[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 70 (Monday, April 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19715-19721]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08335]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74664; File No. SR-EDGX-2015-15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rules 11.8, 11.9, 11.10, 11.11, and 11.16 Regarding the Limit Up-Limit
Down Plan

April 7, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 26, 2015, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') 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 filed a proposal to amend Rules 11.8, 11.9, 11.10,
11.11, and 11.16, in order to conform Exchange Rules to the rules of
BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') and BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.

(``BYX'') as they relate to the Plan to Address Extraordinary Market
Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS under the Act (the
``Limit Up-Limit Down Plan'' or ``Plan'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See BZX and BYX Rules 11.18(e). See Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 69084 (March 8, 2013), 77 FR 16334 (March 14, 2013)
(SR-BATS-2015-015) [sic]; and 69088 (March 8, 2013), 77 FR 16308
(March 14, 2013) (SR-BYX-2013-010). See also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 67091 (May 31, 2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (the
``Limit Up-Limit Down Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.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 parts 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 restructure and amend various Exchange
Rules related to the applicability of the Plan in order to make the
Exchange's Rules identical to the corresponding rules on BZX and BYX,
as further described below. In early 2014, the Exchange and its
affiliate, EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''), received approval to effect
a merger (the ``Merger'') of the Exchange's parent company, Direct Edge
Holdings LLC, with BATS Global Markets, Inc., the parent of BZX and BYX
(together with BZX, EDGA, and EDGX, the ``BGM Affiliated
Exchanges'').\4\ In the context of the Merger, the BGM Affiliated
Exchanges are working to align certain system and regulatory
functionality, retaining only intended differences between the BGM
Affiliated Exchanges. Thus, the proposal set forth below is intended to
amend Rules 11.8, 11.9, 11.10, 11.11, and 11.16 to make such Rules
identical to corresponding rules on BZX and BYX related to the Plan.
The Exchange does not propose to alter its current system functionality
with regard to compliance with the Plan set forth under current
Exchange Rules.\5\ Rather, the proposed rule change is designed to
provide a consistent rule set across each of the BGM Affiliated
Exchanges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71449 (January 30,
2014), 79 FR 6961 (February 5, 2014) (SR-EDGX-2013-043; SR-EDGA-
2013-034).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 69002 (February 27,
2013), 78 FR 14394 (March 5, 2013) (SR-EDGA-2013-08); and 69003
(February 27, 2013), 78 FR 14380 (March 5, 2013) (SR-EDGX-2013-08).
    \6\ See BZX and BYX Rules 11.18(e). The Exchange notes that EDGA
intends to file a proposal very similar to this proposal that will
align the rules related to the Plan across each of the BGM
Affiliated Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    The Plan is designed to prevent trades in individual NMS Stocks
from occurring outside of specified Price Bands.\7\ As described more
fully below, the requirements of the Plan are coupled with Trading
Pauses to accommodate more fundamental price moves (as opposed to
erroneous trades or momentary gaps in liquidity). All trading centers
in NMS Stocks, including both those operated by Participants and those
operated by members of Participants, are required to establish,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are
reasonably designed to comply with the requirements specified in the
Plan.\8\ As set forth in more detail in the Plan, Price Bands
consisting of a Lower Price Band and an Upper Price Band for each NMS
Stock are calculated by the Processors.\9\ When the National Best Bid
(Offer) is below (above) the Lower (Upper) Price Band, the Processors
shall disseminate such National Best Bid (Offer) with an appropriate
flag identifying it as non-executable. When the National Best Bid
(Offer) is equal to the Upper (Lower) Price Band, the Processors shall
distribute such National Best Bid (Offer) with an appropriate flag
identifying it as a Limit State Quotation.\10\ All trading centers in
NMS Stocks must maintain written policies and procedures that are
reasonably designed to prevent the display of offers below the Lower
Price Band and bids above the Upper Price Band for NMS Stocks.
Notwithstanding this requirement, the Processor shall display an offer
below the Lower Price Band or a bid above the Upper Price Band, but
with a flag that it is non-executable. Such bids or offers shall not be
included in the National Best Bid (``NBB'') or National Best Offer
(``NBO'') calculations.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Unless otherwise specified, capitalized terms used in this
rule filing are based on the defined terms of the Plan.
    \8\ The Exchange is a Participant in the Plan.
    \9\ See Section (V)(A) of the Plan.
    \10\ See Section VI(A) of the Plan.
    \11\ See Section VI(A)(3) of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Trading in an NMS Stock immediately enters a Limit State if the
National Best Offer (Bid) equals but does not cross the Lower (Upper)
Price Band.\12\ Trading for an NMS stock exits a Limit State if, within
15 seconds of entering the Limit State, all Limit State Quotations were
executed or canceled in their entirety. If the market does not exit a
Limit State within 15 seconds, then the Primary Listing Exchange would
declare a five-minute Trading Pause pursuant to Section VII of the
Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, which would be applicable to all markets
trading the security.\13\ In addition, the Plan defines a Straddle
State as when the National Best Bid (Offer) is below (above) the Lower
(Upper) Price Band and the NMS Stock is not in a Limit State. For
example, assume the Lower Price Band for an NMS Stock is $9.50 and the
Upper Price Band is $10.50, such NMS stock would be in a Straddle State
if the National Best Bid were below $9.50, and therefore non-
executable, and the National Best Offer were above $9.50 (including a
National Best Offer that could be above $10.50). If an NMS Stock is in
a Straddle State and trading in that stock deviates from normal trading
characteristics, the Primary Listing Exchange may declare a Trading
Pause for that NMS Stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Section VI(B)(1) of the Plan.
    \13\ The primary listing market would declare a trading pause in
an NMS Stock; upon notification by the primary listing market, the
Processor would disseminate this information to the public. No
trades in that NMS Stock could occur during the trading pause, but
all bids and offers may be displayed. See Section VII(A) of the
Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Amendment to Rule 11.9
    Currently, Rule 11.9(a)(8) describes the priority of orders that
are re-priced and displayed in accordance with the Plan. The Exchange
is proposing to delete this clause and to include this information in
Rule 11.16(e)(5) in order to adopt a consistent rule set as between the
Exchange and the other BGM Affiliated Exchanges. The proposed rule text
for Exchange Rule 11.16(e)(5) is directly based on BZX and BYX Rule
11.18(e)(5), and is described in greater detail below. The Exchange is
not proposing to alter the priority handling of orders that are re-
priced and displayed in accordance with the Plan, but rather, is
proposing to adopt rule text that is identical to that of its
affiliated exchanges to reduce potential confusion.

Proposed Amendment to Rule 11.10
    In sum, Rule 11.10(a)(3) sets forth the general rule that no
executions shall occur outside the Price Bands during Regular Trading
Hours. The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 11.10(a)(3) to further state
that the Exchange's procedures for handling executing, re-pricing and
displaying orders in connection with the Plan are further described in
proposed Rule 11.16(e), which is discussed below.
    Current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(A) discusses how an order priced within
the Price Bands may be executed or posted to the EDGX Book. Current
Rule 11.10(a)(3)(B) explains how the Exchange will re-price an order
that is priced outside of the Price Bands. The Exchange proposes to
delete Rules 11.10(a)(3)(A) and (B) and replace them with Rule
11.16(e)(5). The proposed rule text for Exchange Rule 11.16(e)(5) is
directly based on BZX and BYX Rule 11.18(e)(5) and is described more
fully below. The Exchange is not proposing to alter the handling and
re-pricing of orders that [sic] under the Plan, but rather, is
proposing to adopt rule text that is identical to that of its
affiliated exchanges to reduce potential confusion.
    The Exchange also proposes to delete Rule 11.10(a)(3)(C) and does
not propose to include it as part of the amended rule set. Rule
11.10(a)(3)(C) states that a description of the behavior of routable
market and Limit Orders in response to the Plan is found in Rule
11.11(b)(1). The Exchange believes this provision is no longer
necessary as the Exchange's procedures for handling, executing, re-
pricing, and displaying orders in connection with the Plan are proposed
to be described in a single rule, Rule 11.16(e), rather than multiple
rules as is currently the case.
    The Exchange proposes to delete Rule 11.10(a)(3)(D), which
discusses the handling of orders with a Short Sale instruction \14\
under the Plan, and replace it with Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E). The proposed
rule text for Exchange Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E) is directly based on BZX and
BYX Rule 11.18(e)(5)(E) and is described more fully below. The Exchange
is not proposing to alter the handling of orders with a Short Sale
instruction under the Plan, but rather, is proposing to relocate the
text, with modifications, to Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E) as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ A ``Short Sale'' instruction is defined as ``[a]n
instruction on an order which shall have the same meaning as defined
in Rule 200(a) of Regulation SHO.'' See Exchange Rule 11.6(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to delete Rule 11.10(a)(3)(E) and replace it
with Rule 11.16(e)(2) thru (4). Current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(E) states that
pursuant to Section IV of the Plan all Trading Centers in NMS Stocks,
including those operated by Members of the Exchange, shall establish,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures that are
reasonably designed to comply with the requirements specified in
Section VI of the Plan, and to comply with the Trading Pauses specified
in Section VII of the Plan. The proposed rule text for Exchange Rule
11.16(e)(2) thru (4) expands upon this provision and is directly based
on BZX and BYX Rule 11.18(e)(2) thru (4) described more fully below.
Proposed Amendment to Rule 11.11
    Rule 11.11 discusses the handling of orders that are to be routed
to away trading centers. Paragraphs (b) thru (d) of Rule 11.11 discuss
the routing of orders under the Plan. The Exchange proposes to delete
Rules 11.11(b) thru (d) and replace them with Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D). The
Exchange proposes to delete in its entirety Rule 11.11(b)(1) as this
provision is no longer necessary as it is covered succinctly in new
Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D). Rule 11.11(c), which discusses re-routing of
orders under the Plan, will be moved to Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D)(i) with
slight modifications. Rule 11.11(d), which discusses the operation of
certain routing strategies under the Plan, will be moved to Rule
11.16(e)(5)(D)(ii) without change. Each of these changes are discussed
in more detail below.
Proposed Amendment to Rule 11.16
    The Exchange is required by the Plan to establish, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to
comply with the limit up-limit down and trading pause requirements
specified in the Plan. In February 2013, the Exchange amended its Rules
in connection with the implementation of the Plan.\15\ The Exchange now
proposes to incorporate the provisions discussed above into Rule
11.16(e) in order to make the Exchange's Rules identical to the
corresponding rules on BZX and BYX. The proposed amendments to Rule
11.16(e) are based on BZX and BYX Rules 11.18(e). The Exchange believes
that the provisions proposed below are reasonably designed to prevent
executions outside the Price Bands as required by the limit up-limit
down and trading pause requirements specified in the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 7 [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to add Rule 11.16(e)(1) to provide
that all capitalized terms not otherwise defined in paragraph (e) of
the Rule shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan or Exchange
Rules, as applicable. The Exchange also proposes to add Rules
11.16(e)(2) thru (4) described below. These provisions are based on BXZ
and BYX Rules 11.18(e)(2) thru (4) and designed to replace deleted Rule
11.10(a)(3)(E), which states that the Exchange and its Members must
establish policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to
comply with the Plan. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add Rule
11.16(e)(2) to provide that the Exchange is a Participant in, and
subject to the applicable requirements of, the Plan, which establishes
procedures to address extraordinary volatility in NMS Stocks. Further,
the Exchange proposes to add Rule 11.16(e)(3) to provide that Exchange
Members shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Plan. The
Exchange believes the requirements of current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(E) would
be sufficiently covered in proposed Rules 11.16(e)(2) and (3), which
will help ensure the compliance by its Members with the provisions of
the Plan as required pursuant to Section II(B) of the Plan.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Section II(B) of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to add Rule 11.16(e)(4) to replace
deleted Rule 11.10(a)(3)(E). Rule 11.16(e)(4) would provide that the
Exchange's System \17\ shall not display or execute buy (sell) interest
above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price Bands, unless such interest is
specifically exempted under the Plan. The Exchange believes that this
requirement is reasonably designed to help ensure the compliance with
the limit up-limit down and trading pause requirements specified in the
Plan by preventing executions outside the Price Bands as required
pursuant to Section VI(A)(1) of the Plan.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The ``System'' is defined in Exchange Rule 1.5(cc) as ``the
electronic communications and trading facility designated by the
Board through which securities orders of Users are consolidated for
ranking, execution and, when applicable, routing away.''
    \18\ See Section VI(A)(1) of the Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, the Exchange proposes to incorporate the
provisions of current Rules 11.9(a)(8) and 11.10(a)(3)(A) and (B)
within Rule 11.16(e)(5) regarding the treatment of certain trading
interest on the Exchange in order to prevent executions outside the
Price Bands and to comply with the Plan. The Exchange is proposing to
delete Rules 11.9(a)(8) and 11.10(a)(3)(A) and (B) to include this
information in Rule 11.16(e)(5) in order to adopt a consistent rule set
as between the Exchange and the other BGM

