[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 234 (Thursday, December 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 66701]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26229]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87641; File No. SR-BOX-2019-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of
Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Adopt Rules Governing the Trading of Equity Securities on the
Exchange Through a Facility of the Exchange Known as the Boston
Security Token Exchange LLC

November 29, 2019.
    On September 27, 2019, BOX Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to adopt rules
governing the listing and trading of equity securities that would be
NMS stocks on the Exchange through a facility of the Exchange known as
the Boston Security Token Exchange LLC. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on October 18, 2019.\3\
The Commission has received no comment letters on the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87287 (October 11,
2019), 84 FR 56022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is December 2, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission hereby is extending the 45-day time period for
Commission action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds
that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to
take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time
to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ the Commission designates January 16, 2020, as
the date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the proposed
rule change (File No. SR-BOX-2019-19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.
    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-26229 Filed 12-4-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on September 11, 2003

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2003-15838

________________________________________________________________________
______________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of    United Parcel Service Co.    filed   8/1/03  for:

XX Allocation of four Russia overflight frequencies to provide the
following service:

Four one-way weekly eastbound flights between Cologne, Germany and Hong
Kong, over Tashkent.

Applicant rep:  David L. Vaughan<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:
Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted  (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   September 11, 2003, and
will remain in effect indefinitely, subject to conditions.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The Annexes to the U.S.-Russia Air Transport Agreement expired on
January 22, 2001.  However, the operations proposed by UPS are in
conformance with the Annexes agreed to by both sides ad referendum on
April 11, 2002.  Both sides, as agreed, have initiated the necessary
internal procedures for bringing these Annexes into force.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  XX Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

________________________

Conditions:  Consistent with our standard practice, once a carrier has
inaugurated service, all of its allocated frequencies are subject to a
90-day dormancy condition so that if any frequency is not used for a
period of 90 days, the allocation as to that unused frequency will
expire automatically and the frequency will revert to the Department for
reallocation.  The 90-day dormancy period for all frequencies will begin
on October 28, 2003, the start-up date proposed by UPS, or on the date
that UPS begins using the frequencies, whichever is earlier.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the exemption authority was consistent with the
public interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a
major regulatory action under the Energy, Policy and Conservation Act of
1975.  To the extent not granted or dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

2

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 217 (Monday, November 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66724-66728]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26596]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0362]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations for
Finished Pharmaceuticals

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the current good manufacturing
practice (CGMP) regulations for finished pharmaceuticals.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by January 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the
collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA
305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of

information they conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of information'' is
defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency
requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports,
keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal
Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning
each proposed collection of information, including each proposed
extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting
the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement,
FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set
forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Current Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations for Finished
Pharmaceuticals--21 CFR Parts 210 and 211 (OMB Control Number 0910-
0139)--Extension

    Under section 501(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 351(a)(2)(B)), a drug is adulterated if
the methods used in, or the facilities or controls used for, its
manufacture, processing, packing, or holding do not conform to or are
not operated or administered in conformity with CGMPs to ensure that
such drug meets the requirements of the FD&C Act as to safety, and has
the identity and strength, and meets the quality and purity
characteristics, which it purports or is represented to possess.
    The FDA has the authority under section 701(a) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 371(a)) to issue regulations for the efficient enforcement of
the FD&C Act regarding CGMP procedures for manufacturing, processing,
and holding drugs and drug products. The CGMP regulations help ensure
that drug products meet the statutory requirements for safety and have
their purported or represented identity, strength, quality, and purity
characteristics. The information collection requirements in the CGMP
regulations provide FDA with the necessary information to perform its
duty to protect public health and safety. CGMP requirements establish
accountability in the manufacturing and processing of drug products,
provide for meaningful FDA inspections, and enable manufacturers to
improve the quality of drug products over time. The CGMP recordkeeping
requirements also serve preventive and remedial purposes and provide
crucial information if it is necessary to recall a drug product.
    The general requirements for recordkeeping under part 211 (21 CFR
part 211) are set forth in Sec.  211.180. Any production, control, or
distribution record associated with a batch and required to be
maintained in compliance with part 211 must be retained for at least 1
year after the expiration date of the batch and, for certain over-the-
counter (OTC) drugs, 3 years after distribution of the batch (Sec.
211.180(a)). Records for all components, drug product containers,
closures, and labeling are required to be maintained for at least 1
year after the expiration date and 3 years for certain OTC products
(Sec.  211.180(b)).
    All part 211 records must be readily available for authorized
inspections during the retention period (Sec.  211.180(c)), and such
records may be retained either as original records or as true copies
(Sec.  211.180(d)). In addition, 21 CFR 11.2(a) provides that ``for
records required to be maintained but not submitted to the Agency,
persons may use electronic records in lieu of paper records or
electronic signatures in lieu of traditional signatures, in whole or in
part, provided that the requirements of this part are met.'' To the
extent this electronic option is used, the burden of maintaining paper
records should be substantially reduced, as should any review of such
records.
    In order to facilitate improvements and corrective actions, records
must be maintained so that data can be used for evaluating, at least
annually, the quality standards of each drug product to determine the
need for changes in drug product specifications or manufacturing or
control procedures (Sec.  211.180(e)). Written procedures for these
evaluations are to be established and include provisions for a review
of a representative number of batches and, where applicable, records
associated with the batch; provisions for a review of complaints,
recalls, returned, or salvaged drug products; and investigations
conducted under Sec.  211.192 for each drug product.
    The specific recordkeeping requirements provided in table 1 are as
follows:
    Section 211.34--Consultants advising on the manufacture,
processing, packing, or holding of drug products must have sufficient
education, training, and experience to advise on the subject for which
they are retained. Records must be maintained stating the name,
address, and qualifications of any consultants and the type of service
they provide.
    Section 211.67(c)--Records must be kept of maintenance, cleaning,
sanitizing, and inspection as specified in Sec. Sec.  211.180 and
211.182.
    Section 211.68--Appropriate controls must be exercised over
computer or related systems to assure that changes in master production
and control records or other records are instituted only by authorized
personnel.
    Section 211.68(a)--Records must be maintained of calibration
checks, inspections, and computer or related system programs for
automatic, mechanical, and electronic equipment.
    Section 211.68(b)--All appropriate controls must be exercised over
all computers or related systems and control data systems to assure
that changes in master production and control records or other records
are instituted only by authorized persons.
    Section 211.72--Filters for liquid filtration used in the
manufacture, processing, or packing of injectable drug products
intended for human use must not release fibers into such products.
    Section 211.80(d)--Each container or grouping of containers for
components or drug product containers or closures must be identified
with a distinctive code for each lot in each shipment received. This
code must be used in recording the disposition of each lot. Each lot
must be appropriately identified as to its status.
    Section 211.100(b)--Written production and process control
procedures must be followed in the execution of the various production
and process control functions and must be documented at the time of
performance. Any deviation from the written procedures must be recorded
and justified.
    Section 211.105(b)--Major equipment must be identified by a
distinctive identification number or code that must be recorded in the
batch production record to show the specific equipment used in the
manufacture of each batch of a drug product. In cases where only one of
a particular type of equipment exists in a manufacturing facility, the

