[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 247 (Friday, December 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 94440-94442]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30947]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79603; File No. SR-BatsBYX-2016-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 11.9, Orders and Modifiers, and Rule 11.13, Order Execution and
Routing, To Enhance the Exchange's Midpoint Routing Functionality

December 19, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 16, 2016, Bats BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Rule 11.9, Orders and
Modifiers, and Rule 11.13, Order Execution and Routing, to enhance the
Exchange's midpoint routing functionality.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.bats.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

the most significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.9, Orders and Modifiers, and
Rule 11.13, Order Execution and Routing, to enhance the Exchange's
midpoint routing functionality. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
amend Rule 11.13(b)(3)(Q) to adopt a new midpoint routing strategy
known as RMPL. The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 11.9(c)(9) to
expand the routing strategies that Mid-Point Peg Orders may be coupled
with to include the Destination Specific routing strategy described
under Rule 11.13(b)(3)(E) and the proposed RMPL routing strategy
described below.
RMPL Routing Strategy
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.13(b)(3)(Q) to adopt a new
midpoint routing strategy known as RMPL. Currently, the Exchange offers
the RMPT routing strategy, which is described under Rule
11.13(b)(3)(Q). RMPT is a routing strategy under which a Mid-Point Peg
Order \5\ checks the System \6\ for available shares and any remaining
shares are then sent to destinations on the System routing table \7\
that support midpoint eligible orders. If any shares remain unexecuted
after routing, they are posted on the BYX Book \8\ as a Mid-Point Peg
Order, unless otherwise instructed by the User.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In sum, a Mid-Point Peg Order is a limit order that after
entry into the System, the price of the order is automatically
adjusted by the System in response to changes in the NBBO to be
pegged to the mid-point of the NBBO, or, alternatively, pegged to
the less aggressive of the midpoint of the NBBO or one minimum price
variation inside the same side of the NBBO as the order. See
Exchange Rule 11.9(c)(9).
    \6\ The term ``System'' is defined as ``the electronic
communications and trading facility designated by the Board through
which securities orders of Users are consolidated for ranking,
execution and, when applicable, routing away.'' See Exchange Rule
1.5(aa).
    \7\ The term ``System routing table'' refers to the proprietary
process for determining the specific trading venues to which the
System routes orders and the order in which it routes them. See
Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(3). While the process for determining the
specific trading venues to which orders are routed is proprietary,
the Exchange publicly discloses the trading venues associated with
each routing strategy via its Web site at http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/features/bats_exchange_routing-strategies.pdf.
    \8\ The term ``BYX Book'' is defined as the ``System's
electronic file of orders.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(e).
    \9\ The term ``User'' is defined as ``any Member or Sponsored
Participant who is authorized to obtain access to the System
pursuant to Rule 11.3.'' See Exchange Rule 1.5(cc).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes RMPL as an alternative to the RMPT
routing strategy for those seeking to route Mid-Point Peg Orders to
destinations that support midpoint eligible executions that are not
included under the current RMPT routing strategy. Like RMPT, RMPL would
be a routing strategy under which a Mid-Point Peg Order checks the
System for available shares and any remaining shares are then sent to
destinations on the System routing table that support midpoint eligible
orders. If any shares remain unexecuted after routing, they are posted
on the BYX Book as a Mid-Point Peg Order, unless otherwise instructed
by the User. As it does for RMPT, the Exchange would determine via the
System routing table the specific trading venues that support midpoint
eligible orders to which the System would route RMPL orders. While RMPL
will operate in an identical manner as RMPT, the trading venues that
each routing strategy would route to and the order in which it routes
them will differ. As is the case for RMPT, the Exchange may alter the
trading venues included under RMPL and the order in which they are
routed to from time to time in accordance with its System routing
table.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange notes that the trading venues to which other
of its routing strategies route orders to are also determined in
accordance with the System routing table. See e.g., Exchange Rule
11.13(b)(3)(G) (listing a series of routing options whose
destinations are determined by the System routing table, like the
proposed revisions to Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(3)(Q)). See also
subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), (D) and (I) of Exchange Rule 11.9(b)(3)
[sic] (describing routing strategies that route orders to
destinations on the System routing table).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to revise Rule 11.13(b)(3)(Q) to describe
both the RMPT and proposed RMPL routing strategies. As a result of
these revision, the construct of paragraph (b)(3)(Q) of Rule 11.13
would be similar to paragraph (b)(3)(G) of Rule 11.13, which also
delineates routing strategies that include different sets of
destinations as determined by the System routing table.
Mid-Point Peg Order Routing
    The Exchange also proposes to amend Rule 11.9(c)(9) to expand the
routing strategies that Mid-Point Peg Orders may be coupled with.
Currently, Exchange Rule 11.9(c)(9) states that Mid-Point Peg Orders
are not eligible for routing pursuant to Rule 11.13 unless routed
utilizing the RMPT routing strategy.\11\ The Exchange now proposes to
amend Rule 11.9(c)(9) to expand the routing strategies that Mid-Point
Peg Orders may be coupled with to include the Destination Specific
routing strategy described under Rule 11.13(b)(3)(E) and the proposed
RMPL routing strategy described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Exchange also proposes to amend the second to last
sentence of Rule 11.9(c)(9) to correct an erroneous reference to
Rule 11.13(a)(3)(Q) by replacing it with ``Rule 11.13(b)(3)''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Destination Specific is a routing option under which an order
checks the System for available shares and then is sent to an away
trading center or centers specified by the User.\12\ As proposed, a
User entering a Mid-Point Peg Order may select the Destination Specific
routing strategy to route such order to a specific trading center or
center that supports midpoint executions after being exposed to the BYX
Book. This differs from RMPT and the proposed RMPL routing strategies
in that the destinations orders subject to the RMPT and RMPL routing
strategies are selected by the Exchange via the System routing table
and not the User itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Rule 11.13(b)(3)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change
also is designed to support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \15\ of
the Act in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and
dealers and among exchange markets. The proposed rule change promotes
just and equitable principles of trade because it would enhance the
Exchange's midpoint routing functionality and provide Users with
greater flexibility in routing Mid-Point Peg Orders to trading venues
that support midpoint executions. This would save such Users from
developing complicated order routing strategies on their own. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will also accomplish
those ends by providing market participants with an additional
voluntary routing strategies and options that will enable

them to easily access midpoint liquidity available on the Exchange and
other trading venues. The Exchange notes that routing through the
Exchange is voluntary and those seeking to access midpoint liquidity on
other trading venues may do so directly and without the involvement of
the Exchange. Therefore, the Exchange believes the proposal removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, protects investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The
Exchange provides routing services in a highly competitive market in
which participants may avail themselves of a wide variety of routing
options offered by self-regulatory organizations, alternative trading
systems, other broker-dealers, market participants' own proprietary
routing systems, and service bureaus. System enhancements, such as the
changes proposed in this rule filing, do not burden competition, but
rather encourage competition because they are designed to attract
additional order flow to the Exchange through enhanced midpoint routing
functionality. Such changes are intended to offer investors higher
quality and better value than services offered by others. Encouraging
competitors to provide higher quality and better value is the essence
of a well-functioning competitive marketplace. Therefore, the Exchange
does not believe the proposed rule change will result in any burden on
intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No comments were solicited or received on the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (A)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (B) impose any significant burden on competition; and (C) by
its terms, 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 \16\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\17\ the Exchange has
designated this rule filing as non-controversial. The Exchange has
given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) 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 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-BatsBYX-2016-41 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-BatsBYX-2016-41. 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 such 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-BatsBYX-2016-41, and should
be submitted on or before January 13, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30947 Filed 12-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73755-73756]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28210]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-517-001]

Golden Pass LNG Terminal LLC; Notice of Schedule for the
Preparation of an Environmental Assessment for the Golden Pass LNG
Export Variance Request No. 15 Amendment Project

    On February 25, 2021 and supplemented on May 19, 2021, Golden Pass
LNG Terminal LLC (Golden Pass) filed a Golden Pass LNG Export Project
Variance Request No. 15 Amendment (Amendment). The Amendment involves
modification to the ongoing construction workforce and work hours at
the authorized Golden Pass LNG Export Terminal, in Jefferson County,
Texas. If authorized, the Amendment would increase the workforce
numbers, amount of traffic volume, and work week/hour limits that were
not previously reviewed during preparation of the final Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) for the Golden Pass LNG Export Project (Docket
Nos. CP14-517-000 and CP14-518-000), which the Commission authorized on
December 21, 2016. Golden Pass's proposed Amendment would increase
construction to 24-hour-day and 7 days a week at the Golden Pass LNG
Export Terminal throughout the remaining construction period, which it
anticipates completing in 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Members of Congress, Sean Casten, Cheri Bustos, Bradley S.
Schneider, and Danny K. Davis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 3, 2021 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Amendment for the proposed
project variance request No. 15. Among other things, that notice
alerted agencies issuing federal authorizations of the requirement to
complete all necessary reviews and to reach a final decision on a
request for a federal authorization within 90 days of the date of
issuance of the Commission staff's environmental document for the
Project.
    This notice identifies Commission staff's intention to prepare an
environmental assessment (EA) for the Amendment and the planned
schedule for the completion of the environmental review.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 40 CFR 1501.10 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA--February 7, 2022
90-Day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline--May 9, 2022

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Amendment's progress.

Project Amendment Description

    Golden Pass identified the need for an increased workforce at the
Golden Pass LNG Export Terminal site. The final EIS for the Golden Pass
LNG Export Project reviewed a peak construction workforce of 2,900
employees; Golden Pass is requesting the authority to increase the
potential peak workforce to 7,700 workers per day. Golden Pass is also
requesting the authority to increase traffic volumes to accommodate the
additional workforce, and a 7-day-per-week, 24-hour-per-day,
construction schedule for the remaining construction period at the
terminal site; Golden Pass anticipates completing the Golden Pass LNG
Export Project in 2025. There are no revisions to land requirements for
the Amendment.

Background

    On November 10, 2021, the Commission issued a Notice of Scoping
Period Requesting Comments on Environmental Issues for the Proposed
Golden Pass LNG Export Variance Request No. 15 Amendment Project and
Notice of Public Scoping Session (Notice of Scoping). The Notice of
Scoping was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local
government agencies; elected officials; environmental and public
interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested parties; and
local libraries and newspapers. In response to the Notice of Scoping,
the Commission received comments from the Sierra Club, James D. Kemp,
RESTORE, Alfred V. Duhamel, and Donald F. Breeden expressing concerns
on light pollution, air quality, noise pollution, impacts on
socioeconomics and environmental justice communities, greenhouse gas
emissions, climate change, public health and safety, and access to non-
proprietary information. All substantive comments will be addressed in
the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the
Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This service
provides automatic notification of filings made to subscribed dockets,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to register for eSubscription.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC

website (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select ``General
Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and
``Docket Number'' (i.e., CP14-517), and follow the instructions. For
assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at
(866) 208-3676, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at [email protected].
The eLibrary link on the FERC website also provides access to the texts
of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices,
and rule makings.

    Dated: December 21, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-28210 Filed 12-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 124 (Monday, June 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 36980]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15876]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2492-013-Maine]

Woodland Pulp LLC; Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental
Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office
of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for license for the
Vanceboro Dam Storage Project, located on the East Branch of the St.
Croix River Washington County, Maine, and has prepared a draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. The project does not
occupy any federal land.
    The draft EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential
environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the
project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not
constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the
quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the draft EA is on file with the Commission and is
available for public inspection. The draft EA may also be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field, to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may also register online
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via
email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending
projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this
notice. Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments.
    For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support. Although the
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be
paper-filed. To paper-file, mail comments to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-2492-013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Watts at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 22, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15876 Filed 6-26-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


3M Drug Pharmaceuticals’ data received per 40 CFR 82.13(u); classified as Confidential Business Information (CBI).

CBI located at EPA headquarters 1310 L St NW.

 PAGE

 PAGE   1


[Federal Register: April 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 83)]
[Notices]
[Page 23287]
[DOCID:fr29ap08-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57699; File No. SR-CHX-2008-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Bylaws Relating to
the Definition of a Public Director

April 23, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On February 26, 2008, the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend the definition of ``Public Director'' in
the Exchange's Bylaws. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on March 17, 2008.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57464 (March 11,
2008), 73 FR 14286.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange's Bylaws currently define a ``Public Director'' as a
director who (i) is not a participant, or an officer, managing member,
partner or employee of an entity that is a participant, (ii) is not an
employee of CHX or any of its affiliates; (iii) is not a broker or
dealer or an officer or employee of a broker or dealer; or (iv) does
not have any other material business relationship with (a) CHX
Holdings, Inc., CHX, or any of their affiliates, or (b) any broker or
dealer.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Article II, Section 2(b) of the Exchange's Bylaws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend the definition of ``Public
Director.'' \5\ Specifically, the Exchange proposes to exclude from the
definition of ``Public Director,'' a director who (1) is a broker or
dealer that is registered under the Act; (2) is an officer or employee
of a broker or dealer that is registered under the Act; or (3) has any
other material business relationship with CHX Holdings Inc. (``CHX
Holdings'') or CHX or any of their affiliates, or any broker or dealer
that is registered under the Act.\6\ Thus, the proposed rule change may
permit a person to serve as a Public Director if he or she is a foreign
broker or dealer or an officer or employee of such a foreign broker or
dealer,\7\ provided that such person has no material business
relationship with CHX Holdings or CHX or any of their affiliates or
with any broker or dealer that is registered under the Act, and meets
the other criteria of the Exchange's definition of Public Director.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See proposed Article II, Section 2(b)(iii) and 2(b)(iv) of
the Exchange's Bylaws.
    \6\ See id.
    \7\ Section 15(a) of the Act generally requires that any broker
or dealer using the mails or any means or instrumentality of
interstate commerce must register as a broker-dealer with the
Commission, unless it is subject to an applicable exception or
exemption. 15 U.S.C. 78o(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    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
and, in particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ 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.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that CHX's proposed change to the
definition of ``Public Director'' is similar to the director
independence standards approved by the Commission for another self-
regulatory organization.\10\ The Commission also notes that, although a
broker or dealer that is not registered under the Act, or an officer or
employee of such broker or dealer, no longer would be categorically
prohibited from serving as a Public Director on CHX's board of
directors, the Exchange must still determine, before any such person is
nominated for a Public Director position, that such person otherwise
meets the Exchange's definition of Public Director.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Independence Policy of the NYSE Euronext Board of
Directors, Independence Qualifications, Section 1(c), which provides
that, in considering the independence of a director, the board must
consider whether the director has any relationships or interests in
any non-member broker-dealers that are registered under the Act, in
addition to other criteria. The Commission notes that the New York
Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE Market, Inc., and NYSE Regulation, Inc.
apply the Independence Policy of NYSE Euronext to their respective
boards. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55293 (February 14,
2007), 71 FR 8033 (February 22, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\11\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CHX-2008-02) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-9334 Filed 4-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:My name is Justin Harless, and I smoked combustible cigarettes for 15 years.  I tried to quit several times, and it was never a successful endeavor.  I found out about e-cigs at the outset of the industry, but the expensive cig-alikes were not sufficient to cut my cravings.  I relapsed to analog cigarettes for another few years, until I found the e-cigs again, as they are now.  The liquids are very helpful in their varying strengths and flavors.  I love the fruity/dessert flavors, and have now been smoke free for 4 months.  I use my e-cig everyday, I am even allowed to use it around my parents whereas I wasn't allowed to smoke around them due to my father's allergies.

As a consumer, I believe the e-liquids should be regulated, but the methods proposed right now are only going to shut down my local shop.  I would be left without an alternative, and would have to go back to smoking combustible tobacco cigarettes.  This is not okay with me.  I have felt better than I have in decades, and am losing weight due to being able to breathe as I exercise.  Please make the regulation of juices into a better option before shutting down thousands of shops, and tons of jobs.

A 75 day comment period is insufficient time for the vaping industry and the wider vaping community to comment on the proposed deeming regulations. I would respectfully request that the period for comment be extended to 180 days.

Thank you for your time.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 4, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54413-54414]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21500]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0440; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-10]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Star, NC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E Airspace at Star,
NC, to accommodate a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning
System (GPS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) serving
Montgomery County Airport. This action would enhance the safety and
airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations within
the National Airspace System.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 21, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001; Telephone: 1-
800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the Docket Number
FAA-2013-0440; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-10, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-0440; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-10) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2013-0440; Airspace Docket No. 13-ASO-10.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays, at the
office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration,
Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
to request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E airspace at Star, NC,
providing the controlled airspace required to support the new RNAV
(GPS) standard instrument approach procedures for Montgomery County
Airport. Controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface is required for IFR operations within a 6.8-mile radius of the
airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA order 7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under
that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign
the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would establish Class E airspace at Montgomery
County Airport, Star, NC.
    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment:

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE
AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, effective September 15, 2012, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the arth.

* * * * *

ASO NC E5 Star, NC [New]

Montgomery County Airport, NC
    (Lat. 35[deg]23'05'' N., long. 79[deg]47'25'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.8-mile radius of Montgomery County Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 26, 2013.
Kip B. Johns,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2013-21500 Filed 9-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P