Affiliated Exchanges. Proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5) is based on BZX and BYX
Rules 11.18(e)(5).
    Current Rule 11.9(a)(8) describes the priority of orders that are
re-priced and displayed in accordance with the Plan. Specifically, Rule
11.9(a)(8) states that if the Upper (Lower) Price Band moves so that
the price of a buy (sell) order resting on the EDGX Book would
consequently be above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price Band, such order
will be re-priced and displayed at a price equal to the Upper (Lower)
Price Band, provided a new timestamp, and prioritized based on its
existing timestamp at the time the new Price Bands are established. If
an order is resting on the EDGX Book at a price equal to the Upper
(Lower) Price Band, such order will not be re-priced but will be
provided a new timestamp and prioritized based on its existing
timestamp at the time the new Price Bands are established.
    Likewise, under proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5), when re-pricing resting
orders because such orders are above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price
Band, the Exchange will provide new timestamps to such orders. The
Exchange will also provide new timestamps to resting orders at the less
aggressive price to which such orders are re-priced. Any resting
interest that is re-priced pursuant to Rule 11.16(e)(5) shall maintain
priority ahead of interest that was originally less aggressively
priced, regardless of the original timestamps for such orders. The
Exchange is not proposing to alter the priority handling of orders that
are re-priced and displayed in accordance with the Plan, but rather, is
proposing to adopt rule text that is identical to that of its
affiliated exchanges to reduce potential confusion. While the text of
current Rule 11.9(a)(8) is not identical to proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5),
the Exchange proposes to adopt language identical to BZX and BYX Rules
11.18(e)(5), which it believes more clearly describes system
functionality.
    Current Rules 11.10(a)(3)(A) and (B) address the handling and re-
pricing of orders under the Plan. Rule 11.10(a)(3)(A) discusses how an
order priced within the Price Bands may be executed or posted to the
EDGX Book by stating that a non-routable buy (sell) order that is
entered into the System at a price less (greater) than or equal to the
Upper (Lower) Price Band will be posted to the EDGX Book or executed,
unless: (i) the order includes a Time-in-Force Instruction (``TIF'') of
Immediate or Cancel (``IOC'') or Fill-or-Kill (``FOK''), in which case
it will be cancelled if not executed; or (ii) the User has entered
instructions to cancel \19\ the order. Rule 11.10(a)(3)(B) explains how
the Exchange will re-price an order that is priced outside of the Price
Bands by stating that a non-routable buy (sell) order at a price
greater (less) than the Upper (Lower) Price Band will be re-priced and
displayed at the price of the Upper (Lower) Price Band. If the price of
the Upper (Lower) Price Band moves above (below) the non-routable buy
(sell) order's displayed price, the buy (sell) order will not be
adjusted further and will remain posted at the original price at which
it was posted to the EDGX Book. If the Upper (Lower) Price Band crosses
a non-routable buy (sell) order resting on the EDGX Book, the buy
(sell) order will be re-priced to the price of the Upper (Lower) Price
Band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Under the Cancel Back instruction, a User may instruct the
System to immediately cancel the order when, if displayed by the
System on the EDGX Book at the time of entry, or upon return to the
System after being routed away, would create a violation of Rule
610(d) of Regulation NMS or Rule 201 of Regulation SHO, or the order
cannot otherwise be executed or posted by the System to the EDGX
Book at its limit price. See Exchange Rule 11.6(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5) discusses the re-pricing and
cancellation of interest and specifically provides that the Exchange
systems shall re-price and/or cancel buy (sell) interest that is priced
or could be executed \20\ above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price Band.
The Exchange is not proposing to alter the handling or re-pricing of
orders under the Plan, but rather, is proposing to adopt rule text that
is identical to that of its affiliated exchanges to reduce potential
confusion. The Exchange notes that while the format of current Rules
11.10(a)(3)(A) and (B) are not identical to that of proposed Rule
11.16(e)(5), the Exchange proposes to include the following provisions
under Rule 11.16(e)(5) regarding the re-pricing or canceling of certain
trading interest that are similar to BZX and BYX Rule 11.18(e)(5),
which if [sic] believes continue to accurately describe system
functionality and provide additional specificity, the specifics of
which are described under each subsection of proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5)
set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The Exchange notes that this includes any interest that is
displayed and/or resting at a less aggressive price but executable
at a more aggressive price, such as orders subject to price sliding
and discretionary order types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Orders and Orders With a TIF of IOC or FOK
    Proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5)(A) would state that the System will only
execute Market Orders or orders with a TIF instruction of IOC or FOK at
or within the Price Bands. If a Market Order or order with a TIF
instruction of IOC or FOK cannot be fully executed at or within the
Price Bands, the System shall cancel any unexecuted portion of the
order without posting such order to the EDGX Book. This provision is
similar to current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(A). The Rule would also state that
the display of Market Orders will be handled in accordance with Rule
11.8(a)(4).
Limit Orders
    The operation of Limit Orders under the Plan would be set forth in
Rule 11.16(e)(5)(B), which would include the following provisions.
     Orders Not Subject to Re-Pricing. Limit Orders will be
cancelled if a User has entered instructions not to use the re-pricing
process set forth in Rule 11.16(e)(5) and such interest to buy (sell)
is priced above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price Band.
     Incoming Orders. If re-pricing is permitted based on a
User's instructions, both displayable and non-displayable incoming
Limit Orders to buy (sell) that are priced above (below) the Upper
(Lower) Price Band shall be re-priced to the Upper (Lower) Price Band.
     Resting Orders. The System shall re-price resting Limit
Orders to buy (sell) to the Upper (Lower) Price Band if Price Bands
move such that the price of resting Limit Orders to buy (sell) would be
above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price Band. If the Price Bands move
again and the original limit price of a displayed and re-priced Limit
Order is at or within the Price Bands and a User has opted into the
Exchange's optional multiple re-pricing process, as described in Rule
11.6(l), the System shall re-price such displayed limit interest to the
most aggressive permissible price up to the order's limit price. All
other displayed and non-displayed limit interest re-priced pursuant to
paragraph (e) of Rule 11.16 will remain at its new price unless the
Price Bands move such that the price of resting Limit Order to buy
(sell) would again be above (below) the Upper (Lower) Price Band.
Orders With a Pegged Instruction \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The ``Pegged'' instruction is described under Rule 11.6(j).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the operation of orders with a Pegged instruction under
the Plan is not specifically addressed in the Exchange's Rules.
Therefore, the Exchange proposes to adopt Rule 11.16(e)(5)(C) which
would state that orders with a Pegged instruction to buy

(sell) shall peg to the specified pegging price or the Upper (Lower)
Price Band, whichever is lower (higher). Rule 11.16(e)(5)(c) is similar
to BZX and BYX Rules 11.18(e)(5)(C).
Routable Orders
    The Exchange proposes to delete Rules 11.11(b) thru (d), which
discuss the routing of orders under the Plan, and replace them with
Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D). The Exchange is not proposing any changes to its
routing functionality in connection with the implementation of the
Plan. The Exchange proposes to delete in its entirety Rule 11.11(b)(1),
which states when an order may be routed under the Plan, as these
provisions are no longer necessary as they are covered succinctly in
new Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D). Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D) would state that if
routing is permitted based on a User's instructions, orders shall be
routed away from the Exchange pursuant to Rule 11.11, provided that the
System shall not route buy (sell) interest at a price above (below) the
Upper (Lower) Price Band.\22\ Rule 11.11(c), which discusses re-routing
of orders under the Plan, will be moved to Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D)(i) with
slight modifications. Current Rule 11.11(c) states that for routing
strategies that access all Protected Quotations, when the Upper (Lower)
Price Band adjusts such that the NBO (NBB) becomes executable, a
routable buy (sell) Market or marketable Limit Order will be eligible
to be re-routed by the Exchange. Likewise, Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D)(i) would
state that when the Upper (Lower) Price Band adjusts such that the NBO
(NBB) becomes executable, a routable buy (sell) Market or marketable
Limit Order will be eligible to be re-routed by the Exchange if such
order contains an Aggressive \23\ or Super Aggressive \24\
instruction.\25\ Rule 11.11(d), which discusses the operation of
certain routing strategies under the Plan, will be moved to Rule
11.16(e)(5)(D)(ii) without change. Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D)(ii) would state
that routing strategies SWPA and SWPB (together, ``SWP''), as described
in Rule 11.11(g), are eligible for routing in accordance with the Plan
as follows: the System will immediately cancel orders utilizing an SWP
routing strategy when an order to buy utilizing an SWP routing strategy
has a limit price that is greater than the Upper Price Band or if a
sell order utilizing an SWP routing strategy has a limit price that is
less than the Lower Price Band. Proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D)(ii) is
similar to BZX and BYX Rule 11.13(a)(3)(I).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ This provision shall also replace current Rule
11.10(a)(3)(C) which states that the description of the behavior of
routable Market Orders and Limit Orders in response to the Plan is
set forth in Rule 11.11(b)(1).
    \23\ The ``Aggressive'' instruction is described under Rule
11.6(n)(1).
    \24\ The ``Super Aggressive'' instruction is described under
Rule 11.6(n)(2).
    \25\ The Exchange notes that this provision is not included in
BZX or BYX Rule 11.18(e), but the Exchange believes it provides
additional detail that was included in current Exchange Rule
11.11(c) that is helpful to retain in proposed Rule
11.16(e)(5)(D)(i).
    \26\ The Exchange notes that it proposal to include current Rule
11.11(d) within proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5)(D)(ii), rather than within
its Rule 11.11(g) which describes each of its routing strategies,
differs from the location of the same provision under BZX and BYX
Rule 11.13(a)(3), which describes BZX and BYX's routing strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Orders With a Short Sale Instruction
    The Exchange proposes to replace current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(D), which
discusses the handling of orders with a Short Sale instruction under
the Plan, with proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E). The proposed rule text for
Exchange Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E) is directly based on BZX and BYX Rule
11.18(e)(5)(E). Current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(D) states that where a short
sale order is entered into the System with a limit price below the
Lower Price Band and a short sale price test restriction under Rule 201
of Regulation SHO is in effect, the System will re-price such order to
the Lower Price Band as long as the Lower Price Band is at a Permitted
Price.\27\ When an order with a Short Sale instruction is entered into
the System with a limit price above the Lower Price Band and a short
sale price test restriction under Rule 201 of Regulation SHO is in
effect, the System will re-price such order, if necessary, at a
Permitted Price. Likewise, proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E) would state
that where a short sale price restriction under Rule 201 of Regulation
SHO is in effect, orders with a Short Sale instruction priced below the
Lower Price Band shall be re-priced to the higher of the Lower Price
Band or the Permitted Price. The Exchange is not proposing to alter the
handling of orders with a Short Sale instruction that under the Plan,
but rather, is proposing to relocate the text, with modifications, to
Rule 11.16(e)(5)(E) discussed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The term ``Permitted Price'' is defined in Rule 11.6(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Amendments to Rule 11.16
    The Exchange also proposes to relocate Rule 11.16(c), which
discusses the re-opening of trading following a trading halt, to
proposed Rule 11.16(e)(6), with minor modifications. Current Rule
11.16(c) states that the re-opening of trading following a trading halt
will be conducted pursuant to procedures adopted by the Exchange and
communicated by notice to its Members. The Exchange recently codified
its opening process, including its re-opening process follow a halt,
suspension or pause, under Rule 11.7.\28\ Therefore, with respect to
the re-opening of trading following a Trading Pause, the Exchange
proposes to adopt Rule 11.16(e)(6) to provide that the Exchange shall
re-open the security as set forth in Rule 11.7(e), which is the
Exchange's Rule describing the Exchange's re-opening process following
a trading halt, suspension or pause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 73468 (October 29,
2014), 79 FR 65450 (November 4, 2014) (SR-EDGX-2014-18); and 73592
(November 13, 2014), 79 FR 68937 (November 19, 2014) (SR-EDGA-2014-
20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to delete Rule 11.16(d) which discusses
when the Exchange may resume trading where the Primary Listing Market
issues an individual stock trading pause and how individual stock
trading pauses are to be handled during Phase I of the Plan.
Interpretation and Policy .01 to Rule 11.16 states that the provisions
of paragraph (d) of this Rule shall be in effect during a pilot set to
end on the earlier of the initial date of operations of the Regulation
NMS Plan to Address Extraordinary Market Volatility or February 4,
2014. Phase I of the Plan has expired and the Exchange, therefore,
proposes to delete Rule 11.16(d) as well as Interpretation and Policy
.01 to Rule 11.16 as they are no longer relevant.
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes the following additional amendments
to Rule 11.16: (i) renumber paragraph (f) as (d); (ii) delete current
Rule 11.16(e) and replace it with new paragraph (f) providing that in
the event of a trading halt, all orders will remain on the EDGA [sic]
Book unless cancelled by the User; and (iii) adopt paragraph (g), which
would state that all times referenced in Rule 11.16 shall be Eastern
Time.
Ministerial Changes
    In light of the above restructuring of the Exchange Rules, the
Exchange proposes the following ministerial changes to update cross
references to Rules that are to be deleted or relocated as described
above:
     amend Rule 11.8(a)(4) regarding the display of Market
Orders to update a cross-reference to current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(A) to
proposed Rule 11.16(e)(5),
     amend Rule 11.8(d)(7) regarding the operation of MidPoint
Match Orders under the Plan to update a cross-

reference to current Rule 11.10(a)(3) to proposed Rule 11.16(e), and
     amend Rule 11.9(a)(2)(D)(ii) regarding the priority of
Market Orders displayed on the EDGX Book to delete a cross-reference to
current Rule 11.10(a)(3)(A).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\29\
Specifically, the proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act,\30\ because it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanism of, a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
does not propose to alter its current system functionality with regard
to compliance with the Plan set forth under current Exchange Rules.
Rather, the proposed rule change is designed to provide a consistent
rule set across each of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges. As mentioned
above, the proposed rule changes, combined with the planned filing for
EDGA,\31\ would allow the BGM Affiliated Exchanges to provide a
consistent set of rules as it relates to the compliance with the Plan
across each of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges. Consistent rules, in turn,
will simplify the regulatory requirements for Members of the Exchange
that are also participants on EDGA, BZX and/or BYX. The proposed rule
change would provide greater harmonization between rules of similar
purpose on the BGM Affiliated Exchanges, resulting in greater
uniformity and less burdensome and more efficient regulatory compliance
and understanding of Exchange Rules. As such, the proposed rule change
would foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities and would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system. Similarly, the Exchange also believes that, by
harmonizing the rules and across each BGM Affiliated Exchange with
respect to the Plan, the proposal will enhance the Exchange's ability
to fairly and efficiently regulate its Members, meaning that the
proposed rule change is equitable and will promote fairness in the
market place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \31\ See supra note 8 [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the proposal to remove the references to individual stock
trading pauses promotes just and equitable principles of trade and
removes impediments to, and perfects the mechanism of, a free and open
market and a national market system. By eliminating the reference to
trading pauses outside the scope of the Plan in its rules, the Exchange
will help to alleviate any potential confusion with respect to such
pauses, particularly in light of the implementation of the Plan. The
proposed rule change is also consistent with Section 11A(a)(1) of the
Act \32\ in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and
dealers and exchange markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes that the non-substantive,
ministerial changes discussed above will contribute to the protection
of investors and the public interest by helping to avoid confusion with
respect to Exchange Rules.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the act. To the contrary, allowing the
Exchange to implement substantively identical rules across each of the
BGM Affiliated Exchanges regarding the Plan does not present any
competitive issues, but rather is designed to provide greater
harmonization among Exchange, BYX, BZX, and EDGA rules of similar
purpose. The proposed rule change should, therefore, resulting in less
burdensome and more efficient regulatory compliance and understanding
of Exchange Rules for common members of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges
and an enhanced ability of the BGM Affiliated Exchanges to fairly and
efficiently regulate Members, which will further enhance competition.

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

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

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)(iii) of the Act \33\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(iii).
    \34\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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 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-EDGX-2015-15 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-EDGX-2015-15. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-EDGX-2015-15, and should be submitted on or before May
4, 2015.

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

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-08335 Filed 4-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


John Silvasi/RTP/USEPA/US
01/22/2009 08:06 AM	To
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>	cc
	Denise Gerth/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kimber Scavo/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	bcc

	Subject
	Doug--your question to Denise on sect. 51.908(b)

Hi, Doug,

Denise forwarded your question to me.  I think it would be proper that we
consider your question as a comment that we can place in the docket so
that we can respond to it when we go final.

John J. Silvasi
Environmental Engineer
State and Local Programs Group (C539-02)
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-5666 (v);<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
"It is EPA’s goal to protect the environment for everyone.  You can help
by reporting potential environmental violations.  To do so, visit EPA’s
website at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/complaints/index.html "

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>01/20/2009 01:44 PM
	To
	Denise Gerth/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	51.908(b)

Denise:

51.908(b) seems extraneous IF subpart 1 classification disappears in 51.902
(b)....Will you plan to remove it?

Doug Deason
Environmental Advisor
Downstream and Chemical SH&E
ExxonMobil Refining & Supply Company
13501 Katy Freeway,
CORP-EMCC-L1-266
Office Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Cell phone (mobile):<PHONE_NUMBER>
E-Mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68894-68896]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21946]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98606; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2023-019]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC; Order
Instituting Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a
Proposed Rule Change To List and Trade Shares of the Valkyrie Bitcoin
Fund Under Nasdaq Rule 5711(d), Commodity-Based Trust Shares

September 28, 2023.
    On July 3, 2023, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``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 list and trade shares (``Shares'') of the
Valkyrie Bitcoin Fund (``Trust'') under Nasdaq Rule 5711(d), Commodity-
Based Trust Shares. The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on July 21, 2023.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97922 (July 17,
2023), 88 FR 47214 (``Notice''). Comments on the proposed rule
change are available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nasdaq-2023-019/srnasdaq2023019.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 31, 2023, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the
Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule
change.\5\ This order

institutes proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \6\ to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98262, 88 FR 61658
(Sept. 7, 2023). The Commission designated October 19, 2023, as the
date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the
proposed rule change.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Summary of the Proposal

    As described in more detail in the Notice,\7\ the Exchange proposes
to list and trade the Shares of the Trust under Nasdaq Rule 5711(d),
which governs the listing and trading of Commodity-Based Trust Shares
on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The investment objective of the Trust is for the Shares to reflect
the performance of the value of a bitcoin as represented by the CME CF
Bitcoin Reference Rate--New York Variant (``Index''), less the Trust's
liabilities and expenses.\8\ The Trust will only hold bitcoin, which
will be held by a custodian on behalf of the Trust.\9\ The bitcoin held
by the Trust will be valued based on the price set by the Index and the
administrator of the Trust will calculate the net asset value of the
Trust once each Exchange trading day.\10\ The Trust will issue and
redeem baskets of Shares on an ongoing basis only in exchange for
delivery to the Trust, or the distribution by the Trust, of the number
of whole and fractional bitcoins represented by each basket being
created or redeemed.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See id. at 47214. Valkyrie Digital Assets, LLC (``Sponsor'')
is the sponsor of the Trust.
    \9\ See id.
    \10\ See id. at 47215.
    \11\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove SR-
NASDAQ-2023-019 and Grounds for Disapproval Under Consideration

    The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section
19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \12\ to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be approved or disapproved. Institution of proceedings is
appropriate at this time in view of the legal and policy issues raised
by the proposed rule change, as discussed below. Institution of
proceedings does not indicate that the Commission has reached any
conclusions with respect to any of the issues involved. Rather, as
described below, the Commission seeks and encourages interested persons
to provide comments on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,\13\ the Commission is
providing notice of the grounds for disapproval under consideration.
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional
analysis of the proposed rule change's consistency with Section 6(b)(5)
of the Act, which requires, among other things, that the rules of a
national securities exchange be ``designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices'' and ``to protect investors and the
public interest.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission asks that commenters address the sufficiency of the
Exchange's statements in support of the proposal, which are set forth
in the Notice, in addition to any other comments they may wish to
submit about the proposed rule change. In particular, the Commission
seeks comment on the following questions and asks commenters to submit
data where appropriate to support their views:
    1. What are commenters' views on whether the proposed Trust and
Shares would be susceptible to manipulation? What are commenters' views
generally on whether the Exchange's proposal is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices? What are commenters'
views generally with respect to the liquidity and transparency of the
bitcoin markets and the bitcoin markets' susceptibility to
manipulation?
    2. Based on data and analysis provided and the academic research
cited by the Exchange,\15\ do commenters agree with the Exchange that
the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (``CME''), on which CME bitcoin futures
trade, represents a regulated market of significant size related to
spot bitcoin? \16\ What are commenters' views on whether there is a
reasonable likelihood that a person attempting to manipulate the Shares
would also have to trade on the CME to manipulate the Shares? \17\ Do
commenters agree with the Exchange that trading in the Shares would not
be the predominant influence on prices in the CME bitcoin futures
market? \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice, 88 FR at 47222-24.
    \16\ See id. at 47223.
    \17\ See id. at 47223-24.
    \18\ See id. at 47224.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The Exchange states that bitcoin is resistant to price
manipulation and that other means to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices ``exist to justify dispensing with the
requisite surveillance sharing agreement'' with a regulated market of
significant size related to spot bitcoin.\19\ In support, the Exchange
states, among other things, that the geographically diverse and
continuous nature of bitcoin trading make it difficult and
prohibitively costly to manipulate the price of bitcoin, and that the
fragmentation across bitcoin platforms, the relatively slow speed of
transactions, and the capital necessary to maintain a significant
presence on each trading platform make manipulation of bitcoin prices
through continuous trading activity challenging.\20\ The Exchange also
states that offering only in-kind creations and redemptions provides
``unique protections against potential attempts to manipulate the
Shares'' and that the price the Sponsor uses to value the Trust's
bitcoin ``is not particularly important.'' \21\ Do commenters agree
with the Exchange's statements regarding the bitcoin market's
resistance to price manipulation?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See id. at 47223 n.24.
    \20\ See id.
    \21\ See id. at 47224-25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The Exchange also states that it will execute a surveillance-
sharing agreement with Coinbase, Inc. (``Coinbase'') that is intended
to supplement the Exchange's market surveillance program.\22\ According
to the Exchange, the agreement is ``expected to have the hallmarks of a
surveillance-sharing agreement between two members of the [Intermarket
Surveillance Group], which would give the Exchange supplemental access
to data regarding spot [b]itcoin trades on Coinbase where the Exchange
determines it is necessary as part of its surveillance program for the
Commodity-Based Trust Shares.'' \23\ Based on the description of the
surveillance-sharing agreement as provided by the Exchange, what are
commenters' views of such an agreement if finalized and executed? Do
commenters agree with the Exchange that such an agreement with Coinbase
would be ``helpful in detecting, investigating, and deterring fraud and
manipulation in the Commodity-Based Trust Shares''? \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See id. at 47224.
    \23\ See id. The Exchange states that ``[t]his means that the
Exchange expects to receive market data for orders and trades from
Coinbase, which it will utilize in surveillance of the trading of
Commodity-Based Trust Shares.'' Id.
    \24\ See id.

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

5. Some sponsors of proposed spot bitcoin exchange-traded products have
also provided data regarding the correlation between certain bitcoin
spot markets and the CME bitcoin futures market.\25\ What are
commenters' views on the correlation between the bitcoin spot market
and the CME bitcoin futures market? What are commenters' views on the
extent to which that correlation provides evidence that the CME bitcoin
futures market is ``significant'' related to spot bitcoin?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See, e.g. Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 3 to, and Order
Instituting Proceedings to Determine Whether to Approve or
Disapprove, a Proposed Rule Change to List and Trade Shares of the
ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF under BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), Commodity-Based
Trust Shares, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98112 (Aug. 11,
2023), 88 FR 55743 (Aug. 16, 2023) (including data from sponsor
21Shares US LLC that purports to show correlations of returns across
the two-year period from January 20, 2021, to February 1, 2023, of
no less than 92% among certain spot bitcoin platforms and between
the CME bitcoin futures market and such spot bitcoin platforms on an
hourly basis, and no less than 78% on a minutely basis).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Procedure: Request for Written Comments

    The Commission requests that interested persons provide written
submissions of their views, data, and arguments with respect to the
issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have
with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written
views of interested persons concerning whether the proposal is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) or any other provision of the Act, and
the rules and regulations thereunder. Although there do not appear to
be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval that would be
facilitated by an oral presentation of views, data, and arguments, the
Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4, any request for an
opportunity to make an oral presentation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, as amended by the Securities
Acts Amendments of 1975, Public Law 94-29 (June 4, 1975), grants the
Commission flexibility to determine what type of proceeding--either
oral or notice and opportunity for written comments--is appropriate
for consideration of a particular proposal by a self-regulatory
organization. See Securities Acts Amendments of 1975, Senate Comm.
on Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs, S. Rep. No. 75, 94th Cong., 1st
Sess. 30 (1975).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change should be approved
or disapproved by October 25, 2023. Any person who wishes to file a
rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by
November 8, 2023.
    Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
file number
    SR-NASDAQ-2023-019 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-2023-019. 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 (https://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
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not
include personal identifiable information in submissions; you should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. We
may redact in part or withhold entirely from publication submitted
material that is obscene or subject to copyright protection. All
submissions should refer to file number SR-NASDAQ-2023-019 and should
be submitted on or before October 25, 2023. Rebuttal comments should be
submitted by November 8, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-21946 Filed 10-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory

                              2565 Plymouth Road

                    Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105-2498

											OFFICE OF

										      AIR AND RADIATION

June 2008

MEMORANDUM

FROM:	John Koupal

		Assessment and Standards Division

		Office of Transportation and Air Quality

TO:		Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0318

SUBJECT:	MOVES model and inputs

	The attached CD contains EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
(MOVES) and related files used to analyze the “4% per year scenario”
presented in the Agency’s GHG Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
MOVES was used to estimate fuel savings, GHG emission reductions and
increased VMT due to “rebound” as detailed in the docketed memo
“Updated Light-duty Vehicle GHG Scenarios”.  The CD contains a full
installation package for the version of the model that was used for the
analysis, input files used to model the scenario, and Microsoft Excel
file used to post-process results.  Additional documentation for MOVES
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ngm.htm

 PAGE   2

 PAGE   67


[Federal Register: June 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 117)]
[Notices]
[Page 33749-33750]
[DOCID:fr19jn07-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12726-001]

Eastern Oregon Light and Power, LLC.; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Commencement
of Licensing Proceeding, Scoping Meetings, Solicitation of Comments on
the Pad and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and
Associated Study Requests

June 12, 2007.
    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
an original License and Pre-Application Document.
    b. Project No.: 12726-001.
    c. Dated Filed: April 17, 2007.
    d. Submitted by: Eastern Oregon Light and Power, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Rock Creek Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The proposed Rock Hydroelectric Project would be
located on Rock Creek in Baker County, Oregon. The proposed project
would likely occupy lands of the United States within the jurisdiction
of the U.S. Forest Service.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR Part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Mark A. Henderson. P.O. Box 247
Haines, OR 97833-0247,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Matt Buhyoff<PHONE_NUMBER> or via e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. We are asking federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with
jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental
issues to cooperate with us in the preparation of the environmental
document. Agencies who would like to request cooperating status should
follow the instructions for filing comments described in paragraph n
below.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations there under at 50 CFR Part 402; and (b) the State Historic
Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historical
Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. Rock Creek filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD); including a
proposed process plan and schedule with the Commission, pursuant to 18
CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.

    m. Copies of the PAD and Scoping Document 1 (SD1) are available for
review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov), using the

``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, of for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in
paragraph n.
    Register online at http://ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm to be notified

via e-mail of new filing and issuances related to this or other pending
projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.
    n. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and SD1
as well as study requests. All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study
requests should be sent to the address above in paragraph h. In
addition, all comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for
cooperating agency status, and all communications to Commission staff
related to the merits of the potential application (original and eight
copies) must be filed with the Commission at the following address:
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. All filings with the
Commission must include on the first page, the project name (Rock Creek
Hydroelectric Project) and number (P-12726-001), and bear the heading
``Comments on Pre-Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,''
``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency
Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any
individual or entity interested in submitting study requests,
commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating
status must do so by August 13, 2007.
    Comments on the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for
cooperating agency status, and other permissible forms of
communications with the Commission may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-

filing'' link.
    o. At this time, Commission staff intends to prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the project, in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act. However, there is the possibility
that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required.
Nevertheless, the scoping meetings will satisfy the NEPA scoping
requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is issued by the
Commission.

Scoping Meetings

    We will hold a daytime and night time scoping meeting at the times
and places noted below. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The time and location of these meetings are as follows:

    Date and Time: Thursday, July 12, 2007, 9:30 a.m. (PDT).
    Location: Haines Branch Library, 818 Cole St., Haines, Oregon.
    Date and Time: Thursday, July 12, 2007, 7 p.m. (PDT).
    Location: Haines Branch Library, 818 Cole St., Haines, Oregon.
    For Directions: Please call Mark Henderson, of Eastern Oregon Light
and Power, LLC. at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Scoping Document 1 (SD1), which outlines the subject areas to be
addressed in the environmental document, has been mailed to the
individuals and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of
SD1 will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the
Web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the

directions for accessing information in paragraph p. Depending on the
extent of comments received, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may or may not
be issued.

Site Visit

    The potential applicant and Commission staff will conduct a site
visit of the proposed project on Wednesday, July 11, 2007, starting at
9 a.m. All participants should meet Haines Branch Library, located at
818 Cole St., Haines, Oregon 97833. All participants are responsible
for their own transportation. Anyone with questions about the site
visit should contact Mr. Mark Henderson, of Eastern Oregon Light and
Power, LLC at<PHONE_NUMBER> on or before June 27, 2006.

Scoping Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meeting, staff will: (1) Present the proposed list
of issues to be addressed in the EA; (2) review and discuss existing
conditions and resource agency management objectives; (3) review and
discuss existing information and identify preliminary information and
potential study needs; (4) review and discuss the process plan and
schedule for pre-filing activity that incorporates the time frames
provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's regulations and, to the
extent possible, maximizes coordination of federal, state, and tribal
permitting and certification processes; and (5) discuss requests by any
federal or state agency or Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency
for development of an environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the Pre-Application Document in
preparation for the scoping meeting. Directions on how to obtain a copy
of the PAD and SD1 are included in item m of this document.

