to UTP consistent with the maintenance of fair and
orderly markets, the protection of investors and the public interest,
and the impact of extending the existing markets for such securities.
Under the UTP Pilot Program Nasdaq Securities trade on the Exchange
pursuant to rules governing the trading of Exchange-Listed securities
that previously have been approved by the Commission. NYSE Amex made
certain minor modifications to the operation of these rules, and added
certain new rules, to accommodate the trading of Nasdaq Securities on a
UTP basis; the Commission also approved all of these modifications and
additions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    No written comments were 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 \19\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2010-124 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2010-124. 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 Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSEAmex-2010-124 and should be submitted on or before January 19,
2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2010-32734 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P