[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 154 (Monday, August 11, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46697-46700]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18864]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0376]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, James River; Newport News, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on the navigable
waters of the James River in Newport News, VA for multiple periods, one
hour in length each, on all weekdays from August 6 until August 15,
2014. This action will restrict vessel traffic movement in the
designated area during the United States Navy's operation involving
unmanned and remote-operated crafts. This action is necessary in order
to protect the life and property of the maritime public due to the high
speed maneuvering of the vessels and the experimental nature of the
control technology.

DATES: This rule is effective from August 11, 2014 through August 15,
2014, and has been in effect with actual notice since July 30, 2014. It
has been or will be enforced from August 6 through August 8, 2014 and
August 11 through August 15, 2014, from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., 12
p.m. to 1 p.m., and 2 p.m. to 3 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2014-0376]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room

W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LCDR Gregory Knoll, Waterways Management Division Chief,
Sector Hampton Roads, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The United States Navy is conducting a demonstration in the James
River in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet and Hog Island.
A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) was published on July 7, 2014 in
the Federal Register (79 FR 38479).
    The Coast Guard received two comments on the NPRM, which are
addressed below in Section C. No request for a public meeting was
received, and no meeting was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard received the dates
and times needed for the waterway closures from the Navy without
sufficient time to provide for 30 days of public comment and 30 days
advance notice of the Final Rule.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The United States Navy's operation will involve over 20 vessels
traveling in close proximity to one another at high speeds. The control
systems on board these vessels have undergone significant research and
development testing, but the experimental nature of them means that
there could be an impact on marine traffic in the vicinity.
    The Coast Guard will establish a safety zone closing a portion of
the James River in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet and
Hog Island for multiple periods, one hour in length each, from August 6
through August 8, 2014, and August 11 through August 15, 2014. The
safety zone will be effective from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., 12 p.m. to
1 p.m., and 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. each day.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard received one comment requesting to move the time of
the second hour-long window each day to allow for a longer opening in
between the two closure periods. The NPRM in 79 FR 38479 stated that
the safety zone would be in effect from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., 11:30
a.m. to 12:30 p.m., and 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. each day. Instead, the second
window will be changed, as requested in the comment received, from 12
p.m. to 1 p.m. each day.
    The Coast Guard received one comment concerning the effect of the
safety zone on deep draft commercial traffic on the James River and the
possible delays to vessels that must sail with the tide for certain
sections of the James River outside of the Safety Zone. The Coast Guard
reached out to facilities up river of the safety zone to determine
vessel schedules from August 6 through August 15, 2014. Based on this
information, the effect on tide-restricted vessels will be minimal due
to the low volume of this type of traffic. For smaller vessel traffic
not restricted by the tide, the limited duration of each closure allows
vessels to transit through the area comprising the zone in between the
specified one-hour periods. Additionally, the Captain of the Port,
Hampton Roads or his designated on-scene Representative may allow
vessels to transit through the safety zone during the enforcement
period if deemed necessary on a case-by-case basis.
    The Captain of the Port of Hampton Roads is establishing a safety
zone within the waters of the James River, from James River Channel
Lighted Buoy 11 (LLNR 11595), upstream to James River Channel Lighted
Buoy 44 (LLNR 11987), bank to bank, in the vicinity of the James River
Reserve Fleet and Hog Island, Virginia. This safety zone will be
enforced from August 6, 2014 through August 8, 2014 and August 11, 2014
through August 15, 2014 from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., 12 p.m. to 1 p.m.
and 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. Access to the safety zone will be restricted
during the specified dates and times. No person or vessel may enter or
remain in the regulated area without the permission of the Captain of
the Port of Hampton Roads.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those orders. Although this regulation
restricts access to the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not
be significant because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a
limited duration; (ii) the zone is of limited size; and (iii) the Coast
Guard will make notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can
adjust their plans accordingly.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in that portion of the James River
during the specified dates and times.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: (i) The
safety zone will only be in place for a limited duration; and (ii)
before the enforcement period, maritime advisories will be issued
allowing mariners to adjust their plans accordingly.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above. Small businesses may

send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or
otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small
Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the
Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman
evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness
to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of
the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule involves establishing a safety zone. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph (34)(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0376 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0376  Safety Zone, James River; Newport News, VA.

    (a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section, Captain of the
Port means the Commander, Sector Hampton Roads. Representative means
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been
authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (b) Location. The following area is a safety zone: Specified waters
of the Captain of the Port Sector Hampton Roads zone, as defined in 33
CFR 3.25-10: The James River between James River Channel Lighted Buoy
11 and James River Channel Lighted Buoy 44 from bank to bank.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into this zone is prohibited unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated
representatives.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this
safety zone shall:
    (i) Contact on scene contracting vessels via VHF channel 13 and 16
for passage instructions.
    (ii) If on scene proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant
or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a
U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
    (3) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads can be reached through
the Sector Duty Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia
at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can
be contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channel 13 (165.65 Mhz) and
channel 16 (156.8 Mhz).
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 9:30
a.m. to 10:30 a.m., 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. to 3

p.m. each day from August 6, 2014 through August 8, 2014 and from
August 11, 2014 through August 15, 2014.