Scoping Meeting Procedures

    The scoping meeting will be recorded by a stenographer and will
become part of the formal Commission record on the project.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-11741 Filed 6-18-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16151]
[DOCID:fr31mr10-99]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001]

Antiviral Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Antiviral Drugs Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on June 2, 2010, from 8
a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Location: Hilton Washington DC/Silver Spring, The Ballrooms, 8727
Colesville Rd., Silver Spring, MD. The hotel phone number is 301-589-
5200.
    Contact Person: Paul Tran, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
(HFD-21), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane (for express
delivery, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1093), Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-
7001, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory
Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the
Washington, DC area), code<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please call the Information Line
for up-to-date information on this meeting. A notice in the Federal
Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously
announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly
enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the
agency's Web site and call the appropriate advisory committee hot line/
phone line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the
meeting.
    Agenda: On June 2, 2010, the committee will discuss biologics
license application (BLA) 125283, motavizumab, MedImmune, LLC,
proposing an indication for the prevention of serious lower respiratory
tract disease caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in children
at high risk of RSV disease.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/
default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before May
18, 2010. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between
approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those desiring to make formal oral
presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief
statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish
to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an
indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation
on or before May 10, 2010. Time allotted for each presentation may be
limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater
than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public
hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers
for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will
notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by May 11,
2010.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Paul Tran at least 7
days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: March 23, 2010.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010-7114 Filed 3-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


I would like to make a comment on the proposal to lift the mandatory age 60 retirement for pilots operating under FAR Part 121 regulations (FAR 121.383(c)).  I am strongly opposed to anyone acting as a pilot of a transport category aircraft past their 60th birthday.  In my experiences as an airline pilot, most pilots have an average of a 28 year career at their airline.  When compared to other professions, this may seem like an average career.  However, you must keep in mind that being a professional pilot is not an average job and is very demanding and puts stresses on the mind and body that are not associated with other professions.  These stresses are cumulative and begin to wear on pilots as they approach their golden years.  I am sure that my mind and body will be no different as I approach retirement at age 60.

I would say that if you asked most pilots if they felt comfortable acting as a pilot past age 60, most would say yes because they have been doing it for so many years.  In addition, being a pilot means that they have the "can do" attitude that sometimes gets in the way of good decision making.  They need someone to tell them when it is no longer safe for them to fly for a FAR Part 121 company.

In addition to physiological reasons to keep the retirement age at 60, there are huge financial reasons for government and companies to not raise the age.  Pilots that are in their last 3 to 5 years at their respective airlines are the most expensive to keep on the payroll.  I hope to be one of these pilots someday, but I also hope to retire at 60 so that I can have at least 10 good years to enjoy what I have worked so hard to get.  I think anyone that has to work as an airline pilot past age 60 has planned very poorly for the last 20 years.  Greed is the driving force behind this small group of pilots seeking to raise the age 60 rule.  I ask that you keep the age 60 rule in place and focus your efforts on issues more important to our country as a whole.


From:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Friday, August 5, 2022 2:33 PM
To:
Hardin, Christopher W<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Jeffrey, Mark A<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Hacker, David W<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Dzurinko, Mike G<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Tunno, Brett J<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Coke ICR2<EMAIL_ADDRESS>French, Chuck<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mcginn, Kevin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Shappley, Ned<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Carpenter, Jacob<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
some clarifications and questions RE: U. S, Steel Concerns Regarding EPA's June 28, 2022 Coke Ovens Section 114 Information Collection Requests (ICRs)

Mr. Hardin, et al.:  Thank you for sending me your comments and concerns on the upcoming Coke RTR 114 information requests. I am including all my notes and comments here for all the COETF members as well as those specific to your company.

A few items to note:
-- Note, I sent a fugitive test data answer file with the emails to Cleveland Cliffs and U.S. Steel. Please confirm receipt or I can resend those emails. From the comments made by Trinity, I surmised there is some confusion about how to submit these data.
-- Note, we are not requiring testing of the flare flame zone nor requiring testing if no test ports are already installed at the flares. We would want COG analyses that represent COG upstream of the flares, if available.
--Note, the 85-day deadline is to tell us when the stack tests are happening and is not the deadline for the test results.
--Note, we can find no reference in the 114 for the stack tests to be performed concurrent with the fugitive sampling. If it is there, this is an error because we don't need these tests to be concurrent.

A few questions based on your emails and documents:
-- US Steel: What previous tests/methods/sources to submit, how old?
-- DTE/EES: For "existing" clean/processed COG analyses offered in lieu of flare testing (by EES), what does "existing" mean? Where is the clean/processed COG sample taken in terms of the batteries and CBRP? Where in the sample train is the COG sampled? Would these samples be considered representative of what is sent to flares?

--COETF: What "EPA ambient data at fenceline" is available? What is the location (facility name, location of test monitors), dates of sampling, which EPA office/contact name performed or requested ambient testing?
--COETF: What specific batteries (by name/number) have anticipated problems with testing bench&yard with method 303 for CCliffs Burns Harbor and US Steel only.
--COETF: Which states and what are the permit requirements for power installation (prior to installation of generators, including small, temporary units) at the three COETF facilities required in the coke 114 to perform fenceline monitoring (CCliffs Burns Harbor, DTE/EES, US Steel)
--COETF: How often are emergency flares used (what is the range in current COETF facilities), i.e., daily/weekly/monthly/ every 3,6,9 months/annually?

Looking forward to talking with everyone next week.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>  Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

From: Hardin, Christopher W<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:49 PM
To: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>French, Chuck<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Jeffrey, Mark A<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Hacker, David W<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Dzurinko, Mike G<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Tunno, Brett J<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: U. S, Steel Concerns Regarding EPA's June 28, 2022 Coke Ovens Section 114 Information Collection Requests (ICRs)

Dear Mr. French and Dr. Jones:

Please see attached U. S. Steel's comments and concerns with the ICRs from EPA related to the Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks (PQBS) 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart CCCCC Risk and Technology Review (RTR) and the technology review for Coke Batteries under 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart L that includes testing, interior and fenceline monitoring, and other information collection activities related to potential new regulations for coke byproduct recovery plants (CBRP).

U. S. Steel, in coordination with the COETF, engaged Trinity Consultants (Trinity) to assist us in assessing concerns with the ICRs.  Trinity has identified a number of safety, technical and schedule concerns with the proposed ICR testing requirements and other information collection activities.  U. S. Steel and the COETF requests that EPA make a number of changes to the ICRs as detailed in the attachment.

Thank you for your consideration and please feel free to reach out with any questions.

Chris

Christopher W. Hardin
Environmental Affairs
United States Steel Corporation
Office:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Cell:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>