[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 33 (Friday, February 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7048-7050]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03237]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-0468]

Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of
Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming
public advisory committee meeting of the Endocrinologic and Metabolic
Drugs Advisory Committee. The general function of the committee is to
provide advice and recommendations to FDA on regulatory issues. The
meeting will be open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket for
public comment on this document.

DATES: The meeting will be held on May 10, 2018, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Tommy Douglas Conference Center, the Ballroom, 10000 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20903. The conference center's
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Answers to commonly asked questions
about FDA Advisory Committee meetings may be accessed at: https://
www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/

AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm. Information about the Tommy
Douglas Conference Center can be accessed at: http://www.tommydouglascenter.com.
    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting.
The docket number is FDA-2018-N-0468. The docket will close on May 9,
2018. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public
meeting by May 9, 2018. Please note that late, untimely filed comments
will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or
before May 9, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing
system will accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of
May 9, 2018. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for
written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are
postmarked or the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before
that date.
    Comments received on or before April 26, 2018, will be provided to
the committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into
consideration by FDA.
    You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2018-N-0468 for ``Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory
Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request
for Comments.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see
ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' FDA will review
this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its
consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed
confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for
public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both
copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name
and contact information be made publicly available, you can provide
this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your
comments and you must identify the information as ``confidential.'' Any
information marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in
accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For
more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see
80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaToya Bonner, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-9001, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email: [email protected], or FDA Advisory
Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the
Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last
minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory
committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide
timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the FDA's website at
https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to
the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory
committee information line to learn about possible modifications before
coming to the meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The committee will discuss the safety and efficacy of new
drug application (NDA) 210645, for volanesoren solution for
subcutaneous injection, submitted by Akcea Therapeutics, Inc. The
proposed indication is as an adjunct to diet for the treatment of
patients with familial chylomicronemia syndrome.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is
available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
All electronic and written submissions submitted to the docket (see
ADDRESSES) on or before April 26, 2018, will be provided to the
committee. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between
approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in making
formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a
brief

statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish
to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an
indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation
on or before April 18, 2018. Time allotted for each presentation may be
limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater
than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public
hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers
for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will
notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by April 19,
2018.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that FDA is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets.
    For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at
[email protected] or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact LaToya Bonner (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7
days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: February 9, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-03237 Filed 2-15-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 9044]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03421]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14803-001; Project No. 2082-063]

PacifiCorp; Klamath River Renewal Corporation; Notice of
Teleconference for Tribal Consultation Meeting

    a. Project Name and Numbers: Lower Klamath and Klamath
Hydroelectric Project Nos. 14803 and 2082.
    b. Project Licensee: PacifiCorp.
    c. Date and Time of Teleconference: Tuesday, March 1, 2022, from
12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
    d. FERC Contact: Jennifer Polardino,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].
    e. Purpose of Meeting: Commission staff will participate in a
teleconference with the Shasta Indian Nation and the California State
Historic Preservation Office (California SHPO) to discuss the
application for the surrender of license and removal of project works
for the Lower Klamath Project No. 14803. The project is located on the
Klamath River in Klamath County, Oregon, and Siskiyou County,
California. The project occupies federal lands managed by the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management.
    f. Members of the public and intervenors in the referenced
proceedings may attend the teleconference; however, participation will
be limited to Tribal representatives of the Shasta Indian Nation,
representatives from the California SHPO, and the Commission's
representatives. If during the call the Shasta Indian Nation decides to
disclose information about a specific location which could create a
risk or harm to an archaeological site or Native American cultural
resource, the public will be excused for that portion of the meeting
and can return to the call after such information is disclosed. The
teleconference meeting will be transcribed by a court reporter and the
transcript will be placed in the public record.
    g. Please call or email Jennifer Polardino at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected] by Monday, February 28, 2022, to RSVP and
to receive the teleconference call-in information.

    Dated: February 11, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03421 Filed 2-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 117 (Wednesday, June 17, 2020)] [Notices] [Pages 36626-36627] [FR Doc No: 2020-13089]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:  85 FR 35966, June  12, 2020.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:  Wednesday, June 17,  2020 at 2:00 p.m.

CHANGES IN THE MEETING:  The Closed Meeting scheduled for Wednesday,  June

17, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. has been changed to Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at  12:30 p.m.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  For further information and to  ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,  please contact Vanessa A. Countryman, Secretary, in the Office of the  Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Dated: June 12, 2020. Vanessa A. Countryman, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2020-13089 Filed 6-15-20; 11:15 am] BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 83 (Monday, April 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 25525]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10363]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Thirteenth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 224, Airport Security
Access Control Systems.

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting Notice of RTCA Special Committee 224, Airport Security
Access Control Systems.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
thirteenth meeting of RTCA Special Committee 224, Airport Security
Access Control Systems

DATES: The meeting will be held May 30, 2012, from 10:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC, 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 203. The agenda will
include the following:

May 30, 2012

     Welcome/Introductions/Administrative Remarks
     Review/Approve Summary--Twelfth Meeting
     Updates from the TSA (as required)
     Workgroup Reports
     Industry Solicitation Progress Report
     Time and Place of Next Meeting
     Any Other Business
     Adjourn
     Other Business
     Date, Place, and Time for Plenary Twenty-Two
     Plenary Adjourns
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 24, 2012.
John Raper,
Manager, Business Operations Branch, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-10363 Filed 4-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48492-48495]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20761]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84209; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2018-073]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 7021

September 19, 2018.
    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 September 6, 2018, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' 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 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 Rule 7021 to address the transition
of reports available on Report Center to a new underlying platform, and
to make technical and clarifying changes.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website 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 is proposing to amend Rule 7021, concerning the Report
Center, to address the transition of reports available on Report Center
to a new underlying platform, and to make technical and clarifying
changes. Report Center provides members with various reports containing
information concerning the member's own historical quoting and trading
activity on Nasdaq and the FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility, which
is located in Carteret, NJ (``TRF Carteret''). The Exchange will begin
operating a second trade reporting facility, FINRA/Nasdaq TRF Chicago
(``TRF Chicago''), in September of 2018.\3\ The purpose of this
proposed rule change is to inform members of the transition to the new
underlying platform, to clarify the contents of certain reports in
light of the new TRF Chicago, and to make clarifying changes concerning
how the fee is assessed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83559 (June 29,
2018), 83 FR 31589 (July 6, 2018) (SR-FINRA-2018-013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is beginning a process of replacing the underlying
platform of Report Center with a new platform, Report HQ. Report HQ
will be more robust and user friendly, and thus an improvement over the
existing Report Center platform. Nasdaq is not proposing to change the
fees assessed for the reports under Rule 7021 or assess an additional
fee for access to the Rule 7021 reports on Report HQ. Nasdaq is
beginning the transition with reports that may include TRF data, which
are certain Historical Research Reports under Rule 7021(b) and the
Market Recap report under Rule 7021(d). These reports will be available
on both platforms concurrent with the launch of the TRF Chicago, which
is currently scheduled for September 2018. In light of the timing of
the TRF Chicago and the transition to the Report HQ,\4\ Nasdaq will not
be adding TRF Chicago data to the Historical Research Reports and
Market Recap reports available on Report Center, but will make TRF
Chicago data in those reports available through the Report HQ platform.
The remaining reports available under Rule 7021 do not include TRF data
and consequently will be identical on each platform as they are
transferred over the course of the transition.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In this regard, Nasdaq notes that it is beginning the
transition to Report HQ with the only reports that include TRF data.
Thus the Exchange is avoiding the time and expense of programming
new reports for the Report Center platform, which will become
defunct upon completion of the transition.
    \5\ The Exchange will provide prior notice via Equity Trader
Alerts of the availability of the reports under Rule 7021 on Report
HQ.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any member may have access to the Report HQ platform upon request.
Specifically, an existing Report Center subscriber must submit a Report
HQ Request Form available at https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/EASP/TraderEASP.aspx?id=ReportHQSignUp. Nasdaq will then verify the account
and send the member a registration link.\6\ Upon completion of the
registration process, the member will be able to access both platforms
to access reports, and will not be charged any additional fees for
these reports. If a member does not have an existing Report Center
subscription and requests Report HQ access to the Rule 7021 reports
using the process described immediately above, Nasdaq will create a
login to the Report Center platform in addition to a Report HQ login
for the member, and the member will be charged the current monthly $250
per entitled user, per MPID \7\ fee under Rule 7021. This registration
process ensures that customers are able to access the whole breadth of
reports available and covered by Rule 7021. Any new subscriber to
Report Center will receive both a Report Center and Report HQ login.
Last, during the process of transitioning reports from Report Center to
Report HQ, subscribers will be able to access up to a total of 100
reports under (b)-(f) of the rule on each platform. This will
effectively double the number of reports available for a subscription
for the duration of the transition. All members may access the Rule
7021 reports on Report HQ upon completion of the Report HQ registration
process noted above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See https://business.nasdaq.com/media/NasdaqReportHQ_tcm5044-43704.pdf.
    \7\ The Exchange is proposing to clarify under Rule 7021 that
the fee is assessed per entitled user, per MPID, because under the
Nasdaq Report Center each entitled user is entitled to reports for a
single MPID.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing to remove Monthly Summaries from
Rule 7021, and hold Rule 7021(a) in reserve. No member has accessed
Monthly Summaries in over a year and Nasdaq does not currently provide
the report in Report Center. The Exchange believes that the report is
no longer useful to members and consequently is proposing to eliminate
the report from Rule 7021.
    Last, the Exchange is proposing to make two clarifying changes to
Rule 7021. First, as noted above, accessing reports under (b)-(f) do
count toward the cap under Rule 7021. In this regard, when the Exchange
added several reports to the Rule in 2014,\8\ it noted that the
following reports count toward the report cap: Nasdaq Order Execution
and Routing; Market Recap; QView Historical Reports; and Real-Time
Registered Market Maker Report. These reports are found under
paragraphs (c)-(f) of the Rule. In the 2014 filing, the Exchange also
added text that made it clear that the newly-added reports under (g)-
(k) do not count toward the report cap.\9\ The Exchange is proposing to
make it clear that the reports under (b)-(f) are counted toward the
monthly cap. Second, the Exchange is making it clear that the monthly
fee under Rule 7021 is assessed per entitled user, per MPID. Currently
under Rule 7021, a member is billed by each entitled user, i.e., a user
ID, which is tied to a single MPID of the member. The 100 report limit
is tied to a user ID. In practice, a member may have multiple user IDs
so that they may access reports concerning multiple MPIDs. Report HQ
has simplified access to reports by not requiring multiple user IDs,
but rather allows a single user ID per person, who then may be given
access to reports for multiple MPIDs (each for the $250 monthly fee).
Thus, Report HQ will simplify access to the reports under Rule 7021,
but will not alter the fee or what reports are provided in return for
the fee. During the transition, a Report Center subscription will
provide the user with access to the reports for the same MPID for
Report HQ, as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73815 (December 11,
2014), 79 FR 75223 (December 17, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-121).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)