    Dated: July 30, 2014.
Christopher S. Keane,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. 2014-18864 Filed 8-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


? Need to return call by / at/ between and . Signature: Project No.: 0<IP_ADDRESS>   DISTRIBUTION Page _ 1_ of _ 1 Project Name: 304( m)

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Outgoing Call Date: 3/ 18/ 05 Time: 10: 30 AM Company Name: Meadwestvaco Coated Board ( AL0000817) Contact Name: Bob Swint Phone No.: ( 334) 855 5326 Name: Meghan Kandle Eastern Research Group GENERAL SUBJECT : Elemental Phosphorus Discharge from Outfall 001 TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN I called Mr. Bob Swint, Environmental Supervisor for Meadwestvaco Coated Board, regarding discharges of elemental phosphorous from Outfall 001 reported to PCS for 2002. I had reviewed this facility's measurements and violation report on EPA's Envirofacts web page and noticed that they only report Elemental Phosphorous ( PRAM Code = 00442) for Outfall 001. All other outfalls are monitored for Total Phosphorus ( as P). In September 2003, the facility stopped reporting Elemental Phosphorus for Outfall 001 and began reporting Total Phosphorus as P. I asked Mr. Swint which parameter was appropriate for their discharge.

Mr. Swint said that the test for Elemental Phosphorous is exactly the same as the test for Total Phosphorus as P. Therefore, the facility has not changed their analysis at all. The only difference between the data reported prior to September 2003 and after September 2003 is that the form sent to the facility by the state had a different PRAM code printed on the top. Mr. Swint did not know why the PRAM code on the form had changed.

Since there is no difference in analytical method for detecting Elemental Phosphorous versus Total Phosphorus, and it is unlikely that the mill is discharging Elemental Phosphorous, ERG determined that it was appropriate to change the PRAM code to Total Phosphorus as P for Outfall 001.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68382-68383]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28012]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2014-0003; PDA-37(R)]

Hazardous Materials: New York City Permit Requirements for
Transportation of Certain Hazardous Materials

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice, and extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is extending the period for comments on the American
Trucking Associations, Inc.'s (ATA) application for a preemption
determination concerning the requirements of the New York City Fire
Department for a permit to transport certain hazardous materials by
motor vehicles through New York City, or for transshipment from New
York City, and the fee for the permit.

DATES: Comments received on or before December 4, 2015 will be
considered before an administrative determination is issued by PHMSA's
Chief Counsel.

ADDRESSES: All documents in this proceeding, including the comments
submitted by the New York City Fire Department (FDNY), may be reviewed
in the Docket Operations Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. All documents in this
proceeding are also available on the U.S. Government Regulations.gov
Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Comments must refer to Docket No.
PHMSA-2014-0003 and may be submitted to the docket in writing or

electronically. Mail or hand deliver three copies of each written
comment to the above address. If you wish to receive confirmation of
receipt of your comments, include a self-addressed, stamped postcard.
To submit comments electronically, log onto the U.S. Government
Regulations.gov Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Use the Search
Documents section of the home page and follow the instructions for
submitting comments. Anyone is able to search the electronic form of
all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted
on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (70 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://www.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vincent Lopez, Office of Chief
Counsel, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590; Telephone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>; Facsimile No.<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ATA applied for an administrative
determination concerning whether Federal hazardous material
transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., preempts requirements of
the New York City Fire Department for a permit to transport certain
hazardous materials by motor vehicle through New York City, or for
transshipment from New York City, and the fee for the permit. PHMSA
published notice of ATA's application in the Federal Register on April
17, 2014. 79 FR 21838. On June 2, 2014, the comment period closed
without any interested parties submitting comments. On April 27, 2015,
we published a notice of delay in processing ATA's application in order
to conduct additional fact-finding and legal analysis in response to
the application. 80 FR 23328. In order to ensure PHMSA has all of the
relevant information before making a determination, we sent a letter to
the FDNY and requested that it submit comments as to whether Federal
hazardous material transportation law preempts the New York City
requirements that are the subject of this proceeding. On August 20,
2015, the FDNY submitted its comments on ATA's application. Therefore,
on October 1, 2015, we published a notice announcing that we were
reopening the comment period in the proceeding to provide interested
parties the opportunity to address any of the issues raised by the FDNY
in its comments. 80 FR 59244. On October 21, 2015, ATA asked us for an
extension of time in which to file comments, and after review of ATA's
request, we have granted its request.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2015.
Joseph Solomey,
Senior Assistant Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2015-28012 Filed 11-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: October 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 191)]
[Notices]
[Page 57169]
[DOCID:fr01oc08-129]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, October
2, 2008 at 2 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (6), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of
the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
October 2, 2008 will be:

Formal orders of investigation;
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an
enforcement nature;
A collection matter;
Amicus consideration;
An adjudicatory matter; and
Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 26, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-23048 Filed 9-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56650-56652]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22518]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

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

Food and Drug Administration/American Glaucoma Society Workshop
on the Validity, Reliability, and Usability of Glaucoma Imaging Devices

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a

public workshop entitled ``FDA/American Glaucoma Society (AGS) Workshop
on the Validity, Reliability, and Usability of Glaucoma Imaging
Devices.'' FDA is co-sponsoring the workshop together with the AGS, a
nonprofit organization that supports glaucoma specialists and
scientists through the advancement of education and research. The
purpose of this public workshop is to provide a forum for discussing
the validity, reliability, and usability of glaucoma imaging devices.
The primary topic to be discussed relates to imaging of the posterior
segment of the eye (e.g., retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head,
ganglion cell layer) using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT, time
domain and spectral domain), with particular emphasis on normative
databases and the diagnostic performance of OCT for therapeutic
glaucoma products (regulatory considerations) and clinical decision
making (clinical practice considerations).

DATES: Date and Time: The public workshop will be held on October 5,
2012, from 8 a.m. until 5 p.m.
    Location: The public workshop will be held at the FDA White Oak
Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31 Conference Center, the Great
Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993. Entrance for the public
workshop participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where
routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and
security information, please refer to: http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.
    Contact Person: Brad Cunningham, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993. Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration: AGS will charge a registration fee to cover its share
of the expenses associated with the workshop. The registration fee is
$200 for AGS members and $300 for non-AGS members. Registration is
available on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons interested in
attending this public workshop must register online by September 17,
2012. Early registration is recommended because facilities are limited
and, therefore, FDA may limit the number of participants from each
organization. If time and space permits, onsite registration on the day
of the public workshop will be provided beginning at 7:30 a.m. the
morning of the workshop (October 5, 2012). AGS will charge an on-site
registration fee of $400.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Ms. Cindy Garris at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>,
no later than September 17, 2012.
    To register for the public workshop, please visit the AGS Web site
at: https://www.formstack.com/forms/?1237628-fpPvbj6eU2. For more
information on the workshop, please see the FDA's Medical Devices News
& Events--Workshops & Conferences calendar at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm. (Select
this meeting/public workshop from the posted events list.) Those
interested in attending but unable to access the electronic
registration should fax the PDF form on the AGS Web site (http://www.americanglaucomasociety.net/client_data/files/2012/259_fdaagsworkshopregistrationform.pdf) to<PHONE_NUMBER> to register. Please
complete either the online registration form or the PDF form with the
contact information for each attendee, including name, title,
affiliation, address, email, and telephone number. If there are any
questions with registration, please contact the AGS administrative
offices at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Registrants will receive confirmation after
they have been accepted. You will be notified if you are on a waiting
list.
    Streaming Webcast of the Public Workshop: This public workshop will
also be webcast. Persons interested in viewing the webcast must
register online by September 17, 2012. Early registration is
recommended because webcast connections are limited. Organizations are
requested to register all participants, but to view using one
connection per location. Webcast participants will be sent technical
system requirements after registration and will be sent connection
access information after October 1, 2012. If you have never attended a
Connect Pro event before, test your connection at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. To get
a quick overview of the Connect Pro program, visit http://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview. (FDA has verified the Web site
addresses in this document, but FDA is not responsible for any
subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document publishes in
the Federal Register.)
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is
available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may
be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management, Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. A
transcript will also be available in either hard copy or on CD-ROM,
after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests
are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029),
Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg.,
Rockville, MD 20857. A link to the transcript will also be available
approximately 45 days after the public workshop on the Internet at
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/default.htm. (Select this public workshop from the posted events list.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Advances in glaucoma diagnostic devices have been rapid, and these
devices are of increasing importance in the diagnosis and clinical
management of glaucoma. Device hardware is often upgraded and
innovative software, such as measurement algorithms, image
registration, and normative databases, is being added to existing
hardware configurations. The optimal endpoints and strategies for
assessing the safety and effectiveness of these new diagnostic tools in
the management of glaucoma are unclear.
    While there are several ophthalmic assessments (e.g., imaging,
perimetry, tonometry, etc.) and ocular spaces (e.g., posterior segment,
anterior chamber angle, etc.) relevant to the diagnosis and management
of glaucoma, the primary topic of this workshop is the imaging of the
posterior segment (e.g., retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head,
ganglion cell layer, etc.) with Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT, time
domain and spectral domain).

II. Topics for Discussion at the Public Workshop

    Topics to be discussed at the public workshop include, but are not
limited to:
     Issues related to the use of OCT technology (time domain
and spectral domain) in the diagnosis and treatment of glaucoma.
     Approaches to verify/validate new diagnostic technologies
and their associated claims as well as factors that affect the quality
of their images and measurements.
     Normative/reference databases and their impact on the
diagnostic use of OCT devices.

    Dated: September 5, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-22518 Filed 9-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 124 (Thursday, June 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29546-29547]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13591]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2013-0315; FRL-9964-17-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart CCCC)
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NSPS for Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units (Renewal)'' to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through June 30,
2017. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register on May 3, 2016 during a 60-day comment period. This notice
allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2013-0315, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents for this ICR (NSPS for
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units (40
CFR part 60, subpart CCCC) (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 2384.04; OMB Control
No. 2060-0662), which explain in detail the information that the EPA
will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The
docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-
1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Owners and operators of affected facilities are required
to comply with reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the general
provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, as well as the specific
requirements at 40 CFR part 60, subpart CCCC. This includes submitting
initial notifications, performance tests and periodic reports and
results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and duration of any
startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected
facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative. These reports are

used by EPA to determine compliance with the standards.
    Form numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Commercial and industrial solid
waste incineration units.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart CCCC).
    Estimated number of respondents: 8 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, semiannually and
annually.
    Total estimated burden: 1,450 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $779,000 (per year), includes $630,000
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the
total estimated burden, labor costs and capital and O&M costs as
currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This
increase is not due to any program changes. The change in the burden
and cost estimates occurred because the respondent universe has
increased since the most recently approved ICR.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-13591 Filed 6-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 39)]
[Notices]
[Page 10086-10088]
[DOCID:fr28fe06-130]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53342; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval
of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Volatility Indexes

February 21, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 20, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or

``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the CBOE. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    CBOE proposes to revise the manner in which the expiration dates
for each volatility-based index is determined. The description of this
proposed rule filing is available for viewing on CBOE's Web site
(http://www.cboe.com), at the CBOE's Office of the Secretary, and at

