35658 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 114 / Thursday, June 13, 2013 / Notices 

11 In approving the proposal, the Commission has 

considered the proposed rule’s impact on 

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 

15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

13The Commission notes that it approved the 

Program on a pilot basis subject to ongoing 

Commission review. The Commission notes further 

that it recently approved nearly identical proposals 

submitted by NYSE, NYSE MKT, and BATS–Y 

concerning those exchanges’ respective retail 

programs. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 

69513 (May 3, 2013), 78 FR 27261 (May 9, 2013) 

(NYSE and NYSE MKT), and 69643 (May 28, 2013), 

78 FR 33136 (June 3, 2013) (BATS–Y). 

14While the Commission recognizes the potential 

benefit of the commenter’s suggestion concerning a 

bright-line definition of de minimis, see supra note 

10, the Commission believes that, in light of the 

facts surrounding the instant proposal, the 

proposal, and the guidance that the Exchange will 

provide to its members on this point, is sufficiently 

clear. The Commission also notes that the example 

the commenter cites is found in Regulation M, 

which governs different circumstances than those at 

issue here. 

15For a more detailed discussion of the Program’s 

potential benefits, see RPI Approval Order, supra 

note 7. 

16The commenter also expressed concern that 

this proposal may increase the Exchange’s burden 

monitoring compliance with the Program. The 

Commission finds that any potential concerns 

raised by this assertion, which is disputed by the 

Exchange, are outweighed by the potential benefits 

of the proposal; namely, that the proposal may 

allow more retail orders the opportunity to 

participate in the Program and to receive the 

attendant benefits of the Program. With respect to 

the commenter’s concern that members may be 

subject to unfair discrimination in the approval and 

disqualification process for participation in the 

Program, the Commission notes that it previously 

found that the Program’s provisions concerning the 

certification, approval, and potential 

disqualification of RMOs are not inconsistent with 

the Act. See RPI Approval Order, supra note 7. 

17 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

18 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

identify non-retail order flow, but also 

to monitor whether such flow exceeded 

a de minimis amount. The commenter 

also questioned whether the potential 

difficulty of the Exchange monitoring 

the Program might increase the 

likelihood that members may be subject 

to unfair discrimination in the 

Program’s approval and disqualification 

process. 

In response, the Exchange noted that 

it will issue Equity Trader Alerts to 

provide clear guidance on how the 

‘‘substantially all’’ standard will be 

implemented and monitored. The 

Exchange also noted that the Program is 

designed to attract as much retail order 

flow as possible, and that, should RMOs 

begin submitting substantial amounts of 

non-retail order flow, liquidity 

providers would become less willing to 

participate in the Program. Finally, the 

Exchange disagreed with the 

commenter’s statement that a standard 

that provides a de minimis number of 

exceptions would be any harder to 

enforce that a standard that permitted 

no exceptions. 

IV. Discussion and Commission 

Findings 

After careful review of the proposal, 

the comment letter received, and the 

Exchange’s response, the Commission 

finds that the proposed rule change is 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Act and the rules and regulations 

thereunder that are applicable to a 

national securities exchange.11 In 

particular, the Commission finds that 

the proposed rule change is consistent 

with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,12 which 

requires, among other things, that the 

rules of a national securities exchange 

be designed to prevent fraudulent and 

manipulative acts and practices, to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, to foster cooperation and 

coordination with persons engaged in 

regulating, clearing, settling, processing 

information with respect to, and 

facilitating transactions in securities, to 

remove impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system, and, in 

general, to protect investors and the 

public interest; and not be designed to 

permit unfair discrimination between 

customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. 

The Commission finds that the 

proposed ‘‘substantially all’’ standard is 

a limited and sufficiently-defined 

modification to the Program’s current 

RMO attestation requirements that does 

not constitute a significant departure 

from the Program as initially approved 

by the Commission.13 The proposal 

makes clear that to comply with the 

standard, RMOs may submit only 

isolated and de minimis amounts of 

agency orders that cannot be segregated 

from Retail Orders due to systems 

limitations.14 Furthermore, as the 

Exchange notes, RMOs will need to 

adequately document their compliance 

with the ‘‘substantially all’’ standard in 

their books and records. Specifically, an 

RMO would need to retain adequate 

documentation that substantially all 

orders sent to the Exchange as Retail 

Orders met that definition, and that 

those orders not meeting that definition 

are agency orders that cannot be 

segregated from Retail Orders due to 

system limitations, and are de minimis 

in terms of the overall number of Retail 

Orders sent to the Exchange. The 

Commission also notes that FINRA will 

monitor an RMO’s compliance with this 

requirement. 

Additionally, the Commission finds 

that the Exchange has provided 

adequate justification for the proposal. 

The Exchange represented that, as 

explained to it by several significant 

retail brokers, the current ‘‘any order’’ 

standard is effectively prohibitive, given 

the brokers’ order flow aggregation and 

management systems. The Exchange 

further represented that these retail 

brokers indicated their systems would 

allow them to comply with the 

‘‘substantially all’’ standard, as 

proposed. By allowing these retail 

brokers to participate in the Program, 

the proposal could bring the potential 

benefits of the Program, including price 

improvement and increased 

transparency,15 to the retail order flow 

that these brokers represent.16

V. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,17 that the 

proposed rule change (SR–NASDAQ– 

2013–031) be, and hereby is, approved. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.18

Kevin M. O’Neill, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2013–14001 Filed 6–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 8353] 

Spectra Energy Corp., Application for 

a New or Amended Presidential Permit 

June 7, 2013. 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Notice of Receipt of Spectra 

Energy Corp., Application for a New or 

Amended Presidential Permit for 

Express Pipeline LLC to Operate and 

Maintain Pipeline Facilities on the 

Border of the United States and Canada. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the Department of State (DOS) has 

received from Spectra Energy Corp 

(‘‘Spectra Energy’’) notice that it has 

acquired the entities that own Express 

Pipeline LLC (‘‘Express’’), which 

operates and maintains pipeline 

facilities including the Express Pipeline, 

which is permitted under a 2004 

Presidential Permit issued to Express. 