of the Act,\10\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ 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, by allowing the Exchange to upgrade its systems, which will
benefit members that use Report Center to access the reports found
under Rule 7021. As noted above, Report HQ will be more robust and user
friendly, and thus an improvement over the existing Report Center
platform. The Exchange notes that all members may access the reports
available through Report HQ without additional cost in addition to the
existing fees. Nasdaq is not proposing to change the fees assessed for
the reports under Rule 7021 or assess an additional fee for access to
the Rule 7021 reports on Report HQ. The proposed rule change will not
change the content of any of the reports under Rule 7021, other than
the addition of TRF Chicago data and the deletion of an unused report
that is not currently offered, as discussed above. Moreover, the
Exchange is proposing to allow members to access 100 reports under Rule
7021(b)-(f) on either system. To access these reports, member need only
complete the registration process, which is provided in a non-
discriminatory manner. As noted above, if a member does not have an
existing Report Center subscription and requests Report HQ access to
the Rule 7021 reports using the process described above, Nasdaq will
create a login to the Report Center platform in addition to a Report HQ
login for the member, and the member will be charged the current
monthly $250 per entitled user fee. Thus, all members receiving the
same reports under Rule 7021 will be assessed the same fee. The
Exchange notes that providing members with a cap of 100 reports under
Rule 7021(b)-(f) on each system will allow firms to more easily
transition between the systems. The Exchange believes that the proposed
clarifying changes protect investors and the public interest by
removing ambiguities from the rule, which may cause market participant
confusion over how the fee is assessed and what is included in the 100
report monthly limit. Last, the Exchange believes that removal of the
Monthly Summaries report from Rule 7021 further perfects the Exchange's
rule book and is consistent with the protection of investors because
the Exchange is eliminating an unused report from its rule. As noted
above, no member has accessed Monthly Summaries in over a year and
Nasdaq does not currently provide the report in Report Center. Keeping
the Monthly Summaries text under Rule 7021 would lead to investor
confusion over what reports are available under the rule. Accordingly,
the Exchange believes that it is consistent with the purposes of the
Act to delete the text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \12\ in that it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and
issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls, and it does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers. The Exchange is
proposing a transition process that will not affect the fee assessed
for the reports under Rule 7021. In this regard, the Exchange notes
that all members receiving the reports under Rule 7021 will be assessed
the same fee. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change is an equitable allocation of a reasonable fee and does not
unfairly discriminate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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, but it is rather pro-
competitive. The proposal is reflective of the Exchange's efforts to
upgrade its systems to improve the experience of its members. The
Exchange is not increasing fees nor limiting the information available
to members through a subscription under Rule 7021 other than the
elimination of an unused report. Moreover, the proposed rule change
will ensure that all members receiving the same reports under Rule 7021
will be assessed the same fee regardless of the platform used to access
the report. To the extent that the upgraded platform improves the
experience of members, it may make the Exchange a more attractive
venue, which will help to retain existing members and potentially
attract new members. Consequently, other trading venues may be
compelled to improve their services in response.

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 \13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \15\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \16\ permits the
Commission to 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 proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. Waiver
of the operative delay would allow the Exchange to provide members with
access to TRF Chicago data through Report HQ and make related changes
to Rule 7021 concurrent with the launch of TRF Chicago in September
2018. The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2018-073 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-2018-073. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2018-073, and should be submitted
on or before October 16, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-20761 Filed 9-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Reduced survival or reproduction

Terrestrial

Upland

Plants

Terrestrial Vertebrates:

Birds, Mammals,

Reptiles, Terrestrial Phase Amphibians

Attribute

Changes

Receptors

Gill/

 Integument Uptake

Direct Contact/

Root Uptake

Direct Contact/

Root Uptake

Ingestion

Exposure

Route

Ground Water

Receiving Water Body/ Sediment

Riparian/

Wetland Foliage/Soil

Upland

Foliage/Soil

Terrestrial Food Items (foliage, fruit, insects, seeds)

Source/

Exposure

Media

Leaching

hûb

hž

h

h

hò

h

h

hv

hv

jV

hØ

&

&

&

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

hx

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

@

&

&

H

H

H

H

*

@

@

阂d㐃ԁᣖĆĆĆĆĆĆ鐇Ȋ혈㠇䀄

퀀ࠂ䀇

順

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

˜

@

@

㜀$␸䠀$

옍)

&

&

X

Y

&

&

&

&

Fft

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

䀆

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

kd

H

H

H

H

H

H

H

œÿ+	Û

œÿ+	Û

œÿ+	Û

œÿ+	Û

	Ö

œÿ+	Û

œÿ+	Û

œÿ+	Û

	Ö

	Ö

	Ö

”ÿ\

È

혈F鐃峿퐍逜怤젆

ÖF鐃峿퐍逜․젆

혈F鐃峿퐍逜怤젆

ÖF鐃峿퐍逜․젆

혈F鐃峿퐍逜怤젆

ÖF鐃峿퐍逜․젆

ÖF鐃峿퐍逜․젆

”ÿ\

È

`

鐇ó혈\먄볼᠇匌尗Ȇ

㬧

इ

h

퀇

퀇

퀇

퀇

퀇

㬧

㜀$␸䠀$ᬀ(Infiltration/

Percolation

Direct Application

Source/

Transport

Pathways

FPE Applied as a Ground/Aerial Spray

Stressor


[Federal Register: September 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 181)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53495-53498]
[DOCID:fr19se07-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-29226; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-256-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81)
and DC-9-82 (MD-82) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81) and DC-9-82 (MD-82)
airplanes. This proposed AD would require, for certain airplanes,
inspecting for cracking of the fuselage skin at the upper corners of
the forward passenger doorjamb, installing or replacing doublers as
applicable, and doing applicable repairs. This proposed AD results from
reports of fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin at the upper corners
of the forward passenger doorjamb. We are proposing this AD to prevent
cracking of the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward
passenger doorjamb, which could lead to loss of overall structural
integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 5,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow

the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
 and follow the instructions for sending your

comments electronically.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room

W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service
information identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Durbin, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
29226; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-256-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We will

also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment 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 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov
, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management System receives them.

Discussion

    We have received a report that fatigue cracking has been discovered
in the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger
doorjamb on certain Model DC-9/MD-80 airplanes. This condition, if not
corrected, could lead to loss of overall structural integrity of the
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated
August 1, 2006. The alert service bulletin describes procedures for a
low-frequency eddy current (LFEC) or a high-frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspection, depending on airplane configuration, for cracking of
the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger
doorjamb; and applicable corrective actions. The compliance time for
the initial inspection is before accumulating 37,500 total flight
cycles, or within 3,575 flight cycles (whichever is later).
    The corrective actions include:
     For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes on which no
cracking is found: Either repeating the LFEC inspection at intervals of
3,575 flight cycles; or installing external aluminum doublers within
3,575 flight cycles after the last inspection, and doing an HFEC
inspection within 28,000 flight cycles after doing the installation,
and repetitively at 20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
     For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes on which any crack
is found that is 2.0 inches or shorter in length: Repair before further
flight, and do an HFEC inspection within 28,000 flight cycles after the
repair, and repetitively at 20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
     For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes on which any crack
is found that is longer than 2.0 inches; for Group 1, Configurations 2
and 3, airplanes on which any crack is found beyond the edge of the
doublers; and for Group 1, Configuration 4, airplanes: Contact Boeing
for repair instructions before further flight.
     For Group 1, Configuration 2, airplanes on which no crack
is found beyond the edge of the steel doublers: Replace existing steel
doublers with aluminum doublers, and repair upper corners within 6,000
flight cycles after the initial inspection; and do an HFEC inspection
within 28,000 flight cycles after the repair, and repetitively at
20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
     For Group 1, Configuration 3, airplanes on which no cracks
are found beyond the edge of the aluminum doublers: Repeat the HFEC
inspection at 20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between Proposed AD and Alert Service Bulletin.''

Differences Between Proposed AD and Alert Service Bulletin

    For all airplanes, the alert service bulletin specifies to contact
the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions,
but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions in one of
the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.
    For airplane configuration 4: Where the alert service bulletin
specifies to contact the manufacturer for repair instructions before
further flight, to avoid unnecessarily grounding airplanes, this
proposed AD would require performing repairs within 90 days after the
effective date of this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 76 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 46 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, at an average labor
rate of $80 per work hour. The proposed actions vary depending upon the
airplane configuration.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Action                Work hours          Parts           Cost per airplane        Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LFEC inspection..................            1  None needed.........  $80, per inspection   Up to $3,680, per
                                                                       cycle.                inspection cycle.
HFEC inspection..................            1  None needed.........  $80, per inspection   Up to $3,680, per
                                                                       cycle.                inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2007-29226; Directorate Identifier
2006-NM-256-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November
5, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81)
and DC-9-82 (MD-82) airplanes; certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated
August 1, 2006.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report of fatigue cracking in the
fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger
doorjamb. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the fuselage
skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger doorjamb, which
could lead to loss of overall structural integrity of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions for Configuration 1, 2,
and 3 Airplanes

    (f) For airplanes identified as Configuration 1, 2, or 3 in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated August 1, 2006: At
the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
the alert service bulletin, do a low-frequency eddy current (LFEC)
or high-frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection, as applicable, for
cracking of the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward
passenger doorjamb; and do all applicable corrective actions
(repetitive inspections, installation of doublers, replacements, and
repairs), except as provided by paragraph (g) of this AD. Do the
actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the
alert service bulletin. Where the alert service bulletin specifies a
compliance time after the date on the service bulletin, this AD
requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the
effective date of this AD.

Repair of Certain Conditions

    (g) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (f) of this AD and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
53A298, dated August 1, 2006, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions: Before further flight, repair using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.

Corrective Action for Configuration 4 Airplanes

    (h) For airplanes identified as Configuration 4 in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated August 1, 2006: Within 90 days
after the effective date of this AD, repair using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. For a
repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification
basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 10, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-18447 Filed 9-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 8)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1697-1699]
[DOCID:fr13ja10-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1252; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-248-AD;
Amendment 39-16173; AD 2010-02-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault-Aviation Model Falcon 7X
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Several occurrences of untimely radio-altimeter lock-up have
been reported, where the failed radio-altimeter indicated a negative
distance to the ground despite the aircraft was flying at medium or
high altitude.
    A locked radio-altimeter 1 leads to untimely inhibition
of warnings that could be displayed along with certain abnormal
conditions while the avionic system switches into landing mode
during altitude cruise.
* * * * *
    [Untimely radio-altimeter lock-up] may cause the crew to be
unaware of possible system failures that could require urgent crew's
actions.
* * * * *
    This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 28, 2010.
    We must receive comments on this AD by March 1, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2009-0208, dated October 13, 2009 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Several occurrences of untimely radio-altimeter lock-up have
been reported, where the failed radio-altimeter indicated a negative
distance to the ground despite the aircraft was flying at medium or
high altitude.
    A locked radio-altimeter 1 leads to untimely inhibition
of warnings that could be displayed along with certain abnormal
conditions while the avionic system switches into landing mode
during altitude cruise.
    Investigation in order to determine the root cause of radio-
altimeter lock-up is in progress. In the meantime, Dassault Aviation
has developed an operational procedure that in case of radio-
altimeter 1 lock-up allows the crew, by depowering radio-
altimeter 1, to restore in flight the system warning
performance.
    Failure to comply with this interim flight procedure may cause
the crew to be unaware of possible system failures that could
require urgent crew's actions.
    This AD mandates application of a new abnormal Airplane Flight
Manual (AFM) procedure when radio-altimeter 1 lock-up
occurs and prohibits dispatch of the aeroplane with any radio-
altimeter inoperative.

    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because lock-
up of the radio-altimeter could interfere with critical flight system
annunciations and functions, which could cause the flightcrew to be
unaware of possible system failures that could require urgent
flightcrew actions. Therefore, we determined that notice and
opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable
and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in fewer
than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-1252; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-248-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2010-02-02 Dassault-Aviation: Amendment 39-16173. Docket No. FAA-
2009-1252; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-248-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January
28, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Dassault-Aviation Model Falcon 7X
airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34:
Navigation.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Several occurrences of untimely radio-altimeter lock-up have
been reported, where the failed radio-altimeter indicated a negative
distance to the ground despite the aircraft was flying at medium or
high altitude.
    A locked radio-altimeter 1 leads to untimely inhibition
of warnings that could be displayed along with certain abnormal
conditions while the avionic system switches into landing mode
during altitude cruise.
    Investigation in order to determine the root cause of radio-
altimeter lock-up is in progress. In the meantime, Dassault Aviation
has developed an operational procedure that in case of radio-
altimeter 1 lock-up allows the crew, by depowering radio-
altimeter 1, to restore in flight the system warning
performance.
    Failure to comply with this interim flight procedure may cause
the crew to be unaware of possible system failures that could
require urgent crew's actions.
    This AD mandates application of a new abnormal Airplane Flight
Manual (AFM) procedure when radio-altimeter 1 lock-up
occurs and prohibits dispatch of the aeroplane with any radio-
altimeter inoperative.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Actions

    (g) Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise
the Limitations Section of the Dassault Falcon 7X Airplane Flight
Manual (AFM) to include the following statement. This may be done by
inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.
    ``If radio-altimeter 1 lock-up conditions occur in
flight, power off radio-altimeter 1, in accordance with the
instructions of Falcon 7X AFM procedure 3-140-65.
    Dispatch of the airplane with any radio-altimeter inoperative is
prohibited.''

    Note 1: When a statement identical to that in paragraph (g) of
this AD has been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the
general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and the copy of this
AD may be removed from the AFM.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009-0208, dated
October 13, 2009, for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 28, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-103 Filed 1-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 201)]
[Notices]
[Page 64393-64394]
[DOCID:fr19oc10-104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Approval of Noise Compatibility Program for Chicago Executive
Airport, Prospect Heights and Wheeling, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
findings on the noise compatibility program (NCP) submitted by the
Chicago Executive Airport Board of Directors for Chicago Executive
Airport under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47501 et seq. (the Aviation
Safety and Noise Abatement Act, herein referred to as ``the Act'') and
14 CFR part 150. On March 1, 2010, the FAA determined that the noise
exposure maps submitted by Chicago Executive Airport Board of Directors
for Chicago Executive Airport were in compliance with applicable
requirements. On September 30, 2010, the FAA approved the Chicago
Executive Airport noise compatibility program. Twenty-one of the
twenty-seven recommendations of the program were approved.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the
Chicago Executive Airport noise compatibility program is September 30,
2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy Hanson, Environmental
Protection Specialist, CHI-603, Federal Aviation Administration,
Chicago Airport District Office, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines,
IL 60018. Telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Documents reflecting this FAA
action may also be reviewed at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA has given
its approval to the Noise Compatibility Program for Chicago Executive
Airport, effective October 1, 2010.
    The Chicago Executive Airport Board of Directors for Chicago
Executive Airport submitted to the FAA the noise exposure maps,
descriptions, and other documentation produced during the noise
compatibility study. The Chicago Executive Airport noise exposure maps
were determined by the FAA to be in compliance with applicable
requirements on March 1, 2010. Notice of this determination was
published in the Federal Register on March 12, 2010, Volume 75, Number
48, pages 11990 and 11991.
    Under section 47504 of the Act, an airport operator who has
previously submitted a noise exposure map may submit to the FAA a noise
compatibility program which sets forth the measures taken or proposed
by the airport operator for the reduction of existing non-compatible
land uses and prevention of additional non-compatible land uses within
the area covered by the noise exposure maps. The Act requires such
programs to be developed in consultation with interested and affected
parties including local communities, government agencies, airport
users, and FAA personnel.
    Each airport noise compatibility program developed in accordance
with Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 150 is a local program.
The FAA does not substitute its judgment for that of the airport
proprietor with respect to which measures should be recommended for
action. The FAA's approval or disapproval of FAR Part 150 program
recommendations is measured according to the standards expressed in
Part 150 of the Act and is limited to the following determinations:
    a. The noise compatibility program was developed in accordance with
the provisions and procedures of FAR Part 150;
    b. Program measures are reasonably consistent with achieving the
goals of reducing existing non-compatible land uses around the airport
and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses;
    c. Program measures would not create an undue burden on interstate
or foreign commerce, unjustly discriminate against types or classes of
aeronautical uses, violate the terms of airport grants agreements, or
intrude into areas preempted by the Federal Government; and
    d. Program measures relating to the use of flight procedures can be
implemented within the period covered by the program without derogating
safety, adversely affecting the efficient use of navigable airspace and
air traffic control systems, or adversely affecting other powers and
responsibilities of the Administrator prescribed by law.
    The submitted program included twenty-seven proposed actions for
noise mitigation on and off the airport, as applicable. The FAA
completed is review and determined that the procedural and substantive
requirements of the Act and FAR Part 150 have been satisfied.
    On October 1, 2010, the FAA approved the Chicago Executive Airport
noise compatibility program. Twenty-one of the twenty-seven
recommendations of the program were approved.

    Specific limitations with respect to FAA's approval of an airport
noise compatibility program are delineated in FAR Part 150, section
150.5. Approval is not a determination concerning the acceptability of
land uses under Federal, State, or local law. Approval does not by
itself constitute an FAA implementing action. A request for Federal
action or approval to implement specific noise compatibility measures
may be required, and an FAA decision on the request may require an
environmental assessment of the proposed action. Approval does not
constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the
implementation of the program nor a determination that all measures
covered by the program are eligible for grant-in-aid funding from the
FAA. Where Federal funding is sought, requests for project grants must
be submitted to the FAA Chicago Airports District Office.
    These determinations are set forth in detail in a Record of
Approval signed by Susan Schalk on October 1, 2010. The Record of
Approval, as well as other evaluation materials and the documents
comprising the submittal, are available for review at the FAA office
listed above and at the administrative offices of the Chicago Executive
Airport. The Record of Approval also will be available online at:
http://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/airport_noise/part_150/
states/.

    Issued in Des Plaines, IL, October 6, 2010.
James G. Keefer,
Manager, Chicago Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2010-26324 Filed 10-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83115-83118]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28009]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90676; File No. SR-CBOE-2020-114]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
To Amend Its Fees Schedule

December 15, 2020.
    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 1, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx),
at the Exchange'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 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 certain routing fees in connection
with routed Customer orders in ETF and equity options, effective
December 1, 2020.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing
venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive or
incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the Exchange is only
one of 16 options venues to which market participants may direct their
order flow. Based on publicly available information, no single options
exchange has more than 16% of the market share.\3\ Thus, in such a low-
concentrated and highly competitive market, no single options exchange
possesses significant pricing power in the execution of option order
flow. The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among
the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories
of products in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain the Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can
readily trade on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those
other venues to be more favorable. In response to competitive pricing,
the Exchange, like other options exchanges, offers rebates and assesses
fees for certain order types executed on or routed through the
Exchange. The Exchange notes too that other options exchanges currently
approximate routing fees in a similar manner as the Exchange's current
approach to assessing approximate routing fees, as discussed below.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Options Monthly Market Volume
Summary (November 23, 2020), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/options/market_statistics/.
    \4\ See e.g., NYSE Arca Options Fees and Charges, ``Routing
Fees'', which provides routing fees of ``$0.11 per contract on
orders routed and executed on another exchange, plus (i) any
transaction fees assessed by the away exchange (calculated on an
order-by-order basis since different away exchanges charge different
amounts) or (ii) if the actual transaction fees assessed by the away
exchange(s) cannot be determined prior to the execution, the highest
per contract charge assessed by the away exchange(s) for the
relevant option class and type of market participant (e.g.,
Customer, Firm, Broker/Dealer, Professional Customer or Market
Maker).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange assesses fees in connection with orders routed away to
various exchanges. Currently, under the Routing Fees table of the Fee
Schedule, fee codes RD, RE, RF, RG, RH and RI are appended to certain
Customer orders in ETF and Equity options, as follows:
     Fee code RD is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity
options \5\ for greater than or equal to 100 contracts routed to NYSE
American (``AMEX''), BOX Options Exchange (``BOX''), Nasdaq BX Options
(``BX''), Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX''), ISE Mercury, LLC
(``MERC''), MIAX Options Exchange (``MIAX'') or Nasdaq PHLX LLC
(``PHLX''), and assesses a charge of $0.33 per contract;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange also updates fee codes RD and RF to make clear
that ``equity'' options are included in the description. The System
currently applies the applicable routing fee codes (RD, RE, RF, RG
and RH) to both ETF and equity options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     fee code RE is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity
options for less than 100 contracts routed to AMEX, BOX, BX, EDGX,
MERC, MIAX or PHLX, and assesses a charge of $0.15 per contract;
     fee code RF is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity,
Penny options for greater than or equal to 100 contracts routed to NYSE
Arca, Inc (``ARCA''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX''), Cboe C2
Exchange, Inc. (``C2''), Nasdaq ISE (``ISE''), ISE Gemini, LLC
(``GMNI''), MIAX Emerald Exchange (``EMLD''), MIAX Pearl Exchange
(``PERL'') or Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOMX), and assesses a charge
of $0.83 per contract;
     fee code RG is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity,
Non-Penny options for greater than or equal to 100 contracts routed to
ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a charge of
$1.18 per contract;
     fee code RH is appended to Customer orders in ETF/Equity,
Penny options for less than 100 contracts routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE,
GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a charge of $0.65 per contract;
and
     fee code RI is appended to Customer order in ETF/Equity,
Non-Penny options for less than 100 contracts routed to ARCA, BZX, C2,
ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX, and assesses a charge of $1.00 per
contract.
    The Exchange proposes to remove fee codes RE, RG and RH and amend
fee codes RD, RF and RI by removing the 100-contract size limit from
each and updating the fees assessed to $0.25 per contract, $0.75 per
contract and $1.25 per contract, respectively. The Exchange believes
that eliminating fee codes RE, RG and RH and the 100-contract
contingency currently applicable to orders that yield fee codes RD, RF
and RI will simplify and streamline the System's billing process for
routed Customer orders in ETF and equity options. By removing the size
contingency, orders to which RE, RG and RH are currently applicable may
then be absorbed into orders to which RD, RF and RI are currently
applicable and the routing fees for Customer orders in ETF and equity
options may be billed as one of three fee codes, instead of six. For
example, fee code RG would, prior to this proposal, be appended to
Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options for 100 contracts or
more routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL or NOMX. However,
without the size contingency, RI will now be appended to all Customer
orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options routed to the same away
exchanges. Regarding the proposed rate changes for the remaining
Customer ETF/Equity routing fee codes (RD, RF and RI), the Exchange
notes that its current approach to routing fees is to set forth in a
simple manner certain sub-categories of fees that approximate the cost
of routing to other options exchanges based on the cost of transaction
fees assessed by each venue as well as a flat $0.15 assessment that
covers costs to the Exchange for routing (i.e., clearing fees,
connectivity and other infrastructure costs, membership fees, etc.)
(collectively, ``Routing Costs''). The Exchange then monitors

the fees charged as compared to the costs of its routing services and
adjusts its routing fees and/or sub-categories to ensure that the
Exchange's fees do indeed result in a rough approximation of overall
Routing Costs, and are not significantly higher or lower in any area.
As a result, the Exchange believes the proposed amended rates for RD,
RF and RI are adjusted to reflect an appropriate, current approximation
of the routing costs to the applicable sub-category group of away
exchanges for ETF/Equity options of any order size, and these routing
fee codes will absorb the orders to which RE, RG and RH are currently
appended. The Exchange notes that routing through the Exchange is
optional and that TPHs will continue to be able to choose where to
route their Customer orders in ETF and equity options.
    The Exchange also proposes to update routing fee codes RD and RF in
the Routing Fees table of the Fees Schedule connection with routed
Customer orders in SPY options to Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``PHLX''). As
described above, routing fee code RD is appended to Customer orders in
ETF/Equity options routed to AMEX, BOX, BX, EDGX, MERC, MIAX or PHLX
and assesses a charge of $0.25 per contract (as proposed), and routing
fee code RF is appended to Customer orders in ETF options in Penny
classes routed to ARCA, BZX, C2, ISE, GMNI, EMLD, PERL, NOMX or PHLX
and assesses a charge of $0.75 per contract (as proposed). Currently,
PHLX assesses a charge of $0.42 per contract for Customer orders in SPY
options that remove liquidity.\6\ As described above, the Exchange
currently assesses a routing fee of $0.33 per contract for Customer
orders routed to PHLX which yield fee code RP. This structure does not
currently take into account, and approximately cover, the $0.42 per
contract fee assessed by PHLX for Customer orders in SPY options.
Therefore, in order to assess fees more in line with the Exchange's
current approach to routing fees, that is, in a manner that
approximates the cost of routing Customer orders in SPY options to
PHLX, along with other away options exchanges, based on the general
cost of transaction fees assessed by the sub-category of away options
exchanges for such orders (as well as the Exchange's routing costs),
the Exchange proposes to exclude Customer orders is SPY options routed
to PHLX from orders that yield fee code RD and are assessed a charge of
$0.25 per contract (as proposed) and, instead, add Customer orders
routed to PHLX in SPY options only to orders that yield fee code RF \7\
and are assessed a charge of $0.75 per contract (as proposed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Nasdaq Phlx Options 7 Pricing Schedule, Section 3
``Rebates and Fees for Adding and Removing Liquidity in SPY'', Part
A.
    \7\ The Exchange notes that SPY options are part of the Penny
Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the 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
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirements that the rules of an 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. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\10\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to remove fee
codes RE, RG and RH and remove the size contingency for fee codes RD,
RF and RI is reasonable in that it is reasonably designed to simplify
and streamline the System's billing process for routed Customer orders
in ETF and equity options. By removing the size contingency, orders to
which fee codes RE, RG and RH are currently applicable may then be
absorbed into the orders to which fee codes RD, RF and RI are
applicable and the routing fees for Customer orders in ETF and equity
options may be billed as one of three fee codes, instead of six. The
Exchange also believes that it is reasonable to amend the rates that
correspond to fee codes RD, RF and RI because the proposed rates are
aligned with the Exchange's current approach to approximating the cost
of routing to other options exchanges based on the cost of transaction
fees assessed by each venue as well as the Exchange's Routing Cost. The
Exchange believes the proposed amended rates for orders that yield fee
codes RD, RF and RI are adjusted to reasonably reflect an appropriate,
current approximation of the routing costs for ETF/Equity options of
any order size to the sub-category group of away exchanges, and these
routing fee codes will absorb the orders to which fee codes RE, RG and
RH are currently appended. For example, routed Customer orders in ETF/
Equity Non-Penny options that yield fee code RG (greater than or equal
to 100 contracts) are currently assessed a routing fee of $1.18 per
contract, while routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options
that yield fee code RH (less than 100 contracts) are currently assessed
a routing fee of $1.00. However, upon the removal of fee code RG, those
routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options will yield fee
code RH, which will assess a proposed fee of $1.25, which the Exchange
believes is appropriately adjusted to reflect the current approximate
cost of routing Customer orders in ETF/Equity Non-Penny options of all
sizes to the same sub-category group of away exchanges. The Exchange
notes that routing through the Exchange is optional and that TPHs will
continue to be able to choose where to route their Customer orders in
ETF and equity options in the same sub-category group of away exchanges
as they currently may choose to route. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because TPHs' routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity options will
continue to be automatically and uniformly assessed the applicable
routing charges.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to amend fee codes
RD and RF to account for PHLX's current assessment of fees for Customer
orders in SPY options is reasonable because it is reasonably designed
to assess routing fees in line with the Exchange's current approach to
routing fees. That is, the proposed rule change is intended to include
Customer orders in SPY options routed to PHLX in the most appropriate
sub-category of fees that approximates the cost of routing to a group
of away options exchanges (including PHLX) based on the cost of
transaction fees assessed by each venue as well as Routing Costs to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all TPHs' Customer
orders in SPY routed to PHLX will automatically yield fee code RQ

and uniformly be assessed the corresponding fee.

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 intramarket or intermarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change to remove
certain routing fee codes and to update other routing fee codes
accordingly to apply instead, will impose any burden on intramarket
competition because all TPHs' routed Customer orders in ETF/Equity
options will continue to be able to route to the same sub-category
group of away exchanges and will automatically and uniformly be
assessed the applicable routing fees. Likewise, all TPH's Customer
orders in SPY options routed to PHLX will automatically yield fee code
RF and uniformly be assessed the corresponding fee.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes in
connection with routing fees will impose any burden on intermarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because, as previously discussed, the Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market. The Exchange notes that other
options exchanges approximate routing costs in a similar manner as the
Exchange's current approach.\11\ Also, the Exchange notes that, in
addition to Cboe Options, TPHs have numerous alternative venues that
they may participate on and director their order flow, including 15
other options exchanges, as well as off-exchange venues, where
competitive products are available for trading. Based on publicly
available information, no single options exchange has more than 16% of
the market share of executed volume of options trades.\12\ Therefore,
no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
option order flow. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly expressed
its preference for competition over regulatory intervention in
determining prices, products, and services in the securities markets.
Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the
importance of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and,
also, recognized that current regulation of the market system ``has
been remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its
broader forms that are most important to investors and listed
companies.'' \13\ The fact that this market is competitive has also
long been recognized by the courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and
Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one
disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC
explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and sellers of
securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-routing
agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders for
execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers'. . . .'' \14\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed changes to the incentive programs impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See supra note 4.
    \12\ See supra note 3.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \14\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \16\
thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge imposed
by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(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 will 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-CBOE-2020-114 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-CBOE-2020-114. 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 website (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 website 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-CBOE-2020-114 and should be
submitted on or before January 11, 2021.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28009 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P