the Commission's public reference room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule filing is to revise the methodology for
determining the expiration dates for options on certain volatility-
based indexes that are approved for listing and trading on the
Exchange. The Commission previously approved for the Exchange to list
and trade options and increased-value options on certain volatility-
based securities indexes; specifically, the CBOE Volatility Index
(``VIX''), the CBOE Nasdaq 100[supreg] Volatility Index (``VXN''), and
the CBOE Dow Jones Industrial Average[supreg] Volatility Index
(``VXD'') (collectively ``volatility indexes).\3\ Each volatility
index, generally, uses the quotes of certain index option series (such
as the S&P 500 index) to derive a measure of the volatility of the U.S.
equity market. The volatility indexes provide investors with up-to-the-
minute market estimates of expected volatility by extracting implied
volatilities from real-time index option quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49563 (April 14,
2004); 69 FR 21589 (April 21, 2004) (order approving SR-CBOE-2003-
40, which allowed CBOE to trade options on the VIX, VXN, and VXD);
see also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 49698 (May 13, 2004);
69 FR 29152 (May 20, 2004) (order approving SR-CBOE-2004-09, which
allowed CBOE to trade increased-value options on the VIX, VXN, and
VXD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All volatility index options contracts were originally designed to
expire on the Wednesday immediately prior to the third Friday of the
month that immediately precedes the month in which the options used in
the calculation of that index expire. This method was chosen to provide
an exercise schedule that is similar to the manner in which most other
option contracts expire (i.e., the third Friday of the month). Under
this method, during any rolling twelve month period, in four of those
twelve months, options on any volatility index would not expire exactly
thirty days prior to the expiration of the options on the index on
which that volatility index is based. To illustrate, under the current
methodology, an option on the March 2006 VXN would expire on Wednesday,
March 16, 2006 because that is the Wednesday immediately prior to the
third Friday of March 2006. However, March 16, 2006 is 37 days prior to
the date on which options on the Nasdaq 100 Index (``NDX'') expire.
    CBOE proposes to revise the methodology by having all volatility
index options expire on the ``Wednesday that is thirty days prior to
the third Friday of the calendar month immediately following the
expiring month.'' This revised approach will provide consistency in the
expiration of options on all volatility indexes by ensuring that every
volatility index option will expire exactly thirty days prior to the
date on which the index that the volatility index is based.\4\ To
illustrate how this new methodology will work using the March 2006 VXN
example above, the April 2006 NDX option will expire on Friday, April
21, 2006 and the March 2006 VXN option would expire on Wednesday March
22, 2006, which is exactly 30 days prior to the expiration of the NDX
April options. Even though the March 2006 VXN option does not expire
during the normal expiration week for all other options, the Exchange
believes it is more important that the volatility index options expire
consistent with the 30-day volatility measurement period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ CBOE states that the revised expiration date calculation
methodology for options on certain volatility indexes is consistent
with the way in which expiration dates for futures on volatility
indexes are calculated. Telephone conversation between James Flynn,
Attorney, CBOE, and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, and
Geoffrey Pemble, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation,
Commission, on February 9, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that it will provide public disclosures and
notifications to its members and the investing public of this
change.\5\ The Exchange states that this proposal does not affect the
rule text of any existing Exchange rule.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CBOE will issue an information circular to its members to
notify them of the changes to the options expiration date
calculation methodology contained in this proposed rule change.
Telephone conversation between James Flynn, Attorney, CBOE, and
Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, and Geoffrey Pemble,
Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on
February 9, 2006.
    \6\ The original rule filing that allowed CBOE to list
volatility-based index options included an exhibit attached to the
rule filing, which provided, among other contract characteristics, a
description of how the expiration date would be determined. That
description was not included in the rule text. See note 1, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act \7\ and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a
national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of
Section 6(b) of the Act.\8\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section
6(b)(5) of Act \9\ that the rules of an exchange be designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange neither received nor solicited written comments on the
proposal.

III. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-CBOE-2006-08 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2006-08. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the CBOE. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-CBOE-2006-08 and should be submitted on or before March
21, 2006.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
the Proposed Rule Change

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\10\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission believes that CBOE's proposal to revise the
methodology for determining the expiration dates for options on certain
volatility-based indexes so that such options expire on the ``Wednesday
that is thirty days prior to the third Friday of the calendar month
immediately following the expiring month'' is appropriate. As noted by
CBOE above, this revised approach will provide consistency in the
expiration of options on all volatility indexes by ensuring that every
volatility index option will expire exactly thirty days prior to the
date on which the index that the volatility index is based, rather than
the prior approach under which such options would not expire exactly
thirty days prior to the expiration of the options on the index on
which that volatility index is based in four of the months in any
rolling twelve-month period.
    The Exchange has requested accelerated approval of the proposed
rule change.\12\ The Commission finds good cause for approving the
proposed rule change prior to the 30th day after the date of
publication of the notice of filing in the Federal Register. The
proposal is intended to ensure consistency in expiration dates for
options on all volatility indexes approved for listing and trading on
CBOE with the expiration of the options on the underlying indexes. The
Commission does not believe that the Exchange's proposal raises any
novel regulatory issues. Therefore, the Commission finds good cause,
consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\13\ to approve the
proposed rule change, as amended, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Telephone conversation between James Flynn, Attorney, CBOE,
and Florence Harmon, Senior Special Counsel, and Geoffrey Pemble,
Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission, on
February 9, 2006.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2006-08) is hereby
approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-2767 Filed 2-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD

ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105-2498

OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Heavy-Duty Hybrid Onboard Diagnostics

FROM:		Amy Kopin

TO:		The Docket

DATE:		July 25, 2011

	On February 24th, 2011 we held a meeting in Ann Arbor, MI with the
Hybrid Manufacturers Regulatory Collaboration (HMRC) to discuss concerns
raised by members of the HMRC regarding heavy-duty onboard diagnostic
(OBD) requirements and timing.  Concerns were raised during the comment
period for the heavy-duty greenhouse gas notice of proposed rulemaking
that heavy-duty hybrid applications may not be able to meet the 2013
heavy-duty OBD regulations that were published in the 2009 OBD Final
Rulemaking.,  Attendees are presented in the table below.

Attendee	Affiliation

Cleophas Jackson	EPA

Anthony Neam	EPA

Charles Schenk	EPA

Chien Sze	EPA

James Sanchez	EPA

Peter Smith	EPA

Carl Ryan	EPA

Carl Fulper	EPA

William Courtois	EPA

Ryan Sparza	EPA

Maria Peralta	EPA

Robert Caldwell	EPA

Anthony Neam	EPA

Barbara Chance	Allison Transmission

Kevin Rodgers	Allsion Transmission

Ian McKenzie	Eaton Corporation

Derek Matthews	BAE Systems

Thomas Apalenek	BAE Systems

 U.S. EPA, NHTSA, and DOT, “Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Fuel
Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles,”
republished December 29, 2010.  Available here:
http://origin.www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-12-29/html/2010-32726.htm

 U.S. EPA, “Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles and New
Motor Vehicles Engines; Final Rule Regulations Requiring Onboard
Diagnostic Systems on 2010 and Later Heavy-Duty Engines Used in Highway
Applications Over 14,000 Pounds; Revisions to Onboard Diagnostic
Requirements for Diesel Highway Heavy-Duty Vehicles Under 14,000
Pounds,” published February 24, 2009.  Available here:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/im/obd/regtech/hd-obd-frm-02-24-09-notice-7
4-fr-8310.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 182 (Friday, September 18, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 58300]
[FR Doc No: 2020-20590]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 292

[Docket No. RM18-20-000]

Petition for Rulemaking of Bloom Energy Corporation

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: Take notice that on August 19, 2020, pursuant to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and
Procedure, Bloom Energy Corporation submitted a petition for rulemaking
requesting that the Commission clarify that the thermal energy output
produced by a topping-cycle facility's solid oxide fuel cell system
when used to reform methane and produce hydrogen for fuel for
electricity generation by that facility is useful thermal energy output
that would enable the facility powered by such fuel cells to be
certified as a qualifying cogeneration facility, all as more fully
explained in the petition.

DATES: Comments due 5 p.m. Eastern time on September 8, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of
comments in lieu of paper using the eFile link at http://www.ferc.gov.
In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions
sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D.
Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other
carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland
20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lawrence Greenfield, Office of the
General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Any person desiring to intervene or to
protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining
the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make
protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a
party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as
appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or
before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest
must serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (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. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.

    Dated: August 21, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-20590 Filed 9-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 9016]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03847]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of AI Document Services, Inc., Creative Edge
Nutrition, Inc. and Interactive Health Network; Order of Suspension of
Trading

February 19, 2016.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
AI Document Services, Inc. because of questions concerning the accuracy
and adequacy of publicly available information about the company,
including, among other things, the control of the company and trading
in its securities. AI Document Services, Inc. is a Delaware corporation
with its principal offices in Atlanta, Georgia and its common stock is
quoted on OTC Link (previously ``Pink Sheets'') operated by OTC Markets
Group, Inc. (``OTC Link'') under the ticker symbol AIDC.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Creative Edge Nutrition, Inc. because of questions concerning the
accuracy and adequacy of publicly available information about the
company, including, among other things, the control of the company and
trading in its securities. Creative Edge Nutrition, Inc. is a Nevada
corporation with its principal offices in Beverly Hills, California and
its common stock is quoted on OTC Link under the ticker symbol FITX.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Interactive Health Network because of questions concerning the accuracy
and adequacy of publicly available information about the company,
including, among other things, the control of the company and trading
in its securities. Interactive Health Network is a Nevada corporation
with its principal offices in Reno, Nevada and its common stock is
quoted on OTC Link under the ticker symbol IGRW.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST
on February 19, 2016, through 11:59 p.m. EST on March 3, 2016.

    By the Commission.
Brent J. Fields,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-03847 Filed 2-19-16; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18397-18399]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07761]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Attendance at PJM Interconnection, LLC Meetings

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) hereby gives
notice that members of the Commission and Commission staff may attend
upcoming PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) Members Committee and Markets
and Reliability Committee meetings, as well as other PJM committee,
subcommittee or task force meetings.\1\

The Commission and Commission staff may attend the following meetings:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For example, PJM subcommittees and task forces of the
standing committees (Operating, Planning and Market Implementation)
and senior standing committees (Members and Markets and Reliability)
meet on a variety of different topics; they convene and dissolve on
an as-needed basis. Therefore, the Commission and Commission staff
may monitor the various meetings posted on the PJM Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PJM Members Committee

     April 23, 2015 (Wilmington, DE)
     May 19-21, 2015 (Atlantic City, NJ)
     June 25, 2015 (TBD)
     August, 27, 2015 (TBD)
     September 24, 2015 (TBD)
     October 22, 2015 (TBD)
     November 19, 2015 (TBD)

PJM Markets and Reliability Committee

     April 23, 2015 (Wilmington, DE)
     May 28, 2015 (Wilmington, DE)
     June 25, 2015 (Wilmington, DE)
     July 23, 2015 (Wilmington, DE)
     August 27, 2015 (Wilmington, DE)
     September 24, 2015 (TBD)
     October 22, 2015 (TBD)
     November 19, 2015 (TBD)
     December 17, 2015 (TBD)

PJM Market Implementation Committee

     April 8, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     May 6, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     June 10, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     July 8, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     August 12, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     September 9, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     October 7, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     November 4, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
     December 2, 2015 (Audubon, PA)
    The discussions at each of the meetings described above may address
matters at issue in pending proceedings before the Commission,
including the following currently pending proceedings:
    Docket No. EL05-121, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL08-14, Black Oak Energy LLC, et al., v. FERC
    Docket No. ER09-1148, PPL Electric Utilities Corporation
    Docket No. ER09-1256, Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline,
L.L.C.
    Docket Nos. ER09-1589 and EL10-6, FirstEnergy Service Company
    Docket No. EL10-52, Central Transmission, L.L.C. v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL11-54, Buckeye Power, Inc. v. American Transmission
Systems Incorporated
    Docket No. ER11-1844, Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc.
    Docket No. AD12-1 and ER11-4081, Midwest Independent Transmission
    System Operator, Inc.
    Docket No. AD12-16, Capacity Deliverability Across the Midwest
Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc./PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C. Seam
    Docket No. EL12-54, Viridity Energy, Inc. v. PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER12-91, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER12-92, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al.
    Docket No. ER12-2399, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER12-2708, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL13-47, FirstEnergy Solutions Corporation v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C. et al.
    Docket No. ER13-90, Public Service Electric and Gas Company and PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-195, Indicated PJM Transmission Owners
    Docket No. ER13-198, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-349-001, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-535, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1654, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1924, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1926, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1927, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1936, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1944, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1947, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-2108, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL14-20, Independent Market Monitor v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.,
    Docket No. EL14-45, Duke Energy Corporation, et al., v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL14-55, FirstEnergy Service Company v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket Nos. EL14-94, EL14-36, FirstEnergy Solutions Corporation and
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-972, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-503, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-504, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-746, RC Cape May Holdings, LLC
    Docket No. ER14-822, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-1144, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-1145, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-1461, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-1485, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER14-2242, Old Dominion Electric Cooperative
    Docket Nos. ER14-2864, ER14-2867, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., and
Baltimore Gas & Electric Company, et al.
    Docket No. ER14-2940, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL15-15, ER15-696, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL15-18, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL15-31, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL15-38, RTO Energy Trading, LLC
    Docket No. EL15-40, Public Service Electric and Gas Company v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL15-41, Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC, et al., v.
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. EL15-46, Champion Energy Marketing LLC v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-61, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., and American
Transmission Systems, Incorporated
    Docket No. ER15-135, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket Nos. ER15-623, EL15-29, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-643, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-738, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-739, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-834, Illinois Municipal Electric Agency
    Docket No. ER15-852, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-952, New Jersey Energy Associates, A Limited
Partnership
    Docket No. ER15-1193, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER15-1232, Illinois Municipal Electric Agency
    Docket No. ER13-1957, ISO New England Inc., New York Independent
System Operator, Inc., and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1942, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1946, New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1947, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Docket No. ER13-1960, ISO New England Inc. and New England Power
Pool Participants Committee
    Docket No. ER13-1926, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Duquesne
Light Company
    Docket No. ER13-1944, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Docket No. ER13-1943, Midcontinent Independent System Operator,
Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1924, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Duquesne
Light Company
    Docket No. ER13-1945, Midcontinent Independent System Operator,
Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1955, Entergy Services, Inc.
    Docket No. ER13-1956, Cleco Power LLC
    Docket No. ER15-376, Calpine Energy Services, L.P.
    For additional meeting information, see: http://www.pjm.com/committees-and-groups.aspx and http://www.pjm.com/Calendar.aspx.
    The meetings are open to stakeholders. For more information,
contact Valerie Martin, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 30, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07761 Filed 4-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 225 (Monday, November 23, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72899-72901]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29632]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 225 / Monday, November 23, 2015 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 876

[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-3720]

Medical Devices; Gastroenterology-Urology Devices; Classification
of the Prostate Lesion Documentation System

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final order.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is classifying the
prostate lesion documentation system into class II (special controls).
The special controls that will apply to the device are identified in
this order and will be part of the codified language for the prostate
lesion documentation system classification. The Agency is classifying
the device into class II (special controls) in order to provide a
reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device.

DATES: This order is effective November 23, 2015. The classification
was applicable on April 27, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. De Luca, Center for Devices
and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. G214, Silver Spring, MD, 20993-0002, 301-
796-6551<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In accordance with section 513(f)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)), devices that were
not in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 (the date of
enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976), generally referred
to as postamendments devices, are classified automatically by statute
into class III without any FDA rulemaking process. These devices remain
in class III and require premarket approval, unless and until the
device is classified or reclassified into class I or II, or FDA issues
an order finding the device to be substantially equivalent, in
accordance with section 513(i) of the FD&C Act, to a predicate device
that does not require premarket approval. The Agency determines whether
new devices are substantially equivalent to predicate devices by means
of premarket notification procedures in section 510(k) of the FD&C Act
(21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807) of the regulations.
    Section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, as amended by section 607 of the
Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-
144), provides two procedures by which a person may request FDA to
classify a device under the criteria set forth in section 513(a)(1).
Under the first procedure, the person submits a premarket notification
under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act for a device that has not
previously been classified and, within 30 days of receiving an order
classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the
FD&C Act, the person requests a classification under section 513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a premarket
notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act and then a request
for classification under the first procedure, the person determines
that there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a
determination of substantial equivalence and requests a classification
under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. If the person submits a
request to classify the device under this second procedure, FDA may
decline to undertake the classification request if FDA identifies a
legally marketed device that could provide a reasonable basis for
review of substantial equivalence with the device or if FDA determines
that the device submitted is not of ``low-moderate risk'' or that
general controls would be inadequate to control the risks and special
controls to mitigate the risks cannot be developed.
    In response to a request to classify a device under either
procedure provided by section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, FDA will
classify the device by written order within 120 days. This
classification will be the initial classification of the device.
    In accordance with section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, FDA issued an
order on April 22, 2010, classifying the prostate mechanical imager
into class III, because it was neither substantially equivalent to a
device that was introduced or delivered for introduction into
interstate commerce for commercial distribution before May 28, 1976,
nor a device which was subsequently reclassified into class I or class
II. On May 21, 2010, Artann Laboratories, Inc., submitted a request for
classification of the prostate mechanical imager under section
513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. The manufacturer recommended that the device
be classified into class II (Ref. 1).
    In accordance with section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, FDA reviewed
the request for de novo classification in order to classify the device
under the criteria for classification set forth in section 513(a)(1).
FDA classifies devices into class II if general controls by themselves
are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special
controls to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device for its intended use. After review of the
information submitted in the request, FDA determined that the device
can be classified into class II with the establishment of special
controls. FDA believes these special controls, in addition to general
controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device.
    Therefore, on April 27, 2012, FDA issued an order to the requestor
classifying the device into class II. FDA is codifying the
classification of the device by adding 21 CFR 876.2050.
    Following the effective date of this final classification order,
any firm submitting a premarket notification (510(k)) for a prostate
lesion documentation system will need to comply with the special
controls named in this final order. The device is assigned the generic
name prostate lesion documentation system, and it is identified as a
prescription device intended for use in producing an image of the
prostate as an aid in documenting prostate abnormalities previously
identified during a digital rectal

examination. The device uses pressure sensors and image reconstruction
software to produce a prostate image that highlights regional
differences in intraprostatic tissue elasticity or stiffness. The
device is limited to use as a documentation tool and is not intended
for diagnostic purposes or for influencing any clinical decisions.
    FDA has identified the following risks to health associated
specifically with this type of device and the measures required to
mitigate these risks in table 1.

   Table 1--Prostate Lesion Documentation System Risks and Mitigation
                                Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Identified risks                   Mitigation measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failure to consistently produce an       Performance Testing (non-
 accurate image.                          clinical and clinical)
                                         Software Verification,
                                          Validation, and Hazard
                                          Analysis
                                         Labeling
Misinterpretation of displayed images..  Labeling
User error.............................  Labeling
Microbial contamination from reusable    Labeling
 components.
                                         Validation of Reprocessing
                                          Methods and Instructions
Adverse tissue reaction................  Biocompatibility Testing
Electromagnetic incompatibility........  Electromagnetic Compatibility
                                          Testing
Electrical injury......................  Electrical Safety Testing
Thermal injury.........................  Thermal Safety Testing
Mechanical injury......................  Mechanical Safety Testing
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA believes that the measures set forth in the following special
controls, in combination with the general controls, address these risks
to health and provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness:
     Non-clinical and clinical performance testing must
demonstrate the accuracy and reproducibility of the constructed image.
     Appropriate analysis/testing must validate electromagnetic
compatibility, electrical safety, thermal safety, and mechanical
safety.
     Appropriate software verification, validation, and hazard
analysis must be performed.
     All elements of the device that may contact the patient
must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
     Methods and instructions for reprocessing of any reusable
components must be properly validated.
     The labeling must include specific information needed to
ensure proper use of the device.
    Prostate lesion documentation systems are prescription devices
restricted to patient use only upon the authorization of a practitioner
licensed by law to administer or use the device; see 21 CFR 801.109
(Prescription devices).
    Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act provides that FDA may exempt a class
II device from the premarket notification requirements under section
510(k) if FDA determines that premarket notification is not necessary
to provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the
device. For this type of device, FDA has determined that premarket
notification is necessary to provide reasonable assurance of the safety
and effectiveness of the device. Therefore, this device is not exempt
from premarket notification requirements. Persons who intend to market
this type of device must submit to FDA a premarket notification, prior
to marketing the device, which contains information about the prostate
lesion documentation system they intend to market.

II. Environmental Impact

    We have determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is of a
type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This final administrative order establishes special controls that
refer to previously approved collections of information found in other
FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of
information in part 807, subpart E, regarding premarket notification
submissions have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120, and
the collections of information in 21 CFR part 801, regarding labeling
have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485.

IV. Reference

    The following reference has been placed on display in the Division
of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630
Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and is available for
viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday; it is also available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov.

1. DEN100016: De novo request per section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act
from Artann Laboratories, Inc., dated May 21, 2010.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 876

    Medical devices.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
876 is amended as follows:

PART 876--GASTROENTEROLOGY-UROLOGY DEVICES

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 876 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360l, 371.

0
2. Add Sec.  876.2050 to subpart C to read as follows:

Sec.  876.2050  Prostate lesion documentation system.

    (a) Identification. A prostate lesion documentation system is a
prescription device intended for use in producing an image of the
prostate as an aid in documenting prostate abnormalities previously
identified during a digital rectal examination. The device uses
pressure sensors and image reconstruction software to produce a
prostate image that highlights regional differences in intraprostatic
tissue elasticity or stiffness. The device is limited to use as a
documentation tool and is not intended for diagnostic purposes or for
influencing any clinical decisions.

    (b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special
controls for this device are:
    (1) Non-clinical and clinical performance testing must demonstrate
the accuracy and reproducibility of the constructed image.
    (2) Appropriate analysis/testing must validate electromagnetic
compatibility, electrical safety, thermal safety, and mechanical
safety.
    (3) Appropriate software verification, validation, and hazard
analysis must be performed.
    (4) All elements of the device that may contact the patient must be
demonstrated to be biocompatible.
    (5) Methods and instructions for reprocessing of any reusable
components must be properly validated.
    (6) The labeling must include specific information needed to ensure
proper use of the device.

    Dated: November 16, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-29632 Filed 11-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16651-16653]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06684]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80348; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2017-032]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Nasdaq Rule 5710

March 30, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 22, 2017, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 5710 (Securities Linked
to the Performance of Indexes and Commodities (Including Currencies)).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Nasdaq Rule 5710 (Securities Linked
to the Performance of Indexes and Commodities (Including Currencies)),
which allows the listing of Linked Securities.\3\ The proposed rule
change will modify language in Nasdaq Rule 5710(e) to reflect a
substantially similar change previously made by NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``Arca'') to Arca Rule 5.2(j)(6)(A)(e) \4\ so both the Nasdaq and Arca
provisions will be substantively identical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Nasdaq Rule 5710, which in defining Linked Securities
states that ``Nasdaq will consider for listing and trading equity
index-linked securities (``Equity Index-Linked Securities'') and
commodity-linked securities (``Commodity-Linked Securities''), fixed
income index-linked securities (``Fixed Income Index-Linked
Securities''), futures-linked securities (``Futures-Linked
Securities'') and multifactor index-linked securities (``Multifactor
Index-Linked Securities'' and, together with Equity Index-Linked
Securities, Commodity-Linked Securities, Fixed Income Index-Linked
Securities and Futures-Linked Securities, ``Linked Securities'')
that in each case meet the applicable criteria of this Rule.''
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56637 (Oct. 10,
2007), 72 FR 58704 (Oct. 16, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-92). At the
time of Arca's initial filing, this rule was Arca Rule 5.2(j)(6)(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, Nasdaq Rule 5710(e) states that for listing of a
Linked Security,\5\ the issuer will be expected to have a minimum
tangible net worth in excess of $250 million and exceed by at least 20%
the earnings requirements set forth in Nasdaq Rule 5405(b)(1)(A).\6\
The proposed rule change deletes the portion of this rule that requires
that a company exceed by at least 20% the earnings requirements set
forth in Nasdaq Rule 5405(b)(1)(A).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This requirement will also apply for continued listing
effective August 1, 2017. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
79784 (Jan. 12, 2017), 82 FR 6664 (Jan. 19, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-
135).
    \6\ Nasdaq Rule 5405(b)(1)(A) requires a company under the
``Income Standard'' alternative for the initial listing of a primary
equity security on the Nasdaq Global Market to have ``Annual income
from continuing operations before income taxes of at least
$1,000,000 in the most recently completed fiscal year or in two of
the three most recently completed fiscal years.''
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will also modify the $250 million minimum
tangible net worth requirement with a parenthetical stating that if the
Linked Securities are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by an
affiliate of the company, Nasdaq will rely on such affiliate's tangible
net worth for purposes of this requirement.
    Nasdaq Rule 5710(e) also provides an alternative listing
requirement where a company can list a Linked Security with tangible
net worth requirement in excess of $150 million (instead of $250
million), provided that the original issue price of all the company's
other index-linked note offerings (combined with index-linked note
offerings of the company's affiliates) listed on a national securities
exchange does not exceed 25% of the company's tangible net worth.
    This alternative listing requirement also will be modified to be
substantively identical to the Arca provision. Thus, while a company's
listing of a Linked Security under the Nasdaq provision must currently
also meet the requirement that the company also exceed by at least 20%
the earnings requirements set forth in Nasdaq Rule 5405(b)(1)(A), that
earnings test will likewise be deleted.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change will both delete the Nasdaq language
discussed above, as well as add the following substantively identical
language from the Arca provision, to substantially conform the Nasdaq
language to the Arca language. First, that the original issue price of
the Linked Securities, combined with all of the company's other Linked
Securities listed on a national securities exchange or otherwise
publicly traded in the United States, must not be greater than 25
percent of the company's tangible net worth at the time of issuance.
Second, a parenthetical will be added following this to say that if the
Linked Securities are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by an
affiliate of the Company, Nasdaq will apply the provisions of this
paragraph to such affiliate instead of the Company and will include in
its calculation all Linked Securities that are fully and
unconditionally guaranteed by such affiliate. Third, as with the Arca
provision, a sentence at the end of this listing standard will state
that Government issuers and supranational entities will be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis.
    The Exchange believes that conforming Nasdaq's listing standards to
Arca's does not impact investor protections and will enhance
competition by establishing an equivalent listing standard across Arca
and Nasdaq for Linked Securities. Although Nasdaq will be deleting the
earnings test, investors will not be adversely affected since a Company
will still be required to have at least either (i) $250 million, or
(ii) $150 million in tangible net worth and subject to a maximum
issuance threshold

(depending on which requirement the Company is able to satisfy). Nasdaq
will also take into consideration whether the Linked Securities are
fully and unconditionally guaranteed by an affiliate of the Company.
These conforming changes will provide a strong indication of the
company's ability to make necessary payments on the Linked Security.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to conform
Nasdaq Rule 5710(e) so that it is substantially similar to Arca Rule
5.2(j)(6)(A)(e) will promote just and equitable principles of trade,
and, in general protect investors and the public interest since it will
promote the application of consistent listing standards for Linked
Securities. Specifically, although Nasdaq will be deleting the earnings
test, investors will not be adversely affected since a Company will
still be required to have at least either (i) $250 million, or (ii)
$150 million in tangible net worth and subject to a maximum issuance
threshold (depending on which requirement the Company is able to
satisfy). Nasdaq will also take into consideration whether the Linked
Securities are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by an affiliate of
the Company. The continuing minimum tangible net worth requirements
coupled with the conforming changes will provide a strong indication of
the company's ability to make necessary payments on the Linked
Security.
    For these reasons, Nasdaq believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Instead, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to conform Nasdaq Rule
5710(e) so that it is substantially similar to Arca Rule
5.2(j)(6)(A)(e) may enhance competition since Nasdaq and Arca \11\ will
have substantially similar listing requirements for Linked Securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

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

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and the text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does
not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchange
has stated that the proposal will lead to a more consistent initial and
continued listing standard across Nasdaq and Arca for Linked Securities
and thereby enhance competition. The Exchange also has noted that the
proposed rule change is substantially similar to a change previously
made by Arca.\15\ Based on the foregoing, the Commission believes that
waiver of the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby
waives the 30-day operative delay and designates the proposed rule
change to be operative upon filing.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ See supra note 4.
    \16\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-032 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-032. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official

business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2017-032 and should be submitted on or before
April 26, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-06684 Filed 4-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P