22566 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Notices 

reports, and content on the commission 

Web site. Proposed for permanent 

retention are records associated with the 

executive director, program 

correspondence files, annual reports, 

congressional testimony and legislation 

records, policy files, energy and species 

program files, fisheries subject files, and 

master files of an electronic information 

system containing Federally-funded 

research and data collection records. 

15. Office of Personnel Management, 

Healthcare and Insurance Program 

(DAA–0478–2015–0001, 1 item, 1 

temporary item). Records relating to 

health plan benefit reviews including 

requests for reviews, claim and medical 

histories files, and final determination 

letters. 

Dated: April 15, 2015. 

Paul M. Wester, Jr. 

Chief Records Officer for the U.S. 

Government. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09423 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection, 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: National Science Foundation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The National Science 

Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans 

to request clearance for this collection. 

In accordance with the requirement of 

section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, we are providing 

opportunity for public comment on this 

action. After obtaining and considering 

public comment, NSF will prepare the 

submission requesting OMB clearance 

of this collection for no longer than 

three years. 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Agency, 

including whether the information shall 

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of 

the Agency’s estimate of the burden of 

the proposed collection of information; 

(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology; 

and (d) ways to minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Written comments should be 

received by June 22, 2015, to be assured 

of consideration. Comments received 

after that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments 

regarding the information collection and 

requests for copies of the proposed 

information collection request should be 

addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports 

Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, 

Room 1265, Arlington, VA 22230, or by 

email to splimpto@nsf.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Suzanne Plimpton on (703) 292–7556 or 

send email to splimpto@nsf.gov. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– 

8339, which is accessible 24 hours a 

day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year 

(including federal holidays). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title of Collection: DUE Project Data 

Form. 

OMB Control No.: 3145–0201. 

Expiration Date of Approval: 

September 30, 2015. 

Abstract: The Division of 

Undergraduate Education (DUE) Project 

Data Form is a component of all grant 

proposals submitted to NSF’s Division 

of Undergraduate Education. This form 

collects information needed to direct 

proposals to appropriate reviewers and 

to report the estimated collective impact 

of proposed projects on institutions, 

students, and faculty members. 

Requested information includes the 

discipline of the proposed project, 

collaborating organizations involved in 

the project, the academic level on which 

the project focuses (e.g., lower-level 

undergraduate courses, upper-level 

undergraduate courses), characteristics 

of the organization submitting the 

proposal, special audiences (if any) that 

the project would target (e.g., women, 

minorities, persons with disabilities), 

strategic foci (if any) of the project (e.g., 

research on teaching and learning, 

international activities, integration of 

research and education), and the 

number of students and faculty at 

different educational levels who would 

benefit from the project. 

Respondents: Investigators who 

submit proposals to NSF’s Division of 

Undergraduate Education. 

Estimated Number of Annual 

Respondents: 2,700. 

Burden on the Public: 20 minutes (per 

response) for an annual total of 900 

hours. 

Dated: April 17, 2015. 

Suzanne H. Plimpton, 

Reports Clearance Officer, National Science 

Foundation. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09364 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–P 

NATIONAL WOMEN’S BUSINESS 

COUNCIL 

Quarterly Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Women’s Business 

Council. 

ACTION: Notice of open public meeting. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

Tuesday, June 23, 2015 from 9:45 a.m. 

to 11:15 a.m. CST. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

The Neal Kocurek Memorial Austin 

Convention Center, located at 500 E 

Cesar Chavez Street in Austin, Texas. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., 

Appendix 2), SBA announces the 

meeting of the National Women’s 

Business Council. The National 

Women’s Business Council is tasked 

with providing policy recommendations 

on issues of importance to women 

business owners to the President, 

Congress, and the SBA Administrator. 

This meeting is the 3rd quarterly 

meeting of the Council for Fiscal Year 

2015. The meeting will include: 

Remarks from the Council Chair, Carla 

Harris, and report outs from each of the 

NWBC committees—the Group of Six, 

Communications and Engagement, and 

Research and Policy. Updates will be 

shared on the current research projects, 

including: Women’s participation in 

accelerators and incubators (qualitative), 

women’s participation in corporate 

supplier diversity programs 

(qualitative), undercapitalization as a 

contributing factor to failure 

(quantitative), women’s use of social 

networks (quantitative), and an impact 

study of the Women Business Center 

program. The Council will also 

announce the FY2015 research 

portfolio. Time will be reserved at the 

end for audience participants to address 

Council Members directly with 

questions, comments, or feedback. 

Following this meeting, NWBC partner 

organization Women’s Business 

National Enterprise Council (WBENC) 

will kick off their National Conference 

and Business Fair. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

meeting is open to the public however 

advance notice of attendance is 

requested. To RSVP and confirm 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Notices 22567 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

3See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74250 

(February 11, 2015), 80 FR 8734 (‘‘Notice’’). 

4On June 5, 2014, Chair Mary Jo White asked all 

national securities exchanges to conduct a 

comprehensive review of each order type offered to 

members and how it operates in practice. See Mary 

Jo White, Chair, Commission, Speech at the Sandler 

O’Neill & Partners, L.P. Global Exchange and 

Brokerage Conference, (June 5, 2014) (available at 

http://www.sec.gov/News/Speech/Detail/Speech/

1370542004312#.VD2HW610w6Y). 

5Exchange Rule 1.5(aa) defines ‘‘System’’ 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.’’ 

6See Rule 11.9(c)(6). 

7As defined in Rule 1.5(e). 

8For additional detail regarding the specific 

proposed revisions for each order type and 

modifier, see Notice, supra note 3 at 8734–36, and 

proposed Rule 11.9. 

9See proposed Rule 11.9(b)(1). In connection 

with this proposed change the Exchange also 

proposes to specify that the cancellation of an 

unfilled balance of an order is one possible outcome 

after an order has been routed away. See proposed 

Rule 11.13(b)(2). This is what would occur with the 

unfilled balance of a routed IOC order. See Notice, 

supra note 3 at 8734. 

10See proposed Rule 11.9(b)(6). 

11See proposed Rule 11.9(c)(6). Due to the 

Exchange’s inverted fee structure, incoming BATS 

Post Only Orders always execute upon entry (and 

hence remove liquidity) when marketable against 

resting contra-side liquidity because it is always 

economically advantageous for them to do so. The 

Exchange nevertheless maintains this order type so 

that the post-only functionality remains available in 

the event the Exchange’s fee structure changes, and 

proposes the clarifying changes reflected in 

proposed Rule 11.9(c)(6) so as to reflect the actual 

functionality of the System, which still performs 

the economic best interest specified in the rule 

despite the outcome being pre-determined by the 

Exchange’s fee structure. See Notice, supra note 3 

at 8735. 

12See proposed Rule 11.9(c)(8). 

13See proposed Rule 11.9(c)(9). 

14See proposed Rule 11.9(c)(10). In addition, the 

Exchange proposes to update cross references to 

rules that would be re-numbered as a result of the 

proposal. See proposed Rules 11.9(c), 11.9(d) and 

11.9(g). 

15See Notice, supra note 3 at 8736–37. See also 

proposed Rule 11.12(a). 

16See Notice, supra note 3 at 8737. See also 

proposed Rule 11.12(a)(2). 

17See Notice, supra note 3 at 8737. See also 

proposed Rule 11.12(a)(2)(C). 

attendance, the general public should 

email nwbcouncil@nwbc.gov with 

subject line—‘‘RSVP for Austin.’’ 

Participants will receive confirmation 

information with the logistical details 

closer to the date of the meeting. 

Anyone wishing to make a presentation 

to the NWBC at this meeting must either 

email their interest to chair@nwbc.gov 

or call the main office number at 202– 

205–3850. For more information, please 

visit the National Women’s Business 

Council Web site at www.nwbc.gov. 

Miguel J. L’Heureux, 

SBA Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09293 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–74739; File No. SR–BYX– 

2015–07] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS 

Y-Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting 

Approval of a Proposed Rule Change 

To Amend Rules 11.9, 11.12, and 11.13 

of BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. 

April 16, 2015. 