name of the equipment may be used in lieu of a distinctive
identification number or code.
    Section 211.122(c)--Records must be maintained for each shipment
received of each different labeling and packaging material indicating
receipt, examination, or testing.
    Section 211.130(e)--Inspection of packaging and labeling facilities
must be made immediately before use to assure that all drug products
have been removed from previous operations. Inspection must also be
made to assure that packaging and labeling materials not suitable for
subsequent operations have been removed. Results of inspection must be
documented in the batch production records.
    Section 211.132(c)--Certain retail packages of OTC drug products
must bear a statement that is prominently placed so consumers are
alerted to the specific tamper-evident feature of the package. The
labeling statement is required to be so placed that it will be
unaffected if the tamper-resistant feature of the package is breached
or missing. If the tamper-evident feature chosen is one that uses an
identifying characteristic, that characteristic is required to be
referred to in the labeling statement.
    Section 211.132(d)--A request for an exemption from packaging and
labeling requirements by a manufacturer or packer is required to be
submitted in the form of a citizen petition under 21 CFR 10.30.
    Section 211.137--Requirements regarding product expiration dating
and compliance with 21 CFR 201.17.
    Section 211.160(a)--The establishment of any specifications,
standards, sampling plans, test procedures, or other laboratory control
mechanisms, including any change in such specifications, standards,
sampling plans, test procedures, or other laboratory control
mechanisms, must be drafted by the appropriate organizational unit and
reviewed and approved by the quality control unit. These requirements
must be followed and documented at the time of performance. Any
deviation from the written specifications, standards, sampling plans,
test procedures, or other laboratory control mechanisms must be
recorded and justified.
    Section 211.165(e)--The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and
reproducibility of test methods employed by a firm must be established
and documented. Such validation and documentation may be accomplished
in accordance with Sec.  211.194(a)(2).
    Section 211.166--Stability testing program for drug products.
    Section 211.173--Animals used in testing components, in-process
materials, or drug products for compliance with established
specifications must be maintained and controlled in a manner that
assures their suitability for their intended use. They must be
identified, and adequate records must be maintained showing the history
of their use.
    Section 211.180(e)--Written records required by part 211 must be
maintained so that data can be used for evaluating, at least annually,
the quality standards of each drug product to determine the need for
changes in drug product specifications or manufacturing or control
procedures. Written procedures must be established and followed for
such evaluations and must include provisions for a representative
number of batches, whether approved or unapproved or rejected, and a
review of complaints, recalls, returned, or salvaged drug products, and
investigations conducted under Sec.  211.192 for each drug product.
    Section 211.180(f)--Procedures must be established to assure that
the responsible officials of the firm, if they are not personally
involved in or immediately aware of such actions, are notified in
writing of any investigations, conducted under Sec.  211.198, 211.204,
or 211.208, any recalls, reports of inspectional observations issued,
or any regulatory actions relating to good manufacturing practices
brought by FDA.
    Section 211.182--Specifies requirements for equipment cleaning
records and the use log.
    Section 211.184--Specifies requirements for component, drug product
container, closure, and labeling records.
    Section 211.186--Specifies master production and control records
requirements.
    Section 211.188--Specifies batch production and control records
requirement.
    Section 211.192--Specifies the information that must be maintained
on the investigation of discrepancies found in the review of all drug
product production and control records by the quality control staff.
    Section 211.194--Explains and describes laboratory records that
must be retained.
    Section 211.196--Specifies the information that must be included in
records on the distribution of the drug.
    Section 211.198--Specifies and describes the handling of all
complaint files received by the applicant.
    Section 211.204--Specifies that records be maintained of returned
and salvaged drug products and describes the procedures involved.
    Written procedures, referred to here as standard operating
procedures (SOPs), are required for many part 211 records. The current
SOP requirements were initially provided in a final rule published in
the Federal Register of September 29, 1978 (43 FR 45014), and are now
an integral and familiar part of the drug manufacturing process. The
major information collection impact of SOPs results from their
creation. Thereafter, SOPs need to be periodically updated. A combined
estimate for routine maintenance of SOPs is provided in table 1. The 25
SOP provisions under part 211 in the combined maintenance estimate
include:
    Section 211.22(d)--Responsibilities and procedures of the quality
control unit;
    Section 211.56(b)--Sanitation procedures;
    Section 211.56(c)--Use of suitable rodenticides, insecticides,
fungicides, fumigating agents, and cleaning and sanitizing agents;
    Section 211.67(b)--Cleaning and maintenance of equipment;
    Section 211.68(a)--Proper performance of automatic, mechanical, and
electronic equipment;
    Section 211.80(a)--Receipt, identification, storage, handling,
sampling, testing, and approval or rejection of components and drug
product containers or closures;
    Section 211.94(d)--Standards or specifications, methods of testing,
and methods of cleaning, sterilizing, and processing to remove
pyrogenic properties for drug product containers and closures;
    Section 211.100(a)--Production and process control;
    Section 211.110(a)--Sampling and testing of in-process materials
and drug products;
    Section 211.113(a)--Prevention of objectionable microorganisms in
drug products not required to be sterile;
    Section 211.113(b)--Prevention of microbiological contamination of
drug products purporting to be sterile, including validation of any
sterilization process;
    Section 211.115(a)--System for reprocessing batches that do not
conform to standards or specifications, to insure that reprocessed
batches conform with all established standards, specifications, and
characteristics;
    Section 211.122(a)--Receipt, identification, storage, handling,
sampling, examination and/or testing of labeling and packaging
materials;