Spectra Energy requests a new or 

amended Presidential Permit be issued 

reflecting these corporate transactions. 

Spectra Energy owns and operates a 

large diversified portfolio of natural gasrelated energy assets in the areas of 

gathering and processing, transmission, 

and distribution. Its natural gas pipeline 

systems consist of over 19,000 miles of 

transmission pipelines. 

The Express Pipeline is a 515 mile, 24 

inch crude oil pipeline running between 

the U.S.-Canada border near Wild 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 114 / Thursday, June 13, 2013 / Notices 35659 

Horse, Montana, to Caster, Wyoming 

and includes five pump stations. The 

Express Pipeline has been in operation 

since 1997 and transports crude oil from 

Hardisty, Alberta Canada to Casper, 

Wyoming. 

On March 14, 2013, Spectra Energy 

(through its subsidiaries Spectra Energy 

Express (US) GP, LLC and Spectra 

Energy Express Holding, LLC) 

purchased all of the outstanding equity 

and debt interests in Express US 

Holdings LP. Immediately following 

these acquisitions, Spectra Energy 

became the 100 percent owner of the 

‘‘upstream’’ entities that own Express 

and reorganized those entities, 

converting the direct parent corporation 

of Express into a limited liability 

corporation, Express Holdings (USA), 

LLC. Spectra plans to assign 40% of its 

ownership interests in Express Holdings 

(USA), LLC, to Spectra Energy Partners, 

LP, a publicly-traded master limited 

partnership. Spectra Energy has control 

over Spectra Energy Partners, LP; it 

indirectly owns 58% of the ownership 

interests in the limited partnership and 

also indirectly owns 100% of Spectra 

Energy Partners, LP’s general partner, 

Spectra Energy Partners (DE) GP, LP. 

Spectra affirms that operation and 

maintenance of the permitted facilities 

will remain substantially the same as 

before its acquisition of Express and 

acknowledges the Express is obligated 

to comply with the existing 2004 

Permit. Spectra does not request any 

changes to the terms and conditions of 

the 2004 Permit. 

Under E.O. 13337 the Secretary of 

State is designated and empowered to 

receive all applications for Presidential 

Permits for the construction, 

connection, operation, or maintenance 

at the borders of the United States, of 

facilities for the exportation or 

importation of liquid petroleum, 

petroleum products, or other nongaseous fuels to or from a foreign 

country. The Department of State is 

circulating this application to concerned 

federal agencies for comment. The 

Department of State has the 

responsibility to determine whether 

issuance of a new or amended 

Presidential Permit in light of Spectra’s 

acquisition of the entities that own 

Express would be in the U.S. national 

interest. 

DATES: Interested parties are invited to 

submit comments within 30 days of the 

publication date of this notice by email 

to SpectraEnergypermit@state.gov with 

regard to whether issuing a new 

Presidential Permit reflecting the 

corporate succession would be in the 

national interest. The application is 

available at http://www.state.gov/e/enr. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Office of Energy Diplomacy, Energy 

Resources Bureau (ENR/EDP/EWA) 

Department of State 2201 C St. NW., Ste 

4843 Washington, DC 20520 Attn: 

Michael Brennan Tel: 202–647–7553. 

Dated: June 7, 2013. 

Michael Brennan, 

Office of Europe, Western Hemisphere and 

Africa, Bureau of Energy Resources, U.S. 

Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2013–14048 Filed 6–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

[Docket Number FRA–2012–0093] 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with Part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

this document provides the public 

notice that by a document dated 

November 30, 2012, the Union Pacific 

Railroad Company (UP) has petitioned 

the Federal Railroad Administration 

(FRA) for a waiver of compliance from 

certain provisions of the Federal 

railroad safety regulations contained at 

49 CFR Part 219, Subpart G, Random 

Alcohol and Drug Testing Programs. 

FRA assigned the petition Docket 

Number FRA–2012–0093. 

UP is requesting FRA’s approval to 

periodically and intermittently adjust 

UP’s random drug and alcohol testing 

rates at specific locations based on 

objective, performance-based criteria or, 

alternately, approval for a pilot program 

in which UP can increase random 

testing of its employees at specific 

locations based on objective, 

performance-based criteria. 

A copy of the petition (included at the 

end of this notice), as well as any 

written communications concerning the 

petition, is available for review online at 

www.regulations.gov and in person at 

the U.S. Department of Transportation’s 

Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. The Docket 

Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m. 

to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal Holidays. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number and may be 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal Holidays. 

Communications received by July 29, 

2013 will be considered by FRA before 

final action is taken. Comments received 

after that date will be considered as far 

as practicable. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of any written 

communications and comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the document, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). See http:// 

www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice 

for the privacy notice of regulations.gov 

or interested parties may review DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 

2013. 

Robert C. Lauby, 

Deputy Associate Administrator for 

Regulatory and Legislative Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2013–14092 Filed 6–12–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[Docket No. AB 290 (Sub-No. 348X)] 

Norfolk Southern Railway Company— 

Discontinuance of Service 

Exemption—in Tipton and Howard 

Counties, Ind. 

Norfolk Southern Railway Company 

(NSR) filed a verified notice of 

exemption under 49 CFR part 1152 

subpart F—Exempt Abandonments and 

Discontinuances of Service to 

discontinue service over an 

approximately 10.8-mile rail line 

between milepost I–41.0 (north of 

Market Road near Tipton) and milepost 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES