[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 223 (Monday, November 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69511-69516]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28006]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 30260; File No. 812-14037]

Columbia ETF Trust, et al.; Notice of Application

November 13, 2012.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order pursuant to sections 6(c)
and 17(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an
exemption from section 17(a) of the Act permitting certain
transactions.

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

Summary of the Application: Applicants request an order (the ``Order'')
that would permit registered investment companies for which certain
direct or indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Ameriprise Financial,
Inc. (``Ameriprise'') act as an investment adviser to engage in certain
primary and secondary market principal transactions in fixed income
instruments (the ``Transactions'') with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner
and Smith Incorporated (``MLPF&S'') and Bank of America, N.A.
(``BANA''), including an internal division of BANA (``BANA (Dealer
Unit)'') as well as affiliates of MLPF&S and BANA (each, a ``BAC
Trading Entity,'' together, the ``BAC Trading Entities'').

Applicants: Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC (``CMIA'') and
Columbia Wanger Asset Management, LLC (``CWAM'') (each, an ``Adviser'',
together, the ``Advisers'') and Columbia ETF Trust, Columbia ETF Trust
I, Columbia Funds Master Investment Trust, LLC, Columbia Funds Series
Trust, Columbia Funds Series Trust I, Columbia Funds Series Trust II,
Columbia Funds Variable Insurance Trust, Columbia Funds Variable
Insurance Trust I, Columbia Funds Variable Series Trust II, Columbia
Seligman Premium Technology Growth Fund, Inc., Tri-Continental
Corporation, Columbia Acorn Trust, Wanger Advisors Trust and Ameriprise
Certificate Company (each a ``Fund'', collectively, the ``Funds''),
Bank of America Corporation (``BAC''), BANA and MLPF&S.

DATES: Filing Dates: The application was filed on June 1, 2012, and
amended on

October 3, 2012. Applicants have agreed to file an amendment during the
notice period, the substance of which is reflected in this notice.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on December 10, 2012, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants, c/
o Robert M. Kurucza, Esq. and Marco E. Adelfio, Esq., Goodwin Procter
LLP, 901 New York Avenue NW., Suite 9000, Washington, DC 20001; Scott
R. Plummer, Esq. and Paul B. Goucher, Esq., Ameriprise Financial, Inc.,
5228 Ameriprise Financial Center, Minneapolis, MN 55474; Glen A. Rae,
Esq., Bank of America, N.A., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, Bank of America Tower, NY1-100-05-01, One Bryant Park,
5th Floor, New York, NY 10036; Brian D. McCabe, Esq., Ropes & Gray LLP,
Prudential Tower, 800 Boylston Street, Boston, MA 02199-3600; Steve
Chaiken, Esq., Bank of America, N.A., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner &
Smith Inc., 50 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10020 and Steve Chaiken,
Esq., Bank of America Corporation, Bank of America Corporate Center,
100 North Tryon Street, Charlotte, NC 28255.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura L. Solomon, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6915, or Daniele Marchesani, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or an applicant
using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. Each Fund, except as explained below, is an open-end management
investment company registered under the Act and is organized as a
statutory trust, business trust, limited liability company or
corporation under the laws of Delaware, Maryland or Massachusetts or is
a series thereof. Columbia Seligman Premium Technology Growth Fund,
Inc. and Tri-Continental Corporation are closed-end registered
investment companies. Columbia ETF Trust and Columbia ETF Trust I are
exchange-traded funds and Ameriprise Certificate Company is a face-
amount certificate company. The Funds have a variety of investment
objectives, but each may to a greater or lesser degree invest a portion
of its assets in fixed-income instruments. The fixed-income instruments
in which the Funds may invest include, but are not limited to,
government securities, municipal securities, tender option bonds,
taxable and tax-exempt money market securities, repurchase agreements,
asset- and mortgage-backed securities, corporate bonds and other issues
and syndicated loans (including assignments thereof and participations
therein), each as the Funds' respective investment policies allow.
    2. CMIA and CWAM, the Advisers, are direct or indirect wholly-owned
subsidiaries of Ameriprise, a Delaware corporation. Each Adviser is
registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940 (the ``Advisers Act''). The Advisers act as investment advisers
to the Funds and, in certain cases, have oversight over one or more
affiliated or unaffiliated sub-advisers engaged by certain Funds.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Certain of the Funds have (or may, in the future, have) sub-
advisers that provide sub-advisory services (each, a ``Sub-
Adviser,'' collectively, the ``Sub-Advisers''). Applicants request
the order cover any such Sub-Advisers, provided that any Sub-Adviser
that relies on the order complies with the conditions of the order
as though it were an Adviser, unless otherwise stated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. BANA is a national banking association and a wholly owned
indirect subsidiary of BAC. BANA (Dealer Unit) is an internal division
of BANA, which is exempt from registering as a broker-dealer pursuant
to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``1934 Act''). MLPF&S, a
Delaware corporation, is also a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of BAC
that is registered as a broker-dealer with the Commission under the
1934 Act. Each of BANA and MLPF&S as well as the affiliates of MLPF&S
and BANA listed in Schedule C to the application (each, a ``BAC Trading
Entity,'' and, collectively, the ``BAC Trading Entities'') act as
dealers and/or underwriters of fixed-income instruments. The BAC
Trading Entities listed in Schedule C are registered broker-dealers or
entities exempt from registration.
    4. On April 30, 2010, BANA sold a portion of the asset management
business of its wholly owned subsidiary Columbia Management Group, LLC
(``CMG'') to Ameriprise (the ``Columbia Sale''), including the
management of some of the Funds. The Columbia Sale also included CMG's
own subsidiary, Columbia Wanger Asset Management, L.P. (now CWAM), the
investment adviser to certain Funds. After the Columbia Sale,
RiverSource Investments, LLC changed its name to Columbia Management
Investment Advisers, LLC (CMIA). CMIA became the investment adviser for
all Funds, including legacy RiverSource Funds and the former long-term
Columbia Funds, other than those advised by CWAM.
    5. Following the Columbia Sale the Advisers are not under the
control (within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act) of BAC and
are not under common control with the BAC Trading Entities. However,
certain fiduciary accounts maintained by BANA's trust department
(``BANA (US Trust)'') \2\ for the principals or beneficiaries of such
accounts are invested in the Fund's securities (``fiduciary account
investments''). BANA (US Trust) has discretionary authority over, but
no pecuniary interest in, such investments.\3\ Because of these
investments, there may be affiliations between the BAC Trading Entities
and the Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ BANA (US Trust) includes Bank of America, U.S. Trust Private
Wealth Management, including U.S. Trust Company of Delaware, the
Retirement and Philanthropic Services unit, and the Merrill Lynch
Trust Company division and any successors. The term ``successor'' is
limited to an entity that results from a reorganization into another
jurisdiction, a change in the type of business organization or a
combination, consolidation or reorganization of any of the entities
covered by the Order, including any such combination, consolidation
or reorganization effected through the use of a ``shell'' entity
controlled by any of the entities covered by the Order, provided
that such combination, consolidation or reorganization does not
result in a change of direct or indirect control of such entities.
    \3\ Applicants note that there may be some instances in which
BAC or an entity, including a division thereof, controlled by BAC
(each, a ``BAC Affiliate,'' collectively, the ``BAC Affiliates'')
might be deemed to own, control or hold with power to vote less than
five percent of the outstanding voting securities of a Fund
otherwise than through fiduciary account investments (a ``<5%
holding''). References to potential affiliations arising ``solely by
reason of'' fiduciary account investments above certain levels may
include situations where fiduciary account investments exceed such
levels only when added to a <5% holding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Applicants state that, because of consolidation in the financial
services

industry, a few major broker-dealers account for a large percentage of
the market share in connection with trading in various asset classes,
including fixed income instruments. Applicants state that the decline
in the number of broker-dealers and banks trading in the fixed-income
instruments in which the Funds seek to invest and the increasing
significance of the few remaining institutions demonstrate the
importance to the Funds of their relationships with such entities,
including the BAC Trading Entities. Applicants further represent that
the BAC Trading Entities were the top-ranked underwriters in the
following categories of fixed-income instruments in 2011: Investment
grade-credit; U.S. leveraged loans; residential mortgage-backed
securities; asset-backed securities; and U.S. commercial paper.
Applicants also represent that the BAC Trading Entities were the second
or third-ranked dealers or underwriters in 2011 in the following
categories of fixed-income instruments: high-yield corporate credit;
investment grade-credit; collateralized mortgage obligations; asset-
backed securities; and municipal securities. As described more fully in
the application, BAC Trading Entities had similar levels of market
share in 2009 and 2010 and were a significant trading partner of the
legacy RiverSource funds prior to the Columbia Sale.
    7. Applicants assert that prohibiting the Funds from engaging in
the Transactions with the BAC Trading Entities would become
increasingly detrimental to the ongoing interests of Fund shareholders
by limiting the Funds' access to important trading counterparties that
have very significant market shares in many of the types of instruments
that the Funds purchase. Applicants submit that prohibiting the Funds
from engaging in Transactions with the BAC Trading Entities
unnecessarily reduces the opportunities available to the Funds to
obtain competitive pricing and execution and to access the markets for
particular fixed-income instruments that are available from only a few
dealers. Applicants assert that precluding a Fund from trading with a
BAC Trading Entity may harm the Fund by, among other things, preventing
it from obtaining the best pricing, terms and quality of services
otherwise available in the market.
    8. Applicants, therefore, request the Order, pursuant to sections
6(c) and 17(b) of the Act exempting Transactions entered into in the
ordinary course of business by a Fund with BAC Trading Entities, under
the circumstances described in the application, from the provisions of
section 17(a) of the Act.\4\ The ``Transactions'' that are the subject
of the Order include primary and secondary market transactions in
fixed-income instruments executed on a principal basis between a Fund
and a BAC Trading Entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Applicants are not seeking relief from the provisions of
sections 10(f), 17(e) or 17(d) of the Act or rule 17d-1 thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Order would be available only where the BAC Trading Entity is
deemed to be a first-tier or a second-tier affiliate of a Fund solely
by reason of fiduciary account investments in the voting securities of
an Owned Fund, as defined below. In particular, the Order would be
available only in circumstances in which the BAC Trading Entity might
be deemed to be (i) An affiliated person (``first-tier affiliate''), in
the case of BANA (Dealer Unit), or an affiliated person of a first-tier
affiliate (a ``second-tier affiliate'') of a Fund solely by reason of
BANA (US Trust), being deemed to own, control or hold with power to
vote through fiduciary account investments five percent or more of the
Fund's total outstanding voting securities (each, a ``5% Fund''); (ii)
a first-tier affiliate of a Fund solely by reason of BANA (US Trust)
being deemed to beneficially own through the fiduciary account
investments more than twenty-five percent of the Fund's total
outstanding voting securities or, by virtue of such fiduciary account
investments, to control the Fund (each, a ``25% Fund,'' together with
the 5% Funds, the ``Owned Funds''); and/or (iii) a second-tier
affiliate of any Fund other than an Owned Fund (each, an ``Other
Fund'') solely by reason of BANA (US Trust) being considered to own,
control or hold with power to vote a 5% Fund's securities as described
in (i) or being deemed to beneficially own a 25% Fund's securities as
described in (ii), through fiduciary account investments.
    9. Applicants seek to have the Order cover (i) The Funds and any
investment company registered under the Act or series thereof, whether
now existing or organized in the future, that is managed, advised or
sub-advised by any Adviser or by any existing or future entity that is
controlling, controlled by or under common control with CMIA and/or
CWAM or controlled by Ameriprise and registered as an investment
adviser under the Advisers Act; (ii) the Advisers and/or any existing
or future investment adviser controlling, controlled by or under common
control with CMIA and/or CWAM or controlled by Ameriprise; and (iii)
the BAC Trading Entities and any successor entities; provided that any
entity that relies on the Order complies with the terms and conditions
of the Order as though it were an applicant.
    10. Applicants request relief only for Transactions that would be
prohibited by section 17(a) because of affiliations, if any, arising
solely by reason of BANA (US Trust) being deemed to own, control or
hold with the power to vote voting securities of an Owned Fund through
fiduciary account investments. The relief would not be available where
a BAC Trading Entity is a first-tier affiliate or a second-tier
affiliate of a Fund for other reasons. The relief would not be
available for Transactions between a Fund and any trading entity under
common control with the Fund's Adviser. The relief would also not be
available for primary market Transactions in fixed-income instruments,
other than repurchase agreements and variable rate demand notes, of
which BAC (or any successor) or any entity controlled by BAC (or any
successor), including any BAC Trading Entity, is the primary obligor.
    11. Neither BAC nor any BAC Affiliates control or will control
(within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act), directly or
indirectly, Ameriprise or the Advisers or any other non-Fund entity
under the control of Ameriprise (together, the ``Ameriprise
Affiliates''). Applicants state that only the fiduciary account
investments in the Owned Funds raise the affiliation issues addressed
by the requested relief. Additionally, Ameriprise has no beneficial
interest in, and will not control (within the meaning of section
2(a)(9) of the Act) directly or indirectly, BAC, the BAC Trading
Entities or any other BAC Affiliate.
    12. The BAC Affiliates and the Ameriprise Affiliates are structured
as separate, independent businesses. Applicants state that the BAC
Affiliates will not have any involvement in the Advisers' investment
decisions or decisions to engage in Transactions pursuant to the Order,
and will not attempt to influence or control in any way the placing by
the Advisers of orders, other than in the normal course of sales
activities of the same nature that are being carried out during the
same time period with respect to unaffiliated institutional clients of
the BAC Trading Entity.
    13. Applicants state that each Fund has adopted confidentiality
policies designed to limit the unnecessary flow of information about
Fund holdings and transactions. Applicants note there are effective,
existing separation and information barriers between the Advisers and
the Funds on the one hand

and the BAC Trading Entities on the other. Applicants assert that there
is substantial internal separation and independent operation of the BAC
Trading Entities from the other BAC Affiliates and of BANA (US Trust)
from BANA (Dealer Unit). BANA (US Trust) is subject to strict fiduciary
laws and regulations that require BANA (US Trust) to act solely in the
interests of the principals or beneficiaries of the accounts.
Applicants represent that there is not, and will not be, any express or
implied understanding between a BAC Trading Entity and Ameriprise or
any Adviser that an Adviser will cause a Fund to enter into
Transactions or give preference to the BAC Trading Entity in effecting
such Transactions between the Fund and the BAC Trading Entity.
    14. Ameriprise and the Ameriprise Affiliates, including the
Advisers, will not adopt any compensation scheme any component of which
is based on the amount of business done by the Funds with a BAC Trading
Entity except to the extent such business might affect indirectly the
profits or losses of the Advisers. BAC and the BAC Affiliates,
including BANA (US Trust), will not adopt any compensation scheme any
component of which is based on a factor that compensates employees for
Transactions with the Funds differently than Transactions with
unaffiliated counterparties.
    15. BANA (US Trust) undertakes to not to exercise any voting
authority with respect to shares that constitute five percent or more
of a Fund's total outstanding voting securities, including in
connection with the election of directors/trustees (the ``Non-Voting
Undertaking'').

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 17(a) of the Act, among other things, prohibits an
affiliated person of a registered investment company, or any affiliated
person of such a person, acting as principal, from selling to or
purchasing from such registered company any security or other property
and from borrowing money or other property from such investment
company. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to exempt a
transaction from section 17(a) of the Act if evidence establishes that
the terms of the proposed transaction, including the consideration to
be paid or received, are reasonable and fair and do not involve
overreaching on the part of any person concerned and the proposed
transaction is consistent with the policy of each registered investment
company concerned and with the general purposes of the Act.
    2. Section 6(c) of the Act, in relevant part, authorizes the
Commission to exempt any person or transaction, or any class or classes
of persons or transactions, from any provision or provisions of the
Act, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act.
    3. Section 2(a)(3) of the Act defines ``affiliated person'' of
another person to include: (a) Any person directly or indirectly
owning, controlling, or holding with power to vote, 5% or more of the
outstanding voting securities of such other person; (b) any person 5%
or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or
indirectly owned by, controlled, or held with power to vote, by such
person; and (c) any person directly or indirectly controlling,
controlled by, or under common control with, such other person.
    4. Section 2(a)(9) of the Act, in relevant part, defines
``control'' as ``the power to exercise a controlling influence over the
management or policies of a company, unless such power is solely the
result of an official position with such company.'' Section 2(a)(9)
also provides that any person who owns beneficially, either directly or
through one or more controlled companies, more than 25% of the voting
securities of a company shall be presumed to control such company. Any
person who does not so own more than 25% of the voting securities of
any company shall be presumed not to control such company.
    5. Applicants state that a BAC Trading Entity could be deemed to be
a first-tier affiliate or a second-tier affiliate of a 5% Fund insofar
as fiduciary account investments of five percent or more of an Owned
Fund's outstanding voting securities could cause BANA (US Trust) to be
viewed as owning, controlling or holding with power to vote ``voting
securities.'' Were BANA (US Trust) to be deemed a first-tier affiliate
of a 5% Fund, the BAC Trading Entities (except for BANA (Dealer Unit))
would then be deemed to be second-tier affiliates of the 5% Fund. BANA
(Dealer Unit), on the other hand, could be deemed to be a first-tier
affiliate of the 5% Fund. Additionally, a BAC Trading Entity could be
deemed a first-tier affiliate of a 25% Fund and a second-tier affiliate
of the Other Funds.\5\ Applicants submit that, due to the fiduciary
account investments, any Transaction involving a Fund and a BAC Trading
Entity that is a first-tier affiliate or a second-tier affiliate
thereof, would be subject to the prohibition of section 17(a) of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As discussed in the application, this conclusion could be
reached if, on account of the fiduciary account investments, BANA
(US Trust) ``beneficially owned'' greater than twenty-five percent
of the 25% Fund's total outstanding voting securities. The Owned
Fund could then be presumed to be under the control of BANA (US
Trust), and thus of BAC. As wholly owned subsidiaries of BAC, the
BAC Trading Entities may also be presumed to be under the control of
BAC. Accordingly, the 25% Fund and the BAC Trading Entities could be
presumed to be under the common control of BAC and thus first-tier
affiliates of each other. If the 25% Fund and the Other Funds are
deemed to be under the control of their respective Adviser(s), then
the 25% Fund and the Other Funds could be deemed to be first-tier
affiliates of each other by virtue of being under common control.
Therefore, if the BAC Trading Entities are deemed to be first-tier
affiliates of the 25% Fund, they could be deemed to be second-tier
affiliates of the Other Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Applicants submit that the primary purpose of section 17(a) is
to prevent a person with the power to control an investment company
from essentially engaging in self-dealing, to the detriment of the
investment company's shareholders. Applicants submit that the policies
which section 17(a) were meant to further are not implicated here
because BAC and BAC Trading Entities are not able to cause a Fund to
enter into a Transaction or otherwise influence portfolio decisions by
the Advisers on behalf of the Funds. Applicants state that, as a
result, no BAC Trading Entity is in a position to engage in self-
dealing or otherwise cause any of the relevant Funds to enter into
Transactions that are not in the best interests of its shareholders.
    7. Applicants submit that the carefully circumscribed circumstances
under which the Transactions would be conducted, including in
particular the proposed conditions for the Order (set out below), amply
satisfy the statutory standards for relief. Applicants state that
compliance with the ``Structural Conditions'' set forth below is
intended to assure that the Advisers and the Funds continue to operate
independently of, and free of any undue influence by, BAC and the BAC
Trading Entities, which applicants assert is further buttressed by the
Non-Voting Undertaking. Moreover, neither BAC, nor any BAC Affiliate
will exercise, or attempt to exercise, control over any Fund.
    8. Applicants state that compliance with the ``Transactional
Conditions'' set forth below is designed to assure that the terms of
the individual transactions are fair from the perspective of the Funds.
Applicants note that, at the outset, the conditions require each

Fund's Board of Directors, Board of Trustees or other governing body of
such Fund, as applicable (each, a ``Board''), including a majority of
its disinterested directors or trustees, as applicable (``Necessary
Majority''), to approve, and the Fund to implement, procedures
governing all Transactions pursuant to the Order. Applicants submit
that, pursuant to such procedures, the Transactions will be subject to
ongoing review by each Fund's chief compliance officer, and will be
reviewed by its Board, including a Necessary Majority, on a quarterly
basis. In addition, the Board must annually consider the level of
Transactions with BAC Trading Entities and whether continued reliance
on the Order is appropriate in light of the need of the Funds to have
the BAC Trading Entities available as trading counterparties. The
conditions also generally require price quotations from unaffiliated
dealers that are in a position to quote competitive prices to ensure
that the terms of the particular Transactions are fair and reasonable
and do not involve overreaching. For primary market Transactions, the
conditions generally require that the Funds purchase instruments at a
price that is not more than the price paid by each other purchaser, and
on the same terms as other purchasers, in that offering or in any
concurrent offering.
    9. Applicants state that the Transactions described in the
Application satisfy the standards of sections 6(c) and 17(b).
Applicants submit that there is no danger of overreaching or self-
dealing by a BAC Trading Entity in connection with a Transaction, and
there will be no conflict of interest associated with an Adviser's or
Sub-Adviser's decision to engage in a Transaction with a BAC Trading
Entity on behalf of a Fund. Moreover, applicants state that the Order
is consistent with the policies of the Funds and the protection of
investors, as the Advisers and Sub-Advisers will manage the Funds in
accordance with the policies and investment objectives of the Funds and
without any influence by the BAC Trading Entities. Finally, applicants
state that permitting the Transactions will be appropriate in the
public interest and consistent with general purposes of the Act because
the ability to engage in Transactions increases the likelihood of a
Fund achieving the best pricing, terms and quality of service otherwise
available in the market in such transactions and results in none of the
abuses that the Act was designed to prevent.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that the Order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:

A. Structural

    (1) Neither BAC nor any BAC Affiliates will control any of the
Advisers or principal underwriters or promoters for the Funds, directly
or indirectly, within the meaning of section 2(a)(9) of the Act, and
neither BAC nor any BAC Affiliates will exercise, or attempt to
exercise, control over any Fund. The Order will remain in effect only
so long as Ameriprise, or another entity not controlling, controlled by
or under common control with BAC, primarily controls the Advisers. In
this regard, pursuant to the Non-Voting Undertaking, BANA (US Trust)
will not exercise any voting authority that it possesses with respect
to shares that constitute five percent or more of any Fund's total
outstanding voting securities. Instead, it will delegate to an
independent third party that is not affiliated with either BAC or any
BAC Affiliate the voting of such shares.
    (2) Neither BAC nor any BAC Affiliates will directly or indirectly
consult with Ameriprise or any Ameriprise Affiliate, including the
Advisers, or any portfolio manager of the Advisers concerning purchase
or sale Transactions, or the selection of a broker or dealer for any
Transactions placed or to be placed on behalf of a Fund, or otherwise
seek to influence the choice of broker or dealer for any Transaction by
a Fund, other than in the normal course of sales activities of the same
nature that are being carried out during the same time period with
respect to unaffiliated institutional clients of the BAC Trading
Entity, or that existed between the BAC Trading Entity and the
Advisers, if any, prior to consummation of the Columbia Sale.
    (3) No officer, director or employee of an Owned Fund will directly
or indirectly seek to influence in any way the terms of any Transaction
covered by the Order, other than in the normal course of investment
activities of the same nature that are being carried out during the
same time period with respect to unaffiliated broker-dealers, or that
existed between the BAC Trading Entity and the Advisers, if any, prior
to consummation of the Columbia Sale.
    (4) The Advisers and each BAC Trading Entity are structured as
separate organizations, with separate capitalization, separate books
and records, and separate officers and employees, and are physically
separated. Each BAC Trading Entity will adopt and implement policies
that prohibit the BAC Trading Entity from (a) linking any approval or
action relating to an Owned Fund to any action by any Fund or by an
Adviser relating to any Fund, or (b) using the fiduciary account
investments in an Owned Fund as a basis for seeking to persuade any
Fund or the Advisers to engage in business with the BAC Trading Entity.
The Funds have adopted policies designed to keep information about
their holdings and transactions on a confidential basis, prior to any
public disclosure, except in connection with the ordinary course of
business as permitted by the portfolio holdings disclosure policies
approved by the Funds' directors/trustees and involving communications
of the same nature as are being made during the same period to
unaffiliated trading partners of the Funds. Pursuant to these policies,
the Advisers will designate information regarding investment advisory
and portfolio execution matters relating to the Funds as information
that may not be communicated between the Owned Fund, on the one hand,
and the BAC Trading Entity, on the other hand, prior to any public
disclosure.
    (5) Ameriprise and the Ameriprise Affiliates will not adopt any
compensation scheme any component of which is based on the amount of
business done by the Funds with a BAC Trading Entity except to the
extent such business might affect indirectly the profits or losses of
the Advisers. BAC and the BAC Affiliates will not adopt any
compensation scheme any component of which is based on a factor that
compensates employees for Transactions with the Funds differently than
Transactions with unaffiliated counterparties.
    (6) The Advisers and the BAC Trading Entities, with the assistance
of their respective legal/compliance departments, will prepare
guidelines for their respective personnel to make certain that
Transactions effected pursuant to the Order comply with its conditions,
and that the Advisers and the BAC Trading Entities maintain an arms-
length relationship. The respective legal/compliance departments of the
Advisers and the BAC Trading Entities will monitor periodically the
activities of the Advisers and the BAC Trading Entities, respectively,
to make certain that the conditions of the Order are met.

B. Transactional

    With respect to each Transaction entered into or effected pursuant
to the Order on behalf of a Fund:
    (1) Each Fund's Board, including the Necessary Majority, shall
approve, and

the Fund shall implement, procedures governing all Transactions
pursuant to the Order and the Fund's Board shall no less frequently
than quarterly review all Transactions conducted pursuant to the Order
and receive and review a report of those Transactions. Such report,
which will be prepared by the Advisers and reviewed and approved by the
Fund's Chief Compliance Officer, will indicate for each Transaction
that the conditions of the Order have been satisfied, and will include
a discussion of any significant changes in the volume, type or terms of
Transactions between the relevant Funds and the BAC Trading Entity, the
reasons for these changes, and a determination that such changes are
appropriate. In addition, the Board will annually consider (i) whether
the level of Transactions with BAC Trading Entities is appropriate and
(ii) whether continued reliance on the Order in any applicable category
of fixed-income instruments is appropriate in light of the need of the
Funds to have the BAC Trading Entities available as trading
counterparties, as evidenced by, among other things, the aggregate
market share of the BAC Trading Entities in each such category.
    (2) For each Transaction, the Adviser or Sub-Adviser will adhere to
a ``best execution'' standard and will consider only the interests of
the Funds and will not take into account the impact of a Fund's
investment decision on the BAC Trading Entity. Before entering into any
such Transaction, the Adviser or Sub-Adviser will determine that the
Transaction is consistent with the investment objective(s) and policies
of the Fund and is in the best interests of the Fund and its
shareholders.
    (3) Each Fund will (a) for so long as the Order is relied upon,
maintain and preserve in an easily accessible place a written copy of
the procedures and conditions (and any modifications thereto) that are
described herein, and (b) maintain and preserve for a period of not
less than six years from the end of the fiscal year in which any
Transaction in which the Adviser or Sub-Adviser knows that both a BAC
Trading Entity and a Fund directly or indirectly have an interest
occurs, the first two years in an easily accessible place, a written
record of each such Transaction setting forth a description of the
security purchased or sold by the Fund, a description of the BAC
Trading Entity's interest or role in the Transaction, the terms of the
Transaction, and the information or materials upon which the
determination was made that each such Transaction was made in
accordance with the procedures and conditions set forth herein.
    (4) Except for Transactions involving repurchase agreements and
variable rate demand notes, before any secondary market principal
Transaction in fixed-income instruments is entered into between a Fund
and a BAC Trading Entity, the Adviser or Sub-Adviser must obtain a
competitive quotation for the same instruments (or in the case of
instruments for which quotations for the same instruments are not
available, a competitive quotation for Comparable Instruments) from at
least two unaffiliated dealers that are in a position to quote
favorable market prices, except that if, after reasonable efforts by
the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, quotations are unavailable from two such
dealers, only one other competitive quotation is required. For each
such Transaction, the Adviser or Sub-Adviser will determine, based upon
the quotations and such other relevant information reasonably available
to the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, as applicable (such as available
transaction prices and any other information regarding the value of the
instruments), that the price available from the BAC Trading Entity is
at least as favorable as that available from other sources.
    (a) Repurchase Agreements. With respect to Transactions involving
repurchase agreements, a Fund will enter into such agreements only
where the Adviser or Sub-Adviser has determined, based upon information
reasonably available to the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, as applicable, that
the income to be earned from the repurchase agreement is at least equal
to that available from other sources. Before any repurchase agreements
are entered into pursuant to the Order, the Fund or the Adviser or Sub-
Adviser, as applicable, must obtain competitive quotations from at
least two unaffiliated dealers with respect to repurchase agreements
comparable to the type of repurchase agreement involved, except that
if, after reasonable efforts by the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, quotations
are unavailable from two such dealers, only one other competitive
quotation is required.
    (b) Variable Rate Demand Notes. With respect to each Transaction
involving variable rate demand notes for which dealer quotes are not
ordinarily available, a Fund will only undertake purchases and sales
where the Adviser or Sub-Adviser has determined, based on relevant
information reasonably available to the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, as
applicable, that the income earned from the variable rate demand note
is at least equal to that of variable rate demand notes of comparable
quality that are available from other sources.
    (5) With respect to instruments offered in a primary market
underwritten, or other primary market, Transaction, the Fund will
undertake such purchase from a BAC Trading Entity only where the
Adviser or Sub-Adviser has determined, based upon relevant information
reasonably available to the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, as applicable, that
the instruments will be purchased at a price that is not more than the
price paid by each other purchaser of the instruments from, as
relevant, the BAC Trading Entity or other members of an underwriting
syndicate in that offering or in any concurrent offering of
instruments, and on the same terms as such other purchasers (except in
the case of an offering conducted under the laws of a country other
than the United States, for any rights to purchase that are required by
law to be granted to existing holders of the issuer). If no information
regarding concurrent purchasers of the instruments is reasonably
available to the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, the Fund may undertake such
purchase from a BAC Trading Entity when the Adviser or Sub-Adviser has
determined, based upon information reasonably available to the Adviser
or Sub-Adviser, as applicable, that the yield on the instruments to be
purchased is at least equal to that available on Comparable Instruments
from other sources at that time.
    (6) The commission, fee, spread, or other remuneration to be
received by the BAC Trading Entities must be reasonable and fair
compared to the commission, fee, spread, or other remuneration received
by others in connection with comparable transactions involving similar
instruments being purchased or sold during a comparable period of time.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-28006 Filed 11-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 58289]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24059]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3331-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Connecticut; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of an Emergency
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for
the State of Connecticut (FEMA-3331-EM), dated August 27, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 1, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this emergency is closed effective September 1, 2011.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-24059 Filed 9-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 7 (Thursday, January 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2304-2306]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00307]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68584; File No. SR-CBOE-2012-109]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change Related to CBSX To
Address the Authority To Cancel Orders When a Technical or Systems
Issue Occurs and To Describe the Operation of Routing Service Error
Accounts

January 4, 2013.

I. Introduction

    On November 16, 2012, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to (i) address the authority of
CBOE Stock Exchange, LLC (``CBSX'', CBOE's stock execution facility) to
cancel orders (or release routing-related orders) when a technical or
systems issue occurs; and (ii) describe the operation of a CBSX error
account(s) and routing broker error account(s), which may be used to
liquidate unmatched executions that may occur in the provision of the
CBSX's routing service. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on November 26, 2012.\3\ The Commission
received no comment letters regarding the proposed rule change. 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. 68265 (November 19,
2012), 77 FR 70511 (November 26, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-109)
(``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    In its proposal, the Exchange states that CBSX operates a system of
trading that allows automatic executions to occur electronically.\4\ As
part of this infrastructure, the Exchange states that CBSX
automatically routes orders to other exchanges under certain
circumstances. These routing services are provided in conjunction with
one or more routing brokers that are not affiliated with CBSX.\5\
Mechanically, when CBSX receives an order from a Trading Permit Holder
that is held in the CBSX system and determines to route an order to
another exchange, CBSX provides the routing broker with a corresponding
order and instructions to route the order to another trading center.
The routing broker then sends the corresponding order to the other
trading center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Notice, 77 FR at 70511.
    \5\ See Notice, 77 FR at 70511-12 n.4, n.8, and accompanying
text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its proposal, CBOE states that CBSX may encounter situations
that make it necessary to cancel orders (or release routing-related
orders), \6\ and to resolve error positions that result from errors of
the Exchange, routing brokers, or another exchange.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Notice, 77 FR at 70512. For examples of some of the
circumstances in which the Exchange may decide to cancel orders, see
Notice, 77 FR at 70512-13.
    \7\ See Notice, 77 FR at 70512. Specifically, CBOE Rule 52.10A
defines ``error positions'' as ``unmatched trade positions that may
occur in connection with the routing service provided under Rule
52.10''.
    For examples of some of the circumstances that may lead to error
positions, see Notice, 77 FR at 70514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule 52.3A (Order Cancellation/Release)

    New CBOE Rule 52.3A provides CBSX with general authority to cancel
orders as it deems to be necessary to maintain fair and orderly markets
if a technical or systems issue occurs at CBSX, a routing broker in
connection with the routing service provided under CBOE Rule 52.10, or
another trading center to which a CBSX order has been routed. It also
provides that a routing broker may only cancel orders being routed to
another trading center based on the CBSX's standing or specific
instructions or as otherwise provided in the Exchange Rules. CBSX will
be required to provide notice of the

cancellation to affected Trading Permit Holders as soon as
practicable.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See CBOE Rule 52.3A(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (b) of the rule provides that CBSX may also determine to
release orders being held on CBSX awaiting another trading center
execution as it deems to be necessary to maintain fair and orderly
markets if a technical or systems issues occurs at CBSX, a routing
broker, or another trading center to which an order has been routed.
Paragraph (c) of the rule provides that, for purposes of Rule 52.10A,
technical or system issues would include, without limitation, instances
where CBSX has not received confirmation of an execution (or
cancellation) on another exchange from a routing broker within a
response time interval designated by the Exchange, which interval may
not be less than three (3) seconds. In conjunction with this proposed
rule change, CBOE also proposed to amend CBOE Rule 52.7 which provides,
in part, that an Intermarket Sweep Order (``ISO'') shall be generated
if an order that is entered on CBSX would lock or cross a protected
quotation in an away market, to provide that if CBSX does not receive
any response at all to an outbound ISO, at the expiration of the
response time internal, CBSX will release the corresponding order that
had been suspended on the CBSX Book pending the response to the ISO in
accordance with Rule 52.3A.

Proposed Rule 52.10A (Routing Service Error Accounts)

    New CBOE Rule 52.10A provides that each routing broker shall
maintain, in the name of the routing broker, one or more accounts for
the purpose of liquidating error positions. In addition CBSX may also
maintain, in the name of CBSX, one or more CBSX error accounts (``CBSX
Error Account'') for the purposes of liquidating error positions,
subject to the procedures prescribed in new CBOE Rule 52.10A.
    Paragraph (a) of the rule provides that errors to which the rule
applies include any action or omission by CBSX, a routing broker, or
another trading center to which a CBSX order has been routed, that
results in an unmatched trade position due to the execution of an order
that is subject to the away market routing service and for which there
is no corresponding order to pair with the execution (each a ``routing
error''); and that such routing errors would include, without
limitation, positions resulting from determinations by CBSX to cancel
or release an order pursuant to CBOE Rule 52.3A.
    Paragraph (b) of the rule provides that, generally, each routing
broker will use its own error account to liquidate error positions. In
certain circumstances, however, CBSX may use a CBSX Error Account. In
particular, in instances where the routing broker is unable to use its
own error account (e.g., due to a technical, systems or other issue
that prevents the routing broker from doing so) \9\ or where the error
is due to a technical or systems issue at CBSX, CBSX may (but would not
be required to) determine it is appropriate to use a CBSX Error
Account. The Exchange states that in making such a determination to use
a CBSX Error Account, the CBSX would consider whether it has sufficient
time, information and capabilities considering the market circumstances
to determine that an error is due to such circumstances and whether the
Exchange can address the error.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice, 77 FR at 70513.
    \10\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to paragraph (c), CBSX will not be permitted to accept any
positions in a CBSX Error Account from an account of a Trading Permit
Holder or permit any Trading Permit Holder to transfer any positions
from the Trading Permit Holder's account to a CBSX Error Account. In
other words, CBSX may not accept from a Trading Permit Holder positions
that are delivered to the Trading Permit Holder through the clearance
and settlement process, even if those positions may have been the
result of an error.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Notice, 77 FR at 70513 n.17. This provision would not
apply if the Exchange incurred a position to settle a Trading Permit
Holder purchase, as the Trading Permit Holder did not yet have a
position in its account as a result of the purchase at the time of
the Exchange's action. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To the extent a routing broker uses its own account to liquidate
error positions, paragraph (d) of new CBOE Rule 52.10A provides that
the routing broker shall liquidate the error positions as soon as
practicable. The routing broker could determine to liquidate the
position itself or have a third-party broker-dealer liquidate the
position on the routing broker's behalf. Paragraph (d) also provides
that the routing broker shall establish and enforce policies and
procedures reasonably designed to (i) adequately restrict the flow of
confidential and proprietary information associated with the
liquidation of the error position in accordance with Rule 52.10,\12\
and (ii) prevent the use of information associated with other orders
subject to the routing services when making determinations regarding
the liquidation of error positions. In addition, paragraph (d) provides
that the routing broker shall make and keep records associated with the
liquidation of such routing broker error positions and shall maintain
such records in accordance with Rule 17a-4 under the Act.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Rule 52.10.01(c) provides that CBSX shall establish and
maintain procedures and internal controls reasonably designed to
adequately restrict the flow of confidential and proprietary
information between CBSX and the routing broker (referred to in the
rule as the ``Technology Provider''), and, to the extent the routing
broker reasonably receives confidential and proprietary information,
that adequately restrict the use of such information by the routing
broker to legitimate business purposes necessary for the licensing
of routing technology.
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17a-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (e) of the rule provides that, to the extent a CBSX Error
Account is used to liquidate error positions, CBSX shall liquidate the
error positions as soon as practicable. In liquidating error positions
in a CBSX Error Account, CBSX shall provide complete time and price
discretion for the trading to a third-party broker-dealer and shall not
attempt to exercise any influence or control over the timing or methods
of such trading.\14\ Such a third-party broker-dealer may include a
routing broker not affiliated with CBSX. Paragraph (e) also provides
that CBSX shall establish and enforce policies and procedures
reasonably designed to adequately restrict the flow of confidential and
proprietary information between CBSX and the third-party broker-dealer
associated with the liquidation of the error positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ This provision is not intended to preclude the Exchange
from providing the third-party broker-dealer with standing
instructions with respect to the manner in which it should handle
all error account transactions. For example, the Exchange might
instruct the broker-dealer to treat all orders as ``not held'' and
to attempt to minimize any market impact on the price of the option
being traded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, paragraph (e) provides that CBSX shall make and keep
records to document all determinations to treat positions as error
positions under the rule (whether or not a CBSX Error Account is used
to liquidate such error positions), as well as records associated with
the liquidation of CBSX Error Account error positions through a third-
party broker-dealer, and shall maintain such records in accordance with
Rule 17a-1 under the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17a-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act
\16\ and the rules

and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\17\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\18\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to 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 mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest;
and are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers. In addition, the Commission believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 11A(a)(1)(C) of the Act
\19\ in that it seeks to assure economically efficient execution of
securities transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission recognizes that technical or systems issues may
occur, and believes that CBOE Rule 52.3A, in allowing CBSX to cancel or
release orders affected by technical or systems issues, should provide
a reasonably efficient means for CBSX to handle such orders, and
appears reasonably designed to permit CBSX to maintain fair and orderly
markets.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The Commission notes that CBSX states it believes that
allowing it to cancel or release orders under such circumstances
would allow CBSX to maintain fair and orderly markets, and that CBOE
Rule 52.10A is designed to ensure full trade certainty for market
participants, and avoid disrupting the clearance and settlement
process. See Notice, 77 FR at 70514. The Commission also notes that
CBOE states that a decision to cancel or release orders due to a
technical or systems issue is not equivalent to CBSX declaring self-
help against a routing destination pursuant to Rule 611 of
Regulation NMS. See 17 CFR 242.611(b). See also Notice, 77 FR at
70512 n.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also believes that allowing CBSX to resolve error
positions through the use of error accounts maintained by its routing
brokers or CBSX itself pursuant to the procedures set forth in the
rule, and as described above, is consistent with the Act. The
Commission notes that the rule establishes criteria for determining
which positions are error positions to which the rule applies, and the
procedures for the handling of such positions. In particular, the
Commission notes that CBOE Rule 52.10A only applies to error positions
that result from the Exchanges routing service, and that such positions
shall be liquidated by the routing broker or the Exchange, as
applicable, as soon as practicable.\21\ In this regard, the Commission
believes that the new rule appears reasonably designed to further just
and equitable principles of trade and the protection of investors and
the public interest, and to help prevent unfair discrimination, in that
it should help assure the handling of error positions will be based on
clear and objective criteria, and that the resolution of those
positions will occur promptly through a transparent process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See CBOE Rule 52.10A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is also concerned about the potential for misuse of
confidential and proprietary information. The Commission notes that
CBSX or a routing broker, as applicable, will establish and enforce
policies and procedures reasonably designed to (1) adequately restrict
the flow of confidential and proprietary information associated with
the liquidation of the error positions, and (2) in the case of
liquidations by a routing broker, prevent the use of information
associated with other orders subject to the routing services when
making determinations regarding the liquidation of error positions.\22\
Furthermore, to the extent CBSX uses a CBSX Error Account to liquidate
error positions, the Exchange shall provide complete time and price
discretion for the trading to liquidate error positions in a CBSX Error
Account to a third-party broker-dealer and shall not attempt to
exercise any influence or control over the timing or methods of such
trading.\23\ The Commission believes that these requirements should
help mitigate the Commission's concerns. In particular, the Commission
believes that these requirements should help assure that none of CBSX,
its routing brokers, or any third-party broker-dealer is able to misuse
confidential or proprietary information obtained in connection with the
liquidation of error positions for its own benefit. The Commission also
notes that routing brokers would be required to make and keep records
associated with the liquidation of routing broker error positions \24\
and CBOE would be required to make and keep records to document all
determinations to treat positions as error positions under this Rule
(whether or not a CBSX Error Account is used to liquidate such error
positions), as well as records associated with the liquidation of CBSX
Error Account error positions through a third-party broker-dealer.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See CBOE Rules 52.10A(d)(i); 52.10A(e)(ii).
    \23\ See CBOE Rule 52.10A(e)(i).
    \24\ See CBOE Rule 52.10A(d)(ii).
    \25\ See CBOE Rule 52.10A(e)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission notes that the proposed procedures for
canceling orders and the handling of error positions are consistent
with procedures the Commission has approved for other exchanges.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67281 (June
27, 2012), 77 FR 39543 (July 3, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-057); 66963
(May 10, 2012), 77 FR 28919 (May 16, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-22);
67010 (May 17, 2012), 77 FR 30564 (May 23, 2012) (SR-EDGX-2012-08);
and 67011 (May 17, 2012), 77 FR 30562 (May 23, 2012) (SR-EDGA-2012-
09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\27\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2012-109) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00307 Filed 1-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 196 (Thursday, October 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57187-57188]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22369]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4606-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Louisiana; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4606-DR), dated June 2, 2021,
and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued June 2, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated June 2, 2021, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Louisiana resulting from severe storms, tornadoes, and flooding
during the period of May 17 to May 21, 2021, is of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,
42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists in the State of Louisiana.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds

available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for
Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance under section 408 will
be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, John E. Long, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Louisiana have been designated
as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Ascension, Calcasieu, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, and Lafayette
Parishes for Individual Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Louisiana are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-22369 Filed 10-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 208 (Monday, October 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74213-74214]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23876]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 35040; 812-15443]

Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Opportunities Fund and Eaton Vance
Management

October 25, 2023.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

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

Applicants: Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Opportunities Fund and Eaton
Vance Management.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 15, 2023, and amended
on April 11, 2023 and August 18, 2023.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below. Hearing
requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on November
20, 2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the
Applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants:
Deidre E. Walsh, Eaton Vance Management, [email protected]; with a
copy to Sarah Clinton, Ropes & Gray LLP, [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Large, Senior Special Counsel, at
(202) 551-7358 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's
Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' amended
application, dated August 18, 2023, which may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number at the top of
this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search field
on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You
may also call the SEC's Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-23876 Filed 10-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 214)]
[Notices]
[Page 67467]
[DOCID:fr07no05-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-11-000]

MIGC, Inc.; Notice of Application of Abandonment

November 1, 2005.
    Take notice that on October 26, 2005, MIGC Inc., (MIGC) tendered
for filing an application for abandonment of Rate Schedule TE-5 and
service. MIGC requests permission and approval to abandon the exchange
of natural gas pursuant to the October 11, 1982 Exchange Agreement with
Arco Oil and Gas Company, Division of Atlantic Richfield Company
included in MIGC's FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, as Rate
Schedule TE-5.
    MIGC states that the Exchange Agreement has been terminated and
that abandonment of the certificate would be in the public convenience
and necessity.
    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 on or before the date as indicated
below. 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>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on November 18, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6153 Filed 11-4-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on July 16, 2004

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- UNDOCKETED

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

BACKGROUND

On June 18, 2004, the United States and the People’s Republic of China
(PRC) initialed a protocol amending the U.S.-PRC aviation agreement.
The amended agreement greatly expands the opportunities for the air
carriers of both countries, including the opportunities for charters.
In this regard, (among other things) under the new agreement, each Party
shall approve applications by the airlines of the other Party for 75
one-way charter flights annually from August 1 of each year, between
points in China Zone 1 and  U.S. points on city pairs served by Chinese
carriers’ scheduled services of the same type (combination or
all-cargo) as the proposed charter flight, and 75 one-way charter
flights annually from August 1 of each year, between points in China
Zone 2 and U.S. points on city pairs served by Chinese carriers’
scheduled services of the same type (combination or all-cargo) as the
proposed charter flight.

XX  Request of Kalitta Air, Inc., for allocation of 29 U.S.-China
all-cargo charter frequencies

By letter of June 28, 2004, Kalitta Air requested an allocation of 29
all-cargo charters to provide service over the routing Shanghai –
(Khabarovsk, Russia) – (Anchorage) – Chicago.  Kalitta proposes to
operate these charters between August 11 and November 24, 2004.  These
flights would fall under the annual 75-flight limitation for China Zone
1.

Evergreen filed a response, stating that because procedures are not in
place for allocation of charters, it believes that it is inappropriate
for the Department to approve Kalitta’s request, and that it is
necessary for the Department to provide interested carriers with advance
notice of what procedures will be established to distribute the
available charters for Zones 1 and 2.

Kalitta responded, stating that its application was served on interested
parties and no carrier (including Evergreen) has requested a specific
charter allocation or stated how it would be prejudiced by an award of
29 charters to Kalitta.  Kalitta maintains that Evergreen knows that a
procedural delay will force the shipper to opt for alternative lift from
another carrier.  Kalitta states that it made a decision not to apply
for the newly-available all-cargo designation in the market, and would
concentrate on charter operations; that, in contrast, Evergreen is
seeking such scheduled designation; and that it was clear during the
U.S. China negotiations that expanded charter opportunities would be
agreed, and on that basis Kalitta sought out the customer for the
flights for which it seeks authority here.

Evergreen responded, stating that it has a history of operating charters
in the U.S.-China market; that if Kalitta’s request is granted, other
carriers will lose the chance to conduct those operations; that
Evergreen expects to operate 25 charters in the market in the coming
year; and that demand from other carriers may cause the frequency caps
to be reached quickly, requiring an allocation mechanism.  Evergreen
states that its seeking of scheduled rights in the U.S.-China market is
not relevant to this proceeding; that the

2

Department needs to establish formal procedures for the allocation of
these charters under the Ashbacker doctrine; and that we should not
grant a large number of flights to Kalitta without further consideration
of this matter.  Evergreen suggests that we allocate the available
charters on a monthly basis to assure an equitable distribution.

Applicant rep:   Mark W. Atwood<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:
Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (See Remarks)

The above action was granted on    July 16, 2004  and will be effective
August 1, 2004, through  November 28, 2004

Action taken by:   Karan K. Bhatia

		    Assistant Secretary for Aviation

		        and International Affairs

Remarks:  We have decided to grant Kalitta the charter frequencies it
seeks for its Shanghai-Chicago service.  It is our policy to ensure that
the operating rights available to U.S. carriers are fully utilized.
Significantly, Kalitta is the only carrier with demonstrably firm plans
to use any of the available U.S.-China charter opportunities at this
time.  While Evergreen has stated that it “expects to operate
approximately 25 charter flights from China during the next 12 calendar
months….” it has presented neither an application nor firm plans for
any such flights, nor has it persuasively demonstrated that the granting
of Kalitta’s request, which would still leave a pool of 46 available
charters, would preclude Evergreen’s plans. No other carrier responded
to Kalitta’s request.   Against this background, we find that, under
the circumstances presented, the public interest supports a decision to
approve Kalitta’s request now.  Saying that, we nevertheless
appreciate Evergreen’s desire for some greater degree of procedural
guidance on future awards of U.S.-China charters.  Thus, we intend, on
an expedited basis, to address by subsequent separate action the
question of procedures for allocating the remaining numerically limited
charter opportunities available under the U.S.-China agreement.  While
we have not yet decided on what those procedures might be, if
comparative procedures should need to be employed, we intend to take
into consideration the award we have made here to Kalitta.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

 China Zone 1 consists of Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou.

 China Zone 2 consists of Anhui, Fujian, Guangdong (except Guangzhou),
Hebei, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Jiangsu, Jiangxi, Shandong, Shanxi, Tianjin,
and Zhejiang.

 Ashbacker Radio Corp. vs. FCC, 326 U.S. 327 (1945).

 Letter of Evergreen International Airlines to Paul L. Gretch, Director,
Office of International Aviation, dated July 13, 2004, at 2.

 Thus, contrary to Evergreen’s assertions, we do not see an Ashbacker
problem in proceeding on Kalitta’s request.


Environmental Fate Assessment of PHMB for the Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED)

August 18, 2004 Case 3122 PC Code 111801 A. Najm Shamim, Ph. D. Office of Pesticide Programs Antimicrobials Division U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Environmental Fate Assessment PHMB is stable hydrolytically in the environment and has a half life of more than thirty days. This may be of environmental concern for surface water contamination. Studies for other fate processes are not required by and have not been submitted to the Agency.

PHMB has a half life of more than thirty days and maybe of environmental concern for surface water contamination.

Hydrolysis: One hydrolysis study ( MRID 43622301) was submitted to the Agency for review. The study assessed the hydrolytic stability of a 20% solution of PHMB. Test solutions of PHMB were prepared at pH 5, 7, and 9 using buffers and water adjusted with sodium hydroxide of hydrochloric acid. Analysis of the test solutions by GPC and UV, following four 7 to 9 day intervals for up to thirty days in a 25 ° C water bath, indicated that PHMB is hydrolytically stable at pH 5,7, and 9 at 25 ° C. Additionally, the data show that PHMB has a half life of more than thirty days ( i. e., < 10 % total degradation in 30 days).


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 64 (Friday, April 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18224-18225]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07689]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1065-000.
    Applicants: Balko Wind, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to February 18, 2015 Balko Wind, LLC tariff
filing.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5238.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/10/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1394-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
03-27_Add ALP Utilities to Sch 7,8,9 to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5250.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1395-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
03-27_SA 6509 White Pine 2 SSR Termination to be effective 4/15/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5291.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1396-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
03-27_Cancel Schedule 43I White Pine 2 SSR to be effective 4/15/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5293.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1397-000.

    Applicants: Aspen Merchant Energy, LP.
    Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 35.15: Aspen Merchant Energy, LP
Notification of Cancellation to be effective 3/27/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/27/15.
    Accession Number: 20150327-5298.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/17/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 27, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07689 Filed 4-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 88 (Friday, May 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26280-26282]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11088]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2558-029]

Vermont Marble Power Division of Omya Inc.; Notice of Application
Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions to Intervene and Protests,
Ready for Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments,
Recommendations, Preliminary Terms and Conditions, and Preliminary
Fishway Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 2558-029.
    c. Date filed: March 31, 2010.
    d. Applicant: Vermont Marble Power Division of Omya Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Otter Creek Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The existing project is located on Otter Creek in
Addison and Rutland counties, Vermont. The project does not affect
federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r)
    h. Applicant Contact: Todd Allard, Operations Engineer, Vermont
Marble Power Division of Omya Inc., 9987 Carver Road, Suite 300,
Cincinnati, OH 45242; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Aaron Liberty, Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, and e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. The deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests,
comments, recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and
preliminary prescriptions is August 30, 2011, and reply comments are
due October 14, 2011.
    Motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations,
preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions
may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/

efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic
filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an
original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready
for environmental analysis.
    l. The Otter Creek Project consists of three developments with a
combined installed capacity of 18.1 megawatts (MW). The project
produces an average annual generation of 67,258 megawatt-hours. Vermont
Marble Power uses the energy from the project to serve its retail
customers in the towns of Proctor and Pittsford, Vermont and to serve
its affiliated industrial operations within Omya Inc.
    On November 23, 2010, the Commission issued an order approving
transfer of licenses and substitution of applicant which approved the
transfer of the existing license for the Otter Creek Hydroelectric
Project from Vermont Marble Power to Central Vermont Public Service
Corporation (133 FERC ] 62,171 [2010]). Ordering Paragraph (D) of the
order provides that the approval of the transfer is contingent upon,
among other things, transfer of the title of the properties under
license, transfer of all project files, and delivery of all license
instruments to Central Vermont Public Service. On April 15, 2011,
Vermont Marble Power and Central Vermont Public Service jointly
indicated that they would not be able to fulfill the requirements of
Ordering Paragraph (D) until June 30, 2011. On April 29, 2011, the
Commission issued an order granting Vermont Marble Power and Central
Vermont Public Service an extension of time until June 30, 2011 for
filing the requirements of Ordering Paragraph (D).
    The Proctor development, located at river mile 64.2, consists of:
(1) An existing 13-foot-high, 128-foot-long dam with a 3-foot-high
inflatable flashboard system; (2) an existing 92-acre reservoir with a
storage capacity of 275 acre-feet at a normal maximum water surface
elevation of 469.5 feet mean sea level (M.S.L); (3) a gated-forebay
intake structure approximately 14 feet deep by 115 feet long with a
maximum width of 48 feet; (4) two intakes with two penstocks: A 9-foot-
diameter, 460-foot-long, riveted steel penstock that decreases to 8
feet diameter; and a 7-foot-diameter, 500-foot-long, spiral welded
steel penstock; (5) an original concrete and brick masonry powerhouse
measuring 100 by 33 feet containing four vertical shaft turbines: Three
750-kilowatt (kW) units and one 1,680-kW unit with a combined maximum
hydraulic capacity of 565 cubic feet per second (cfs); (6) an
additional steel structure measuring 28 by 48 feet attached to the
original powerhouse containing one 3,000-kW vertical shaft unit with a
maximum hydraulic capacity of 325 cfs; (7) generator leads; (8) a 0.48/
4.16-kilovolt (kV) single phase transformer; (9) a 0.48/46-kV step-up
transformer; (10) three winding transformer banks; and (11) appurtenant
facilities.
    The Beldens development, located at river mile 23, consists of: (1)
Two existing concrete dams on either side of a ledge/bedrock island
with 2.5-foot-high wooden flashboards: A 15-foot-high, 56-foot-long dam
(west) and a 24-foot-high, 57-foot-long dam (east); (2) an existing 22-
acre reservoir with a storage capacity of 253 acre-feet at a normal
maximum water surface elevation of 282.52 feet M.S.L.; (3) two intakes
equipped with trash racks: A 79-foot-long intake and a 35-foot-long
intake with a 95-foot-long sluiceway; (4) a 12-foot-diameter, 30-foot-
long steel penstock that bifurcates into two 10-foot-diameter sections,
each leading to an original powerhouse; (5) a 12-foot-diameter, 45-
foot-long concrete penstock that leads to a newer powerhouse; (6) an
original concrete and masonry powerhouse measuring 40 by 44 feet
containing a 800-kW vertical shaft unit and 949-kW vertical shaft unit
with a combined maximum hydraulic capacity of 650 cfs; (7) a second,
newer concrete powerhouse measuring 40 by 75 feet containing a 4,100-kW
vertical shaft unit with a maximum hydraulic capacity of 1,350 cfs; (8)
generator leads; (9) a 2.4/46-kV step-up transformer bank; and (10)
appurtenant facilities.
    The Huntington Falls development, located at river mile 21,
consists of: (1) An existing 31-foot-high, 187-foot-long concrete dam
with a 2.5-foot-high inflatable flashboard system; (2) an existing 23-
acre reservoir with a storage capacity of 234 acre-feet at a normal
maximum water surface elevation of 218.1 feet M.S.L; (3) two intakes
equipped with trash racks: A 40-foot-long intake and a 24-foot-long
intake; (4) three penstocks: Two 10-foot-diameter, 30-foot-long steel
penstocks leading to an original powerhouse, and a 12-foot-diameter,
75-foot-long concrete penstock leading to a newer powerhouse; (5) an
original brick masonry powerhouse measuring 42 by 60 feet containing a
600-kW vertical shaft unit and a 800-kW vertical shaft unit with a
combined maximum hydraulic capacity of 660 cfs; (6) a second, newer
powerhouse measuring 40 by 75 feet containing a 4,100-kW vertical shaft
unit with a maximum hydraulic capacity of 1,350 cfs; (7) generator
leads; (8) a 2.4/46-kV step-up transformer bank; and (9) appurtenant
facilities.
    Currently, the Proctor development operates in a modified run-of-
river mode, with infrequent diversions at the direction of Independent
System Operator-New England, while the Beldens and Huntington Falls
developments operate in a run-of-river mode. The Proctor development
provides a continuous downstream minimum flow of 100 cfs or inflow to
the development, whichever is less, with minimum flows from April
through mid-June equal to at least 50 percent of project inflows. A
bypassed reach minimum flow of 5 cfs is released at the Beldens
development through an opening in the flashboards along the west dam. A
bypassed reach minimum flow of 15 cfs is released at the Huntington
Falls development via a minimum flow gate at the right abutment of the
dam.
    The dams and existing project facilities described above are
currently owned by Vermont Marble Power. Vermont Marble Power does not
propose any changes to project facilities or operations. However, as
noted above, the license for the project is currently being transferred
to Central Vermont Public Service Corporation. Vermont Marble Power
proposes to implement measures to enhance recreation facilities in the
project area.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding

the last three digits in the docket number field to access the
document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is also
available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h
above.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene
in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure,
18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to
take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments
filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with
the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any
comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified comment date for the particular application.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', ``COMMENTS,'' ``REPLY COMMENTS,''
``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRELIMINARY FISHWAY PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or
motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the
applicant specified in the particular application. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.
    o. Procedural Schedule:
    The application will be processed according to the following
revised Hydro Licensing Schedule. As noted in item (l) above, the
current license is being transferred to Central Vermont Public Service
Corporation. The revised schedule takes into consideration the timeline
for completing the transfer. Revisions to the schedule may be made as
appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing of recommendations,            August 30, 2011.
 preliminary terms and conditions,
 and preliminary fishway
 prescriptions.
Commission issues EA................  December 28, 2011.
Comments on EA......................  January 27, 2012.
Modified terms and conditions.......  February 26, 2012.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    p. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than July 31, 2011.
    q. A license applicant must file no later than August 30, 2011: (1)
A copy of the water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request
for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying
agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality
certification.

    Dated: May 2, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-11088 Filed 5-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P