    Section 211.125(f)--Control procedures for the issuance of
labeling;
    Section 211.130--Packaging and label operations, prevention of
mixup and cross contamination, identification and handling of filed
drug product containers that are set aside and held in unlabeled
condition, and identification of the drug product with a lot or control
number that permits determination of the history of the manufacture and
control of the batch;
    Section 211.142--Warehousing;
    Section 211.150--Distribution of drug products;
    Section 211.160--Laboratory controls;
    Section 211.165(c)--Testing and release for distribution;
    Section 211.166(a)--Stability testing;
    Section 211.167--Special testing requirements;
    Section 211.180(f)--Notification of responsible officials of
investigations, recalls, reports of inspectional observations, and any
regulatory actions relating to good manufacturing practice;
    Section 211.198(a)--Written and oral complaint procedures,
including quality control unit review of any complaint involving
specifications failures, and serious and unexpected adverse drug
experiences;
    Section 211.204--Holding, testing, and reprocessing of returned
drug products; and
    Section 211.208--Drug product salvaging.
    In addition, the following regulations in parts 610 and 680 (21 CFR
parts 610 and 680) reference certain CGMP regulations in part 211:
Sec. Sec.  610.12(g), 610.13(a)(2), 610.18(d), 680.2(f), and 680.3(f).
In table 1, the burden associated with the information collection
requirements in these regulations is included in the burden estimates
under Sec. Sec.  211.165, 211.167, 211.188, and 211.194, as
appropriate.
    Although most of the CGMP provisions covered in this document were
created many years ago, there will be some existing firms expanding
into new manufacturing areas and startup firms that will need to create
SOPs. As provided in table 1, FDA is assuming that approximately 100
firms will have to create up to 25 SOPs for a total of 2,500 records,
and the Agency estimates that it will take 20 hours per recordkeeper to
create 25 new SOPs for a total of 50,000 hours.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                   Table 1--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Number of
                21 CFR Section                    Number of      records per    Total annual        Average burden per recordkeeping        Total hours
                                                recordkeepers   recordkeeper       records
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOP Maintenance..............................           4,360            1              4,360  25.......................................         109,000
New startup SOPs.............................             100           25               2500  20.......................................          50,000
211.34--Consultants..........................           4,360             .25           1,090  0.50 (30 minutes)........................             545
211.67(c)--Equipment cleaning and maintenance           4,360           50            218,000  .25 (15 minutes).........................          54,500
211.68--Changes in master production and                4,360            2              8,720  1........................................           8,720
 control records or other records.
211.68(a)--Automatic, mechanical, and                   4,360           10             43,600  .50 (30 minutes).........................          21,800
 electronic equipment.
211.68(b)--Computer or related systems.......           4,360            5             21,800  .25 (15 minutes).........................           5,450
211.72--Filters..............................           4,360             .25           1,090  1........................................           1,090
211.80(d)--Components and drug product                  4,360             .25           1,090  .10 (6 minutes)..........................             109
 containers or closures.
211.100(b)--Production and process controls..           4,360            3             13,080  2........................................          26,160
211.105(b)--Equipment identification.........           4,360             .25           1,090  .25 (15 minutes).........................             273
211.122(c)--Labeling and packaging material..           4,360           50            218,000  .25 (15 minutes).........................          54,500
211.130(e)--Labeling and packaging facilities           4,360           50            218,000  .25 (15 minutes).........................          54,500
211.132(c)--Tamper-evident packaging.........           1,769           20             35,380  .50 (30 minutes).........................          17,690
211.132(d)--Tamper-evident packaging.........           1,769             .2              354  .50 (30 minutes).........................             177
211.137--Expiration dating...................           4,360            5             21,800  .50 (30 minutes).........................          10,900
211.160(a)--Laboratory controls..............           4,360            2              8,720  1........................................           8,720
211.165(e)--Test methodology.................           4,360            1              4,360  1........................................           4,360
211.166--Stability testing...................           4,360            2              8,720  .50 (30 minutes).........................           4,360
211.173--Laboratory animals..................           1,077            1              1,077  .25 (15 minutes).........................             269
211.180(e)--Production, control, and                    4,360             .2              872  .25 (15 minutes).........................             218
 distribution records.
211.180(f)--Procedures for notification of              4,360             .2              872  1........................................             872
 regulatory actions.
211.182--Equipment cleaning and use log......           4,360            2              8,720  .25 (15 minutes).........................           2,180
211.184--Component, drug product container,             4,360            3             13,080  .50 (30 minutes).........................           6,540
 closure, and labeling records.
211.186--Master production and control                  4,360           10             43,600  2........................................          87,200
 records.
211.188--Batch production and control records           4,360           25            109,000  2........................................         218,000
211.192--Discrepancies in drug product                  4,360            2              8,720  1........................................           8,720
 production and control records.
211.194--Laboratory records..................           4,360           25            109,000  .50 (30 minutes).........................          54,500
211.196--Distribution records................           4,360           25            109,000  .25 (15 minutes).........................          27,250
211.198--Compliant files.....................           4,360            5             21,800  1........................................          21,800
211.204--Returned drug products..............           4,360           10             43,600  .50 (30 minutes).........................          21,800
                                              ------------------------------------------------                                           ---------------
    Total....................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .........................................         882,203
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Dated: November 4, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-26596 Filed 11-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 92 (Tuesday, May 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27365-27366]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10964]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0040]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
5 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from
the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not compromise
safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemption renewals
will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than
the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective June 6, 2014. Comments must be
received on or before June 12, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [Docket No. FMCSA-2012-
0040], using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level 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. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such

exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 5 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 5 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Rudolph Bisschop (MA)
Richard Doroba (IL)
Steven Martin (IL)
Tommy Thomas (CA)
Malcolm J. Tilghman, Sr. (DE)

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 5 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (77 FR 23799; 77 FR 33558). Each of these 5 applicants has
requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing
that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement
specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is
stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving
with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years
indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
requirements.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by June 12, 2014.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 5 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket numbers FMCSA-2012-0040 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2012-0040 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: April 28, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-10964 Filed 5-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1767-1768]
[DOCID:fr13ja10-48]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

December 28, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP10-254-000.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC submits Eighth Revised
Sheet 394 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1 to be
effective 1/13/10.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0048.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-255-000.
    Applicants: Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline submits Original Sheet
9S et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-256-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Pipeline GP.
    Description: Northwest Pipeline, GP submits Fifth Revised Sheet 395
et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-257-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline, LLC submits Original Sheet
11B to its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-258-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits 12 Revised Sheet
66B.35 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0044.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-259-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company,

    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits
First Revised Sheet 502 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised
Volume 1, to be effective 1/18/10.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-260-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits
First Revised Sheet 336 et al. to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised
Volume 1 to be effective 1/18/10.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0042.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 30, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-261-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits 13 Revised Sheet
66B.35 to FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1 to be effective 12/
22/09.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-0041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-262-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Co, LP submits First Revised Sheet
No. 2500 to FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091223-0091.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-264-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits an
amendment to an existing Firm Transportation Rate Discount Agreement
with The Board of Trustees of University of Illinois, to be effective
1/1/10.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091224-0019.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-265-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, LP.
    Description: Equitrans, LP submits Fifteenth Revised Sheet 11 to
FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be effective 1/1/10.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091224-0018.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-266-000.
    Applicants: Sabine Pipe Line LLC.
    Description: Sabine Pipe Line LLC submits Original Sheet No. 310B
et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091224-0020.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-267-000.
    Applicants: Bear Creek Storage Company, LLC.
    Description: Notice of name change for Bear Creek Storage Company
to Bear Creek Storage Company, LLC of Bear Creek Storage Company.
    Filed Date: 12/21/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091221-5134.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP10-268-000.
    Applicants: Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Trans. LLC.
    Description: Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC Submits
2009 Reconciliation Filing.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091222-5236.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-461 Filed 1-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


 We believe that moving to quarterly LDAR for gas well sites and high-GOR oil wells would yield additional reductions that are cost-effective, net-beneficial; and that such an approach is implementable and supported by the record.
 Cost-Effectiveness: According to EPA's TSD and RIA, quarterly monitoring is highly cost-effective. At a quarterly LDAR frequency, the cost/ton of CO2e is $728 and $1,686 for gas and oil sites, respectively. However, because LDAR for low-GOR wells is less cost-effective than gas and oil wells because of their lower emissions, we propose retaining semiannual LDAR for these sites.
 Additional Emissions Reductions: This alternative would capture an additional 1 to 2 million metric tons CO2e annually, achieve an additional 10 MMTCO2e of cumulative reductions between 2020 and 2025 (and more thereafter), and would be net beneficial in 2025, even when not accounting for the benefits of VOC and HAP reductions.
 Net Benefits: EPA's break-even analysis makes clear that quarterly LDAR for all well sites (Option 3) would be net beneficial if the very significant benefits of reducing emissions of VOCs and HAPs were appropriately considered, and accordingly quarterly LDAR for all well sites except semiannual for low-GOR wells would be even more net beneficial.
 Implementation: As EPA already makes a distinction for low-GOR in other sections of the rule (and proposes to do so in the ICR), we find this alternative reasonable. Well sites that are determined to be low-GOR are exempted from making well-completions. The agency notes that this determination can be made in advance of a well completion, and that same determination could serve to categorize wells for LDAR frequency. Additionally, the agency makes the same distinction in its draft ICR, noting that it already has "estimates of the gas-to-oil ratio (GOR), from which we designate well type, for nearly all wells" and is taking comment on using GOR to stratify wells into different categories which impact "types of processes or equipment present at the site and the magnitude of emissions from these sources."  To address implementation concerns related to weather, the rule could include an exemption for quarterly for weather reasons, as is done for compressor sites.
 Record Support: Industry comments on the current use of low-GOR to differentiate wells for well completion requirements were universally supportive, and major industry associations -- API, Western Energy Alliance, American Exploration and Production Council, Idaho Petroleum Council, Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico, La Plata County Energy Council, Montana Petroleum Association, New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, North Dakota Petroleum Council, Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association, and Utah Petroleum Association -- urged EPA to use the low-GOR distinction in the LDAR context as well to categorize wells, arguing that wells with low-GOR produce lower emissions (and they urged that these wells be entirely exempted from LDAR).
 Additional Considerations:
 Using GOR to put wells into categories that determine LDAR frequency would be similar to the tiered approach that Colorado and Utah use in order to achieve greater emission reductions  -  Colorado sorts wells based on VOC emissions, and Utah sorts wells based on throughput.
 Retaining low-GOR wells at semiannual is appropriate since they emit fewer emissions than the other two well types and therefore they have a higher cost per ton of abatement. (see table below)

                                  Model Plant
                       Baseline CH4 Emissions (Tons/yr)
Gas Well
                                                                           5.50
Oil Well (GOR < 300)
                                                                           1.23
Oil w/ Associated Gas
                                                                           2.75


ND Dept. of Health, Division of Air Quality Comments (prepared by Adam M. Miller, Environmental Scientist) on:

"Update on Proposed Rules and Draft Guidelines for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry" 1:30-3:00pm (Central Time) conference call on 11/30/2015.

There was some talk about the appropriate frequency of optical gas imaging (OGI) inspections by producers.  It does not appear an appropriate OGI inspection frequency has been determined, and that producers could "get credit" for not finding leaks by reducing the frequency of required OGI inspections at facilities that were not found to have leaks.  This all sounds good in theory; however, there are perhaps some factors not yet considered.

From experience using the FLIR GF 320 camera at oil and gas production facilities:
The ability to detect leaks with an OGI camera depends on several factors, not the least of which is the skill of the camera operator using the camera.  Most cameras will have an `automatic' setting but this automatic setting is not good at finding what may be considered "small leaks".  The `manual' setting allows an operator to tune the camera to the environmental conditions to effectively identify volatile organic compound (VOC) leaks, but requires a degree of skill.
Another factor that contributes to whether or not an operator of an OGI camera is able to find leaks is the weather conditions, and location of the sun at the time of the inspection.  The camera sensors would be ruined by looking directly at the sun with the camera.  This sometimes limits where a camera operator can be standing in relation to a potential emission source (tanks, piping, elbows, valves, etc) and in some cases will prevent the camera operator from detecting certain minor leaks.  The inability to detect leaks is also amplified by cold (32 degrees F and below) and windy (20+ mph wind).  The cameras do not work well in adverse weather conditions (cold, wind, rain, or snow).  Adverse weather conditions are typical of North Dakota winters.  In practice, some days are better than others for using the camera to detect leaks.
The absence of fluid in storage tanks may also contribute to an inability to detect leaks.  It is difficult or nearly impossible to detect leaks using OGI shortly after trucks drain production fluid out of the storage tanks.  The facility may have leaking equipment but because of the timing of inspection (storage tanks without fluid) no leak will be detected.
Complicating our ability using OGI to determine whether a facility has VOC leaks or will leak in the near future is the useful life of some of the equipment (seals and gaskets).  It is possible that a facility with no detectable leaks one month may be a major source of fugitive emissions the following month due to equipment failures.  Degradation of thief hatch gaskets seems to occur regularly.  It is unclear how often these types of seals should be changed out, but it would be reasonable to require every producer to implement a preventative maintenance program (based on an average useful life) for seals to give some assurance that these seals are more-likely-than-not in good condition and capable of functioning properly.
OGI is a great tool, but it has limitations.  The danger of relying on only OGI inspections as "The Standard" for preventing leaks is that it may cause producers to wait until a leak is detected before action is taken.  Operating a "Find-and-Fix Program" without a preventative maintenance component has the potential to increase fugitive emissions overall.  In such as case, if a leak develops shortly after an OGI inspection, then it is possible nobody corrects the malfunction until it is revealed during the next OGI inspection (which may occur on an annual, semi-annual, or quarterly basis).

Additionally, allowing for a reduction in the frequency of inspections for companies that do not find leaks at their facilities incentivizes companies either to falsify reports, or conduct OGI inspections poorly so as not to detect leaks which would be opposite of the goals.  Maintaining a standard without allowing for the relaxation of the standard is an important part of operating an adequate leak detection program.  Clearly defining the inspection frequency for all facilities, and not allowing a change in frequency for good behavior, would eliminate confusion that may develop relative to timing of OGI inspections.  Any incentives must be in line with EPA's goals and not counter to them.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 127 (Wednesday, July 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39645-39649]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14113]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89151; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2020-033]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Options 9, Sections 13 and 15 To Increase the Position and
Exercise Limits for Options on the SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF
Trust

June 25, 2020.
    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 June 17, 2020, 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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend The Nasdaq Options Market LLC's
(``NOM'') Options 9, Section 13, Position Limits, to increase position
limits for options on the SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF Trust
(``SPY''), and similarly increase exercise limits within Options 9,
Section 15, Exercise Limits.
    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 proposes to amend Options 9, Section 13, Position
Limits, to increase position limits for options on SPY. The Exchange's
position limits are incorporated by reference to Cboe Exchange, Inc.
(``Cboe''), except for SPY.\3\ The proposed amendments to SPY are based
on the similar proposal by Cboe.\4\ The Exchange also proposes to make
minor non-substantive technical corrections to Options 9, Section 13
and Options 9, Section 15. Each change will be described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Options 9, Section 13(a)(1). The Exchange notes that
with respect to U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency Options, those
position limits are incorporated by reference to Phlx. See Options
9, Section 13(a)(4).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88768 (April 29,
2020) (SR-CBOE-2020-015) (Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 1 and
Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1, to Increase Position Limits for Options
on Certain Exchange-Traded Funds and Indexes). The Cboe proposal
also proposed to increase position limits for options overlying a
number of ETFs as well as the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (``MXEF'')
and the MSCI EAFE Index (``MXEA''). The Exchange's proposal only
proposes an increase to the position (and exercise limits) for
options overlying SPY. NOM does not list options on MXEF and MXEA.
Also, other options and Exchange-Traded Fund position limits, which
were amended in Cboe's rule change, have already been increased on
NOM because NOM's rules at Options 9, Section 13 and Options 9,
Section 15 incorporate its position limits and exercise limits to
Cboe, except for SPY. Accordingly, this proposal is limited to SPY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Position limits are designed to address potential manipulative
schemes and adverse market impacts surrounding the use of options, such
as disrupting the market in the security underlying the options. While
position limits should address and discourage the potential for
manipulative schemes and adverse market impact, if such limits are set
too low, participation in the options market may be discouraged. The
Exchange believes that position limits must therefore be balanced
between mitigating concerns of any potential manipulation and the cost
of inhibiting potential hedging activity that could be used for
legitimate economic purposes.
    The Exchange has observed an ongoing increase in demand in options
on the SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF Trust (``SPY'') for both
trading and hedging purposes. Though the demand for options on SPY
appear to have increased, position limits (and corresponding exercise
limits) for options on SPY have remained the same. The Exchange
believes these unchanged position limits may have impeded, and may
continue to impede, trading activity and strategies of investors, such
as use of effective hedging vehicles or income generating strategies
(e.g., buy-write or put-write), and the ability of Market Makers to
make liquid markets with tighter spreads in these options, resulting in
the transfer of volume to over-the-counter (``OTC'') markets. OTC
transactions occur through bilateral agreements, the terms of which are
not publically disclosed to the marketplace. As such, OTC transactions
do not contribute to the price discovery process on a public exchange
or other lit markets. Therefore, the Exchange believes that the
proposed increase for position limits (and exercise limits) on options
on SPY may enable liquidity providers to provide additional liquidity
to the Exchange and other market participants to transfer their
liquidity demands from OTC markets to the Exchange, as well as other
options exchange on which they participate. As described in further
detail below, the Exchange believes that the continuously increasing
market capitalization of SPY and SPY component securities, as well as
the highly liquid markets for those securities, reduces the concerns
for potential market manipulation and/or disruption in the underlying
markets upon increasing position limits, while the rising demand for
trading options on SPY for legitimate economic purposes compels an
increase in position limits (and corresponding exercise limits).
Proposed Position Limits for Options on SPY
    Options 9, Section 13 sets forth the position limit for options on
SPY. The Exchange proposes to amend Options 9, Section 13 to double the
position limits for options on SPY. The current position limit for
options on SPY is 1,800,000 and the proposed position limit for options
on SPY is 3,600,000. The Exchange represents that SPY qualifies for the
initial listing criteria set forth in Options 4, Section 3(i) for ETFs.
In addition, the Exchange is making corresponding amendments to
exercise limits for options on SPY within Options 9, Section 15.
Composition and Growth Analysis for SPY
    As stated above, position (and exercise) limits are intended to
prevent the establishment of options positions that can be used or
might create incentives to manipulate the underlying market so as to
benefit options positions. The Commission has recognized that these
limits are designed to minimize the potential for

mini-manipulations and for corners or squeezes of the underlying
market, as well as serve to reduce the possibility for disruption of
the options market itself, especially in illiquid classes.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67672 (August 15,
2012), 77 FR 50750 (August 22, 2012) (SR-NYSEAmex-2012-29).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SPY as well as SPY components are highly liquid, and are based on a
broad set of highly liquid securities and other reference assets, as
demonstrated through the trading statistics presented in this proposal.
Indeed, the Commission recognized the liquidity of the securities
comprising the underlying interest of SPY and permitted no position
limits on SPY options from 2012 through 2018.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69180 (March 19,
2013), 78 FR 17962 (March 25, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-046), which
implemented a pilot program that ran through 2017, during which
there were no position limits for options on SPY. The Exchange notes
that throughout the duration of the pilot program it was not aware
of any problems created or adverse consequences as of result of the
pilot program. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83421
(June 13, 2018), 83 FR 28474 (June 19, 2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2018-044).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To support the proposed position limit increase (and corresponding
increase in exercise limit), the Exchange considered both the liquidity
of SPY and the component securities of SPY, as well as the availability
of economically equivalent products to the overlying option and its
respective position limit. SPY is based upon S&P 500 Index, and
therefore the options on SPY are economically equivalent to the options
on the index, which have no position limits. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes the position limit of 3,600,000 contracts is appropriate for
options on SPY.
    The Exchange is presenting data collected by Cboe as part of its
initial filing to increase the position and exercise limit on SPY, that
the Commission approved,\7\ following trading statistics regarding
shares of and options on SPY, as well as the component securities:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See supra note 3.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Shares                         Total market cap
       Product           ADV \8\ (ETF       ADV (option        outstanding     Fund market cap       of ETF
                           shares)           contracts)        (ETFs) \9\           (USD)        components \10\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPY.................  70.3 million.....  2.8 million......  968.7 million...  312.9 billion...  29.3 trillion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is presenting the following data collected by Cboe as
part of its initial filing, that the Commission has approved,\11\ for
the same trading statistics, where applicable, as above regarding a
sample of other ETFs, as well as the current position limits for
options on such ETFs pursuant to Options 9, Section 13, to draw
comparisons in support of a proposed position limit increase for
options on SPY (see further discussion below):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Cboe's Average daily volume (ADV) data for ETF shares and
options contracts are for all of 2019. Additionally, reference to
ADV in ETF shares, and ETF options herein this proposal are for all
of 2019, unless otherwise indicated.
    \9\ See Amendment No. 1 to SR-CBOE-2020-015, at page 4,
available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2020-015/srcboe2020015-7081714-215592.pdf (``Amendment No. 1'').
    \10\ See Amendment No. 1, at page 4.
    \11\ See supra note 4.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Current
         Product              ADV (ETF shares)       ADV (option     Shares outstanding     Fund market cap (USD)   Total market cap of      position
                                                     contracts)            (ETFs)                                      ETF components         limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QQQ......................  30.2 million..........         670,200  410.3 million.........  88.7 billion..........  10.1 trillion........       1,800,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that, overall, the liquidity in the shares of
SPY and in the component securities of SPY and in its overlying
options, as well as the large market capitalizations and structure of
SPY support the proposal to increase the position limit for SPY (and
corresponding exercise limit). Given the robust liquidity and
capitalization in SPY and in the component securities of SPY the
Exchange does not anticipate that the proposed increase in position
limits would create significant price movements. Also, the Exchange
believes the market capitalization of the underlying component
securities of the S&P 500 Index are large enough to adequately absorb
potential price movements that may be caused by large trades.
    The following analysis for SPY, which the Exchange agrees with in
support of this proposal, as well as the statistics presented in
support thereof, were presented by Cboe in their initial filing, which
was approved by the Commission.\12\ The Exchange notes that SPY tracks
the performance of the S&P 500 Index, which is an index of diversified
large cap U.S. companies.\13\ It is composed of 505 selected stocks
spanning over approximately 24 separate industry groups. The S&P 500 is
one of the most commonly followed equity indices, and is widely
considered to be the best indicator of stock market performance as a
whole. SPY is one of the most actively traded ETFs, and, since
2017,\14\ its ADV has increased from approximately 64.6 million shares
to 70.3 million shares by the end of 2019. Similarly, its ADV in
options contracts has increased from 2.6 million to 2.8 million through
2019.\15\ As noted, the demand for options trading on SPY has continued
to increase, however, the position limits have remained the same, which
the Exchange believes may have impacted growth in SPY option volume
from 2017 through 2019. The Exchange also notes that SPY shares are
more liquid than INVESCO QQQ Trust\SM\, Series 1 (``QQQ'') shares,
which is also currently subject to a position limit of 1,800,000
contracts. Specifically, SPY currently experiences over twice the ADV
in shares and over four times the ADV in options than that of QQQ.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra note 4.
    \13\ See SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust, available at https://www.ssga.com/us/en/individual/etfs/funds/spdr-sp-500-etf-trust-spy
(January 21, 2020).
    \14\ See supra note 4.
    \15\ See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83421 (June
13, 2018), 83 FR 28474 (June 19, 2018) (SR-NASDAQ-2018-044). (Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend The Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOM'') Rules at Supplementary
Material to Chapter III, Section 7, Entitled ``Position Limits,''
and Section 9, Entitled ``Exercise Limits'').
    \16\ The 2019 ADV for QQQ shares is 30.2 million and for options
on QQQ is 670,200.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Creation and Redemption for ETFs
    The Exchange believes that the creation and redemption process for
ETFs will lessen the potential for manipulative activity with options
on SPY. When an ETF provider wants to create more shares, it looks to
an Authorized Participant (generally a market maker or other large
financial institution) to acquire the securities the

ETF is to hold. For instance, when an ETF is designed to track the
performance of an index, the Authorized Participant can purchase all
the constituent securities in the exact same weight as the index, then
deliver those shares to the ETF provider. In exchange, the ETF provider
gives the Authorized Participant a block of equally valued ETF shares,
on a one-for-one fair value basis. The price is based on the net asset
value, not the market value at which the ETF is trading. The creation
of new ETF units can be conducted during an entire trading day, and is
not subject to position limits. This process works in reverse where the
ETF provider seeks to decrease the number of shares that are available
to trade. The creation and redemption process, therefore, creates a
direct link to the underlying components of the ETF, and serves to
mitigate potential price impact of the ETF shares that might otherwise
result from increased position limits for the ETF options.
    The Exchange understands that the ETF creation and redemption
process seeks to keep an ETF's share price trading in line with the
ETF's underlying net asset value. Because an ETF trades like a stock,
its share price will fluctuate during the trading day, due to simple
supply and demand. If demand to buy an ETF is high, for instance, the
ETF's share price might rise above the value of its underlying
securities. When this happens, the Authorized Participant believes the
ETF may now be overpriced, so it may buy shares of the component
securities and then sell ETF shares in the open market (i.e.,
creations). This may drive the ETF's share price back toward the
underlying net asset value. Likewise, if the ETF share price starts
trading at a discount to the securities it holds, the Authorized
Participant can buy shares of the ETF and redeem them for the
underlying securities (i.e., redemptions). Buying undervalued ETF
shares may drive the share price of the ETF back toward fair value.
This arbitrage process helps to keep an ETF's share price in line with
the value of its underlying portfolio.
Surveillance and Reporting Requirements
    The Exchange believes that increasing the position limits for the
options on SPY would lead to a more liquid and competitive market
environment for these options, which will benefit customers interested
in trading these products. The reporting requirement for the options on
SPY would remain unchanged. Thus, the Exchange would still require that
each Participant that maintains positions in the options on the same
side of the market, for its own account or for the account of a
customer, report certain information to the Exchange. This information
would include, but would not be limited to, the options' positions,
whether such positions are hedged and, if so, a description of the
hedge(s). Market Makers would continue to be exempt from this reporting
requirement, however, the Exchange may access Market-Maker position
information.\17\ Moreover, the Exchange's requirement that Participants
file reports with the Exchange for any customer who held aggregate
large long or short positions on the same side of the market of 200 or
more options contracts of any single class for the previous day will
remain at this level for the options subject to this proposal and will
continue to serve as an important part of the Exchange's surveillance
efforts.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') through the
Large Option Position Reporting (``LOPR'') system acts as a
centralized service provider for Participant compliance with
position reporting requirements by collecting data from each
Participant, consolidating the information, and ultimately providing
detailed listings of each Participant's report to the Exchange, as
well as Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''),
acting as its agent pursuant to a regulatory services agreement
(``RSA'').
    \18\ See Options 6E, Section 2 for reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the existing surveillance procedures and
reporting requirements at the Exchange and other SROs are capable of
properly identifying disruptive and/or manipulative trading activity.
The Exchange also represents that it has adequate surveillances in
place to detect potential manipulation, as well as reviews in place to
identify potential changes in composition of SPY and continued
compliance with the Exchange's listing standards. These procedures
utilize daily monitoring of market activity via automated surveillance
techniques to identify unusual activity in both options and the
underlyings, as applicable.\19\ The Exchange also notes that large
stock holdings must be disclosed to the Commission by way of Schedules
13D or 13G,\20\ which are used to report ownership of stock which
exceeds 5% of a company's total stock issue and may assist in providing
information in monitoring for any potential manipulative schemes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The Exchange believes these procedures have been effective
for the surveillance of trading the options subject to this
proposal, and will continue to employ them.
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.13d-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the current financial requirements
imposed by the Exchange and by the Commission adequately address
concerns regarding potentially large, unhedged positions in the options
on SPY. Current margin and risk-based haircut methodologies serve to
limit the size of positions maintained by any one account by increasing
the margin and/or capital that a Participant must maintain for a large
position held by itself or by its customer.\21\ In addition, Rule 15c3-
1 \22\ imposes a capital charge on Participants to the extent of any
margin deficiency resulting from the higher margin requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Options 6C, Section 3 for a description of margin
requirements.
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.15c3-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical Corrections
    The Exchange proposes to: (1) Update the Chicago Board Options
Exchange to Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') as the name of this self-
regulatory organization has changed; (2) rename the SPDR[supreg] S&P
500[supreg] exchange-traded fund (``SPY ETF'' or ``SPY'') as
``SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF Trust (SPY) to update the name of
this product; (3) amend ``Customer'' to ``customer'' as this reference
refers to the customer of a Participant; and (4) amend ``PHLX'' to
``Phlx.''
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.\23\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \24\ 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 the
Section 6(b)(5) \25\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed increase in position limit
for options on the SPY will remove

impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest, because it will provide market participants with the
ability to more effectively execute their trading and hedging
activities. The proposed increase will allow market participants to
more fully implement hedging strategies in related derivative products
and to further use options to achieve investment strategies (e.g.,
there are Exchange-Traded Products (``ETPs'') that use options on SPY
as part of their investment strategy, and the applicable position
limits (and corresponding exercise limits) as they stand today may
inhibit these ETPs in achieving their investment objectives, to the
detriment of investors). Also, increasing the applicable position
limits may allow Market Makers to provide the markets for these options
with more liquidity in amounts commensurate with increased consumer
demand in such markets. The proposed position limit increases may also
encourage other liquidity providers to shift liquidity, as well as
encourage consumers to shift demand, from over the counter markets onto
the Exchange, which will enhance the process of price discovery
conducted on the Exchange through increased order flow.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that the structure of SPY, the
considerable market capitalization of the fund, underlying component
securities and the liquidity of the markets for the applicable options
and underlying component securities will mitigate concerns regarding
potential manipulation of the products and/or disruption of the
underlying markets upon increasing the relevant position limits. As a
general principle, increases in market capitalizations, active trading
volume, and deep liquidity of securities deters manipulation and/or
disruption. This general principle applies to the recently observed
increased levels of market capitalization, trading volume, and
liquidity in SPY, and the components of the Underlying ETFs [sic] (as
described above). The Exchange does not believe that the options
markets or underlying markets would become susceptible to manipulation
and/or disruption as a result of the proposed position limit increases.
Indeed, the Commission has previously expressed the belief that
removing position and exercise limits may bring additional depth and
liquidity to the options markets without increasing concerns regarding
intermarket manipulation or disruption of the options or the underlying
securities.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62147 (October 28,
2005) (SR-CBOE-2005-41), at 62149.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange notes that the proposed rule change to
increase position limits for select actively traded options, is not
novel and has been previously approved by the Commission. The proposed
increase to the position and exercise limits on SPY has recently been
approved by the Commission.\27\ The Commission has previously approved,
on a pilot basis, eliminating position limits for options on SPY.\28\
In approving increases in position limits in the past, the Commission
relied heavily upon the exchange's surveillance capabilities,
expressing trust in the enhanced surveillances and reporting safeguards
that the exchange took in order to detect and deter possible
manipulative behavior which might arise from eliminating position and
exercise limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra note 4.
    \28\ See supra notes 9 and 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's surveillance and reporting safeguards continue to be
designed to deter and detect possible manipulative behavior that might
arise from increasing or eliminating position and exercise limits in
certain classes. The Exchange believes that the current financial
requirements imposed by the Exchange and by the Commission adequately
address concerns regarding potentially large, unhedged position in the
options on SPY, further promoting just and equitable principles of
trading, the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and the
protection of investors.
Technical Corrections
    The Exchange's proposal to make various technical amendments,
within Options 9, Section 13 and Options 9, Section 15 to: (1) Update
the Chicago Board Options Exchange to Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') as
the name of this self-regulatory organization has changed; (2) rename
the SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] exchange-traded fund (``SPY ETF'' or
``SPY'') as ``SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF Trust (SPY) to update
the name of this product; (3) amend ``Customer'' to ``customer'' as
this reference refers to the customer of a Participant; and (4) amend
``PHLX'' to ``Phlx.'' Accordingly, these amendments are non-substantive
technical changes which add clarity to the Rulebook and are consistent
with the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose an unnecessary burden on intra-market competition because it
will apply to all market participants. The Exchange does not believe
the proposed rule change will impose any burden on inter-market
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the increased position limit (and exercise
limit) will be available to all market participants and apply to each
in the same manner. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change
will provide additional opportunities for market participants to more
efficiently achieve their investment and trading objectives of market
participants.
    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 Act. On the contrary, the Exchange
believes the proposal promotes competition because it may attract
additional order flow from the OTC market to exchanges, which would in
turn compete amongst each other for those orders.\29\ The Exchange
believes market participants would benefit from being able to trade
options with increased position limits in an exchange environment in
several ways, including but not limited to the following: (1) Enhanced
efficiency in initiating and closing out position; (2) increased market
transparency; and (3) heightened contra-party creditworthiness due to
the role of OCC as issuer and guarantor. The Exchange understands that
other options exchanges intend to file similar proposed rule changes
with the Commission to increase position limits on options on SPY. This
may further contribute to fair competition among exchanges for multiply
listed options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Additionally, several other options exchanges have the same
position limits as the Exchange is proposing, as they incorporate by
reference to Cboe's position limits, and as a result the position
limits for options on SPY and will increase at those exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical Corrections
    The Exchange's proposal to make various technical amendments,
within Options 9, Section 13 and Options 9, Section 15 to: (1) Update
the Chicago Board Options Exchange to Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') as
the name of this self-regulatory organization has changed; (2) rename
the SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] exchange-traded fund (``SPY ETF'' or
``SPY'') as ``SPDR[supreg] S&P 500[supreg] ETF Trust (SPY) to update
the name of this product; (3) amend ``Customer'' to ``customer'' as
this reference refers to the customer of a Participant; and (4) amend
``PHLX'' to ``Phlx.'' Accordingly, these amendments are non-substantive

technical changes which add clarity to the Rulebook and do not impose a
burden on competition.

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 \30\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \32\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \33\ 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 asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposed rule change may become operative upon filing. The Exchange
states that waiver of the operative delay would be consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because it would allow
the Exchange to immediately increase its position and exercise limits
for options on SPY to those of Cboe, which the Exchange believes will
ensure fair competition among exchanges and provide consistency for
Nasdaq Participants that are also members at Cboe where these increased
position and exercise limits are currently in place. For this reason,
the Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the operative delay and
designates the proposal as operative upon filing.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \33\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \34\ 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2020-033 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-2020-033. 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 such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. 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-2020-033, and should be submitted
on or before July 22, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-14113 Filed 6-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P