IMPORTANT NOTE TO USER:

This OMB form has been recreated in WP6.0 by OPPTS staff. The margins and lines are NOT block protected, so you must fill the form with caution, paying attention to any shifting of the existing text. The following tips should make this a simple task:

 Fill in the spaces by using the type over command. Otherwise you'll have to delete a space for each letter you add.

 Use the same font ( Times New Roman 8pt).

 Do not change table lines ( although you can delete an extra space line to provide more space elsewhere.

 It is not recommended that you convert this form to WP5.1, some of these features are not available in WP5.1, so the text will scramble.

If you have any problems or questions, please call your RID Desk Officer @ 260 2706. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 2. OMB control number b. G None a. 2080 0033 3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title Quality Assurance Specification and Requirements 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) EPA ICR 0866.06 9. Keywords quality assurance, quality control, financial assistance 10. Abstract Quality assurance specifications and requirements to be provided by state and local agencies and for research financial assistance include a written Quality Assurance Project Plan that describes in detail or by reference the purpose and objectives of the proposed study, measurement systems used, the quality control ( QC) procedures to be followed, data analysis and reporting, and any other aspects of QA/ QC used to document that the data generated are of the quality claimed and needed to meet project objectives and support findings and conclusions. The QA project plan can be combined with a work plan provided all of the QA/ QC requirements are identified.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. P Not for profit institutions f. X State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. X Required to obtain or retain benefits c. G Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 1940 b. Total annual responses 1940 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total hours requested 164,900 d. Current OMB inventory 55,635 e. Difference 109,265 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change ___ 109,265 _____________ 2. Adjustment _______________________________ 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 0 c. Total annualized cost requested 0 d. Current OMB inventory 0 e. Difference f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 2. Adjustment 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. XApplication for benefits e. __ Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. __ Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. Q Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) Once 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Nancy Wentworth Phone: 202 564 6830 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected' ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Nancy W. Wentworth, Director Quality Staff, Office of Environmental Information Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

"( a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

"( b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

"( c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U. S. C § 601( 6)), the use of such techniques as:

"( 1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond; "( 2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof; "( 3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

"( d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

"( e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

"( f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

"( g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8( b)( 3); [ see below]

"( h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

"( I) uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and "( j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public."

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3) requires that each collection of information:

"( 3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of: "( I) the reasons the information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( ii) the way such information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the average burden of the collection ( together with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden); "( iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit ( citing authority), or mandatory ( citing authority); "( v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any ( citing authority); and "( vi) the fact that any agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number."

OMB 83 I ( Instructions) 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67074-67078]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23257]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90197; File No. SR-IEX-2020-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Investors Exchange LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Add an
Offset Peg Order Type

October 15, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on October 5, 2020, the Investors Exchange LLC (``IEX'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

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

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

    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) under the Act,\4\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\5\ IEX is filing with the Commission a
proposed rule change to add a new order type (a ``Offset Peg'' or ``O-
Peg'' order) that pegs to the primary quote,\6\ plus or minus an offset
amount. The Exchange has designated this rule change as ``non-
controversial'' under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and provided
the Commission with the notice required by Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \6\ The primary quote is the national best bid for a buy order
or the national best offer for a sell order. See IEX Rule 1.160(u).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
website at www.iextrading.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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
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 statement [sic] may be examined
at the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory
organization 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend IEX Rule 11.190 to add a new Offset
Peg or O-Peg order type that pegs to the primary quote,\9\ plus or
minus an offset amount specified by the User.\10\ In addition, the
Exchange proposes two accommodating amendments to IEX Rule 11.190 to
describe how O-Peg orders will behave when executed at the Midpoint
Price \11\ and in locked and crossed markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 6.
    \10\ See IEX Rule 1.160(qq).
    \11\ See IEX Rule 1.160(t),
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange offers three types of pegged orders--
primary peg, midpoint peg and Discretionary Peg \12\--each of which are
non-displayed orders that upon entry into the System \13\ and while
resting on the Order Book,\14\ are pegged to a reference price based on
the national best bid and offer (``NBBO'') and the price of the order
is automatically adjusted by the System in response to changes in the
NBBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ IEX has two other order types that are based on the
discretionary peg order type: The Retail Liquidity Provider order
and the Corporate Discretionary Peg order. See IEX Rule
11.190(b)(14) and (16).
    \13\ See IEX Rule 1.160(nn).
    \14\ See IEX Rule 1.160(p).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to add a new type of pegged order--an Offset
Peg order--that is a non-displayed pegged order that upon entry and
when posting to the Order Book, the price of the order is automatically
adjusted by the System to be equal to and ranked at the less aggressive
of the primary quote (i.e., the NBB \15\ for buy orders and NBO \16\
for sell orders) plus or minus an offset amount specified by the User
or the order's limit price, if any. While resting on the Order Book,
(i) a buy order is automatically adjusted by the System in response to
changes in the NBB plus or minus the offset amount up to the order's
limit price, if any; and (ii) a sell order is automatically adjusted by
the System in response to changes in the NBO plus or minus the offset
amount down to the order's limit price, if any; and (iii) in locked and
crossed markets, slide one MPV \17\ less aggressive than the locking
price or crossing price (i.e., the lowest Protected Offer \18\ for buy
orders and the highest Protected Bid \19\ for sell orders).\20\
Further, an Offset Peg order would not be eligible to trade when the
market is locked or crossed, either upon order entry or when resting on
the Order Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See IEX Rule 1.160(u).
    \16\ See IEX Rule 1.160(u).
    \17\ See IEX Rule 11.210.
    \18\ See IEX Rule 1.160(bb).
    \19\ See IEX Rule 1.160(bb).
    \20\ As with all pegged orders, each time the price of an Offset
Peg order is adjusted by the System it receives a new timestamp, as
described in IEX Rule 11.220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Offset Peg orders would not be limited to trading more
aggressively than the primary quote, based on informal feedback from
Members, IEX understands that Offset Peg orders would be useful to
market participants seeking to trade between the primary quote and the
Midpoint Price.
    Accordingly, IEX proposes to amend subparagraph (b)(13) of IEX Rule
11.190, which is currently reserved, to add the Offset Peg order. As
proposed, an Offset Peg order:
    (A) Must be a pegged order.
    (B) Must have a TIF of DAY, GTT, GTX, or SYS, as described in IEX
Rule 11.190(a)(3).
    (C) Is not eligible for routing pursuant to IEX Rule 11.230(b) and
(c)(2).
    (D) May not be an ISO, as defined in paragraph (12) above.
    (E) May be submitted with a limit price or without a limit price
(an ``unpriced pegged order'').
    (F) Is eligible to trade only during the Regular Market Session. As
provided in IEX Rule 11.190(a)(3)(E)(iii), any pegged order marked with
a TIF of DAY that is submitted to the System before the opening of the
Regular Market Session will be queued by the System until the start of
the Regular Market Session; any pegged order that is marked with a TIF
other than DAY will be rejected when submitted to the System during the
Pre-Market Session. Any pegged order submitted into the System after
the closing of the Regular Market Session will be rejected.
    (G) May be a MQTY, as defined in paragraph (11) below.
    (H) Is not eligible to display. Pegged orders are always non-
displayed.
    (I) May be an odd lot, round lot, or mixed lot.
    (J) Is eligible to be invited by the System to Recheck as described
in IEX Rule 11.230(a)(4)(D).
    (K) Is not eligible to trade when the market is locked or crossed.
    (L) May be submitted with an offset amount that is either
aggressive or passive compared to the primary quote. If the offset
amount would result in the price of an Offset Peg order being more
aggressive than the Midpoint Price, the offset amount will be reduced
so that the order is priced at the Midpoint Price until such time as
the full value of the offset amount will not result in the price of the
Offset Peg order being more aggressive than the Midpoint Price, except
when the order is an active order.\21\ If the offset amount would
result in the price of an Offset Peg order being in an increment
smaller than specified in IEX Rule 11.210, the price of a buy order
will be rounded down and the price of a sell order will be rounded up
to the nearest permissible increment. If no offset amount is specified,
the System will consider the offset amount to be zero.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See IEX Rule 1.160(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes two accommodating amendments to
other IEX rules. First, IEX Rule 11.190(a)(3) would be amended to
specify that an Offset Peg may be executed in sub-pennies if necessary
when the execution is at or constrained to the midpoint and the order
executes

at the Midpoint Price. This is consistent with the fact that midpoint
peg orders and Discretionary Peg orders can execute at a Midpoint Price
in sub-pennies.\22\ Second, the Exchange proposes amendments to IEX
Rule 11.190(h) to describe the manner in which Offset Peg orders will
operate in locked and crossed markets. Specifically, when the market
becomes locked, Offset Peg orders resting on or posting to the Order
Book will be priced at the less aggressive of the locking price plus or
minus an offset amount or the order's limit price, if any.\23\ However,
an Offset Peg with an offset amount that would otherwise result in the
order being priced more aggressive than the locking price will be
priced at the locking price pursuant to the Midpoint Price Constraint.
When the market becomes crossed, the Exchange considers the Midpoint
Price to be indeterminable,\24\ and resting Offset Peg orders that
would otherwise be subject to the Midpoint Price Constraint pursuant to
IEX Rule 11.190(h)(3)(D) (i.e., because the price of the order would be
more aggressive than the Midpoint Price) will be priced to be no more
aggressive than the crossing price, the lowest Protected Offer for buy
orders and the highest Protected Bid for sell orders. Further, as
proposed, Offset Peg orders resting on or posting to the Order Book
while the market is crossed are priced at the least aggressive of (1)
the crossing price (the lowest Protected Offer for buy orders and the
highest Protected Bid for sell orders) plus or minus an offset amount,
(2) the crossing price (the lowest Protected Offer for buy orders and
the highest Protected Bid for sell orders), or (3) the order's limit
price, if any.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ An execution at a sub-penny Midpoint Price is not
prohibited by Rule 612 under Regulation NMS so long as the execution
did not result from an impermissible sub-penny order or quotation.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005), 70 FR
37496, 37556 (June 29, 2005) (File No. S7-10-04) (``NMS Adopting
Release'').
    \23\ See IEX Rule 11.190(h)(3)(C).
    \24\ See IEX Rule 11.190(h)(3)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The methodology for pricing Offset Peg orders during locked and
crossed markets is designed to price such orders at the least
aggressive price that is consistent with the terms of the order so as
to avoid exacerbating the lock or cross.
    In addition, Offset Peg orders will not be eligible to trade when
the market is locked or crossed, and an Offset Peg order that would
otherwise be eligible to trade against an active order will surrender
its precedence on the Order Book for the duration of the System
processing the current active order, pursuant to IEX Rule 11.220(a)(5).
    The manner in which Offset Peg orders will operate in locked and
crossed markets (as proposed) is similar to the manner in which other
pegged order types operate, except that other pegged orders are
eligible to trade when the market is locked or crossed. Offset Peg
orders are designed to enable a market participant to capture part of
the spread between the NBBO; when the NBBO is locked or crossed there
is uncertainty as to the spread. Consequently, the Exchange believes
that Offset Peg orders should not trade in such circumstances.
    The Exchange notes that for many years other national securities
exchanges have offered order types that peg to the NBB and/or NBO plus
or minus an offset amount.\25\ In this regard, the Exchange notes that
this proposed rule change is substantially similar to order types
offered by the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``Arca'') and CBOE BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX''), each of which offer a
nondisplayed primary or market pegged order type or attribute that pegs
to the inside quotation on the same side of the market (i.e., the NBB
for a buy order and the NBO for a sell order) and may also specify an
aggressive or passive offset amount.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52449
(September 15, 2005), 70 FR 55647 (September 22, 2005) (File No. SR-
NASD-2005-107).
    \26\ See Nasdaq Rule 4703(d), NYSE Arca Rule 7.31-E(h)(1), and
Cboe BZX Rule 11.9(c)(8)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\27\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\28\ in particular, in that it is
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 facilitating transactions in
securities, and 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. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because it is designed
to increase competition among execution venues by providing an
additional pegged order type that market participants can use to trade
at an offset to the primary quote, as described in the Purpose section
and thereby enable the Exchange to better compete with order types on
other national securities exchanges that offer similar features to
market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, IEX believes that the proposal is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest in that the Offset Peg
order type would provide additional flexibility to market participants
in their use of pegging orders. As described in the Purpose section,
IEX already offers several different types of pegging orders that trade
with reference to the primary quote (Discretionary Peg and primary
peg), at the Midpoint Price (Midpoint Peg), and in some cases with the
ability to also exercise price discretion in specified circumstances
(Discretionary Peg and primary peg). As proposed, the Offset Peg order
would function in a similar manner but provide flexibility to market
participants to specify an offset to the primary quote. Such
functionality could be used for a number of purposes, including to
mitigate risk by posting an order at a price that is lower or higher
than the prevailing NBB or NBO. Although broker-dealers could implement
similar functionality on their own by consuming market data feeds and
sending limit orders to the Exchange at prices that are offset from the
NBBO, implementing this functionality through an exchange order type
ensures that it is widely available to market participants on a fair
and non-discriminatory basis. At the same time, the offset instruction
would be offered on a purely voluntary basis, and with flexibility for
Users to choose the amount of any offset, thereby providing flexibility
to continue using current pegged order types without a User specified
offset and to choose different offsets based on a User's specific
needs. The Exchange does not believe that providing flexibility to
Users to select the amount of any offset raises any significant or
novel concerns, since similar offset functionality is already available
on other national securities exchanges, as discussed in the Purpose
section.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See supra note 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, IEX believes that it is consistent with the Act to not
permit an Offset Peg order to trade when the market is locked or
crossed. While IEX's current pegged order types are eligible to trade
in such circumstances, they are repriced away from the locking and
crossing price (except for Midpoint Peg orders in a locked market which
continue to be priced at the locking Midpoint Price) which is designed
to

reduce the incidence of trading when the market is locked or crossed.
As noted in the Purpose section, Offset Peg orders are designed to
enable a market participant to capture part of the spread between the
NBBO; when the NBBO is locked or crossed there is uncertainty as to the
spread. Consequently, the Exchange believes that Offset Peg orders
should not trade in such circumstances.\30\ Moreover, similar order
types on other national securities exchange are explicitly not eligible
to trade in locked and crossed markets.\31\ Additionally, IEX believes
that the methodology for pricing Offset Peg orders during locked and
crossed markets is consistent with the Act because it is designed to
price such orders at the least aggressive price that is consistent with
the terms of the order so as to avoid exacerbating the lock or cross.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ In contrast, IEX's other pegged order types are designed to
enable a market participant to capture liquidity pursuant to the
terms of the order type so the Exchange has chosen not to impose a
restriction on trading in locked and crossed markets.
    \31\ See, e.g., NYSE Arca Rule 7.31-E(h)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange believes that it is consistent with the
Act to round the price of a buy order down and a sell order up to the
nearest permissible increment if the offset amount would result in the
price of an Offset Peg order being in an increment smaller than
specified in IEX Rule 11.210. Rounding assures that IEX is compliant
with Regulation NMS Rule 612 \32\ and IEX Rule 11.210. Moreover, this
approach is consistent with the way other national securities exchanges
handle pegged orders.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 17 CFR 242.612 and FAQs 8, 1, and 2 in Division of
Market Regulation: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Concerning Rule 612 (Minimum Pricing Increment) of Regulation NMS,
available at https://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/subpenny612faq.htm which provides that although exchanges (and
broker-dealers) may not accept and round orders in NMS stocks
explicitly priced in sub-penny increments (FAQs 8 and 1), they may
accept such orders when the order is not ``explicitly'' priced in an
impermissible sub-penny increment, meaning that a calculation must
be performed to obtain the price of the order, in which case the
exchange or broker-dealer may round the price of the stock to
determine the ``actual explicit price for the order.'' (FAQ 2). IEX
believes that Offset Peg orders would not be explicitly priced in
sub-penny increments even if the offset amount specified is in a
sub-penny increment because the Exchange would need to perform a
calculation to obtain the price of the order by applying the offset
amount to the NBB or NBO as applicable. Accordingly, IEX believes
that rounding as proposed is consistent with Rule 612 under
Regulation NMS and relevant FAQs, which provides that exchanges (and
broker-dealers) may not accept and round orders in NMS stocks
explicitly priced in sub-penny increments (FAQs 8 and 1), except for
when the order is not ``explicitly'' priced in an impermissible sub-
penny increment, in which case the exchange may round the price of
the stock to determine the ``actual explicit price for the order.''
(FAQ 2).
    \33\ See, e.g., Cboe U.S. Equities FIX Specification (Version
2.8.18) describing treatment of Tag 211 regarding ``Pegged
Difference'' available at https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/membership/Cboe_US_Equities_FIX_Specification.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, IEX does not believe that the proposed changes raise any new
or novel material issues that have not already been considered by the
Commission in connection with existing order types offered by the IEX
and other national securities exchanges.

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, the
proposal is a competitive response to similar order types available on
other exchanges.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Competing
exchanges have and can continue to adopt similar order types, subject
to the SEC rule change process, as discussed in the Purpose and
Statutory Basis sections.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See supra notes 26 and 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also does not believe that the proposed rule change
will impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. All Members
would be eligible to use an Offset Peg order type on the same terms.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) \35\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \36\
thereunder. Because the 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 and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \36\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change meets the
criteria of subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 \37\ because it is
substantially similar to order types previously approved or considered
by the Commission and as discussed in the Statutory Basis and Burden on
Competition sections.\38\ Thus, IEX does not believe that the proposed
changes raise any new or novel material issues that have not already
been considered by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \38\ See supra notes 26, 29, and 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \39\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-IEX-2020-16 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-IEX-2020-16. 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-IEX-
2020-16, and should be submitted on or before November 12, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-23257 Filed 10-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 46949]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19271]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2972-027]

City of Woonsocket; Notice of Technical Meeting

    a. Date and Time of Meeting: September 10, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.
Eastern Standard Time.
    b. Place: Telephone conference.
    c. FERC Contact: Patrick Crile at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or (202)
502-8042.
    d. Purpose of Meeting: As part of the relicensing of the Woonsocket
Falls Project No. 2972 (project), Commission Staff is hosting a
technical meeting to discuss: (1) The operation of the U.S. Army Corp
of Engineers' (Corps) Woonsocket Falls Dam; (2) the effect of the
Corps' operation of the Woonsocket Falls Dam on environmental resources
at the project; and (3) the status of the development of an operating
plan and Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Woonsocket and the
Corps regarding the hydropower project operation.
    e. A summary of the meeting will be prepared and filed in the
Commission's public file for the project.
    f. All local, state, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other
interested parties are invited to participate by phone. Please call
Patrick Crile at<PHONE_NUMBER> by September 9, 2019, to RSVP and to
receive specific instructions on how to participate in the meeting.

    Dated: August 30, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-19271 Filed 9-5-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 10, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 40490]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16696]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0286; Airspace Docket No. 11-AWP-22]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Area Navigation (RNAV) Routes; Southwestern
United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects a final rule published in the Federal
Register on June 14, 2012, that establishes two RNAV routes in the
southwest United States. This action corrects the latitude/longitude
coordinates for the NOCHI waypoint (WP) as appears in the description
of RNAV route T-310.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, July 26, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Airspace, Regulations
and ATC Procedures Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 14, 2012, the FAA published a final rule in the Federal
Register establishing two RNAV routes, T-306 and T-310, in the
southwestern United States (77 FR 35618). Subsequent to publication, an
error was found in the latitude/longitude coordinates for the NOCHI
waypoint (WP) in the description of T-310. The NOCHI WP also appears in
the description of T-306, but the coordinates are correct in that
description.
    Area Navigation Routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order
7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15, 2011, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV route listed in
this document will be published subsequently in the Order.

Correction to Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the
coordinates for the NOCHI waypoint as published in the Federal Register
on June 14, 2012 (77 FR 35618) (FR Doc. 2012-14406) for RNAV route T-
310, is corrected under the description as follows:

Paragraph 6011--United States Area Navigation Routes

* * * * *

T-310 [Corrected]

0
On page 35619, line 23, remove ``NOCHI, AZ WP (lat. 31[deg]59'58'' N.,
long. 108[deg]30'51'' W.)'' and insert ``NOCHI, AZ WP (Lat.
32[deg]02'00'' N., long. 109[deg]45'30'' W.)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2012.
Gary A. Norek,
Acting Manager, Airspace, Regulations and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2012-16696 Filed 7-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P