I. Introduction 

On January 30, 2015, BATS YExchange, Inc. (‘‘BYX’’ or the 

‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section 

19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act 

of 1934 (‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘Exchange Act’’) 1 and 

Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule 

change to amend Exchange Rules 11.9, 

11.12, and 11.13. The proposed rule 

change was published for comment in 

the Federal Register on February 18, 

2015.3 The Commission received no 

comments on the proposal. This order 

grants approval of the proposed rule 

change. 

II. Description of the Proposed Rule 

Change 

The Exchange conducted a 

comprehensive review of its system 

functionality.4 The proposal adds 

additional clarity and specificity 

regarding the current functionality of 

the Exchange’s System,5 including the 

operation of its order types and order 

instructions. The Exchange proposes no 

substantive modifications to the System. 

The changes include: (i) Making clear 

that orders with a Time-in-Force (‘‘TIF’’) 

of Immediate-or-Cancel (‘‘IOC’’) can be 

routed away from the Exchange; (ii) 

specifying the methodology used by the 

Exchange to determine whether BATS 

Post Only Orders 6 will remove liquidity 

from the BATS Book; 7 (iii) adding 

additional detail to and re-structuring 

the description of Pegged Orders; (iv) 

adding additional detail to the 

description of Mid-Point Peg Orders; (v) 

adding additional detail to the 

description of Discretionary Orders; (vi) 

amending Rule 11.12, Priority of Orders, 

and Rule 11.13, Order Execution, to 

provide additional specificity and 

enhance the structure of Exchange rules 

describing the process for ranking, 

executing and routing orders; (vii) 

adding additional detail to the 

description of orders subject to Re-Route 

functionality; and (viii) making a series 

of conforming changes to Rules 11.9, 

11.12 and 11.13 to update crossreferences. 

Rule 11.9. The Exchange proposes 

revisions to Rule 11.9 to provide greater 

detail as to the existing functionality of 

certain order types and modifiers.8

Among other things, the Exchange 

proposes to make clear that orders with 

an IOC TIF are routable but do not post 

to the Exchange’s book,9 whereas orders 

with a Fill-or-Kill (‘‘FOK’’) TIF are not 

routable.10 The Exchange also proposes 

to clarify the Exchange’s methodology 

for determining whether BATS Post 

Only orders will remove liquidity from 

the Exchange’s order book upon entry.11

In addition, the Exchange proposes to 

reformat the rule describing the Primary 

Pegged and Market Pegged orders,12 and 

to make clear that Mid-Point Peg Orders 

are not eligible to execute when the 

NBBO is crossed but Users may elect 

whether such orders will be eligible to 

execute when the NBBO is locked.13

Further, the Exchange proposes to add 

additional detail to the rule describing 

Discretionary Orders so that it specifies: 

(i) That Discretionary Orders may be 

fully non-displayed, with a nondisplayed ranked price (and 

discretionary price); (ii) how resting 

Discretionary Orders interact with 

incoming contra-side orders, including 

how the order type, TIF and price of the 

incoming order affects whether the 

resting Discretionary Order removes 

liquidity against the incoming order or 

the incoming order removes liquidity 

against the resting Discretionary Order; 

and (iii) that Discretionary Orders are 

routed away from the Exchange at their 

full discretionary price.14

Rule 11.12. The Exchange proposes 

several modifications to Rule 11.12 that 

are intended to clarify existing 

functionality relating to order priority. 

Some of these modifications would 

revise the structure of Rule 11.12 or add 

cross references to other rules.15 In 

addition, the Exchange proposes to 

revise Rule 11.12(a)(2) to refer to 

ranking, rather than executing, equallypriced trading interest because, 

according to the Exchange, the rule is 

intended to describe the manner in 

which resting orders are ranked and 

maintained.16 The Exchange also 

proposes to revise the reference to 

Pegged Orders in the priority hierarchy 

set forth in Rule 11.12(a)(2) to make 

clear that the reference is specifically to 

non-displayed Pegged Orders.17 The 

Exchange notes that the purpose of this 

revision is to distinguish non-displayed 

Pegged Orders from Primary Pegged 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES