[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 54 (Thursday, March 19, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15819-15823]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05680]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88383; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2020-012]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 4121 (Trading Halts Due to Extraordinary Market Volatility)

March 13, 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 March 12, 2020, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4121 (Trading Halts Due to
Extraordinary Market Volatility) to enhance the re-opening auction
process for Nasdaq listed securities following trading halts due to
extraordinary market volatility.
    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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the re-opening
auction process for Nasdaq listed securities following trading halts
due to extraordinary market volatility (i.e., ``market-wide circuit
breakers'') to be similar to the process currently employed following a
Trading Pause initiated pursuant to the Plan to Address Extraordinary
Market Volatility (i.e., the ``Limit Up-Limit Down'' or ``LULD''
Plan).\3\ In 2017, the Exchange amended its auction process for re-
opening a Nasdaq listed security following a Trading Pause initiated
pursuant to the LULD Plan.\4\ Specifically, the Exchange modified its
rules such that initial Auction Collars following a Trading Pause would
be calculated using a new methodology based on the Price Band that
triggered the Trading Pause, and instituted the process for extending
the auction and further widening the collars if necessary to
accommodate buy or sell pressure outside of the collars then in effect.
The Exchange believes that these changes have been effective in
facilitating a fair and orderly market following Trading Pauses
initiated pursuant to the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan, and has decided to
implement similar functionality for trading halts in Nasdaq listed
securities following the initiation of market-wide circuit breakers.\5\
The Exchange believes that the proposed changes would promote price
formation and provide a more consistent re-opening process for members
and investors following such trading halts, similar to the current
implementation on NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Arca'') and Cboe BZX Exchange,
Inc. (``BZX'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange notes that it is working on a separate proposal
to amend its reopening process following a Level 1 or Level 2
market-wide circuit breaker halt, and is filing this rule change as
an interim step.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79876 (January 25,
2017), 82 FR 8888 (January 31, 2017) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-131).
    \5\ A market-wide circuit breaker is triggered if the price of
the S&P 500 Index declines by a specified amount compared to the
closing price for the immediately preceding trading day. See Rule
4121.
    \6\ Both Arca and BZX implemented similar processes for resuming
trading following non-LULD regulatory halts (which include trading
halts following market-wide circuit breakers). See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 79846 (January 19, 2017), 82 FR 8548
(January 26, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2016-130); and 84927 (December 21,
2018), 83 FR 67768 (December 31, 2018) (SR-CboeBZX-2018-090) (``BZX
Proposal'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, trading in Nasdaq listed securities would resume on the
Exchange in most cases through a Halt Cross,\7\ including after a Level
1 or Level 2 market-wide circuit breaker trading halt initiated under
Rule 4121. In particular, Rule 4121(c)(i) provides that the re-opening
of trading following a Level 1 or Level 2 trading halt shall follow the
procedures set forth in Rule 4120. These procedures are in Rule
4120(c)(7), which provides, in relevant part, for a 5-minute Display
Only Period during which market participants may enter quotes and
orders in Nasdaq systems, at the conclusion of which trading will
immediately resume through the Halt Cross under Rule 4753.\8\
Additionally, the Exchange will

extend the Display Only Period for an additional 1-minute period if
there is volatility during the Display Only Period (i.e., an order
imbalance in the security). The volatility checks are governed under
Rule 4120(c)(7)(C)(1) and (2), and provides that the Display Only
Period will be extended if: (i) The expected cross price moves the
greater of 5% or 50 cents, or (ii) all market orders will not be
executed in the cross. The Exchange now proposes to amend this process
such that for the resumption of trading after a Level 1 or Level 2
market-wide circuit breaker trading halt, the Exchange proposes to
instead follow a process similar to that currently applied for
releasing a security following a Trading Pause initiated under the LULD
Plan, which is described in Rule 4120(c)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Halt Cross process is set forth in Rule 4753. As
discussed in more detail later in this filing, the Halt Cross does
not apply to the re-opening of a Nasdaq listed security following a
Trading Pause initiated under the LULD Plan, which instead re-opens
pursuant to Rule 4120(c)(10).
    \8\ The Exchange would then re-open the Nasdaq listed security
that was subject to the Level 1 or Level 2 market-wide circuit
breaker trading halt at an execution price determined pursuant to
the execution algorithm in Rule 4753(b)(2)(A)-(D), which sets forth
a series of tie-breakers for selecting the execution price of the
Halt Cross.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 4120(c)(10), which describes the current process for resuming
trading after a Trading Pause, provides for an initial auction period
and additional auction periods with widening price collars should the
security fail to conclude each auction period. For any such security
listed on Nasdaq, prior to terminating the pause, there is a 5-minute
initial Display Only Period during which market participants may enter
quotations and orders in that security in Nasdaq systems. During this
initial period, the Exchange also establishes the auction reference
price (hereinafter ``LULD Auction Reference Price''),\9\ as well as the
upper and lower auction collar (hereinafter, ``LULD Auction Collar'')
prices.\10\ The security is released at the end of the initial Display
Only Period unless the Exchange detects an order imbalance \11\ in the
security, in which case the initial Display Only Period is extended for
an additional five minutes, and the LULD Auction Collar prices are
further widened by 5% increments (or $0.15 for securities with a LULD
Auction Reference Price of $3 or less) in the direction of the order
imbalance.\12\ At the end of the first extended Display Only Period,
the security is released for trading unless there is an order imbalance
in the security, in which case the extended Display Only Period will be
further extended every five minutes in the manner described in Rule
4120(c)(10)(B) until the security is released for trading. The security
is released for trading at the first point there is no order imbalance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Rule 4120(c)(10)(A)(i).
    \10\ See Rule 4120(c)(10)(A)(ii). In contrast, price collars
would not be established for re-opening a Nasdaq listed security
after a Level 1 or Level 2 market-wide circuit breaker trading halt
today. As noted above, the Exchange would instead re-open at an
execution price determined pursuant to the execution algorithm in
Rule 4753(b)(2)(A)-(D). See supra note 8.
    \11\ For purposes of Rule 4120(c)(10), an order imbalance is
established if: (i) The calculated price at which the security would
be released for trading is outside the applicable Auction Collar
prices calculated under paragraphs (A), (B), or (C) of Rule
4120(c)(10); or (ii) all market orders would not be executed in the
cross. See Rule 4120(c)(10)(E).
    \12\ See Rule 4120(c)(10)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal
    The Exchange now proposes to implement this process for resuming
trading following a market-wide circuit breaker under Rule 4121 as
well. As noted above, the current re-opening process for a Level 1 or
Level 2 trading halt initiated under Rule 4121 does not have a
mechanism for calculating price collars and a process for widening the
collars if necessary to accommodate buy or sell pressure outside of the
collars then in effect. The Exchange therefore believes that its
proposal will facilitate a fair and orderly market following such
trading halts initiated pursuant to a Level 1 or Level 2 market-wide
circuit breaker that is designed to reduce the potential for
significant price disparity in post-auction trading. The proposed
process for re-opening a Nasdaq listed security under Rule 4121 would
be substantially similar to the re-opening process employed today for
Trading Pauses under Rule 4120(c)(10), with certain differences
discussed below, primarily related to the calculation of the halt
auction collars.
    Accordingly, the Exchange will provide in new paragraph (d) to Rule
4121 that a Level 1 or Level 2 trading halt initiated under this Rule
(``MWCB Halt'') shall be terminated when Nasdaq releases the security
for trading.\13\ For any such security listed on Nasdaq, prior to
terminating the MWCB Halt, there will be a 15-minute ``Initial Display
Only Period'' during which market participants may enter quotations and
orders in that security in Nasdaq systems. The Initial Display Only
Period will be 15 minutes in duration instead of the 5 minute initial
display only period currently employed for Trading Pauses under Rule
4120(c)(10) to coincide with the entire duration of a MWCB Halt.\14\ As
discussed below, the Exchange also proposes to begin publishing MWCB
halt information at the start of the Initial Display Only Period, which
would include the MWCB auction reference prices and auction collars.
The Exchange believes that the proposed Initial Display Only Period,
together with the dissemination of MWCB halt information at the
beginning of the Initial Display Only Period, would provide additional
time to attract offsetting interest, and would help address order
imbalances that may not be resolved within the current 5-minute
period.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Rule 4121(c)(i) currently points to Rule 4120 for the re-
opening process following a MWCB Halt. The new re-opening process
will be set forth in proposed Rule 4121(d), so the Exchange proposes
to update the reference in Rule 4120(c)(i) accordingly. The Exchange
will also renumber current Rule 4121(d) to 4121(f) in light of the
changes proposed herein.
    \14\ See Rule 4121(b).
    \15\ This is similar to the current implementation on Arca,
which begins disseminating Trading Halt Auction Imbalance
Information immediately after trading in an Arca-listed security is
halted, and accepts orders during the relevant Auction Processing
Period. See Arca Rule 7.35-E(e)(1) and (g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 4121(d)(1)(A) will provide that during the Initial
Display Only Period, the Exchange will also establish the ``Auction
Reference Price.'' The Auction Reference Price shall mean the Nasdaq
last sale price (either round or odd lot) after 9:15 a.m. Eastern Time
(``ET'') but prior to the MWCB Halt and, if none, the prior trading
day's Nasdaq Official Closing Price (``NOCP''). The Exchange is not
proposing to use the LULD Auction Reference Price, which is based on
the Price Band that triggered the Trading Pause, as the Exchange
believes that a different reference is necessary for a re-opening
process that is unrelated to the LULD mechanism. The Exchange has
chosen to use the last Nasdaq sale price prior to the MWCB Halt (or if
none, the prior trading day's NOCP) in this circumstance as this price
is reflective of the current market for the halted security. The
Exchange's proposal is similar to the current implementation on Arca
and BZX.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Neither Arca nor BZX use the LULD auction reference price
in the context of their respective MWCB auctions. Arca's auction
reference prices for trading halt auctions other than auctions
following a Trading Pause are based on the last consolidated round-
lot price of that trading day and, if none, the prior trading day's
official closing price. See Arca Rule 7.35-E(a)(8)(A) and (e)(7)(A).
BZX uses the price of the Final Last Sale Eligible Trade or
``FLSET'' as the auction reference price for BZX-listed securities
in auctions conducted after non-LULD Regulatory Halts, which price
is based on the price of a trade on the primary listing exchange
(i.e., BZX). See BZX Rule 11.23(a)(9) and (d)(2)(C)(i). See also BZX
Proposal, footnote 14 (defining FLSET for halt auctions as the last
trade occurring during Regular Trading Hours on the Exchange if the
trade was executed within one second prior to trading in the
security being halted). The Exchange's proposed Auction Reference
Price for MWCB Halts is equivalent to BZX's reference price in
substance, except that the Exchange will use the last Nasdaq sale
price prior to the MWCB Halt. Similar to BZX, the Exchange believes
that it is appropriate to use the price of a trade on the primary
listing market, i.e., Nasdaq, to set the reference price for
auctions in Nasdaq listed securities when such a trade has been
executed recently.

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

    Proposed Rule 4121(d)(1)(B) will describe how the Exchange would
calculate the upper and lower ``MWCB Auction Collar'' prices during the
Initial Display Period. Specifically, the initial upper and lower
collar prices would be determined as follows:
     The lower MWCB Auction Collar is derived by subtracting 5%
of the Auction Reference Price, rounded to the nearest minimum price
increment,\17\ or in the case of securities with an Auction Reference
Price of $3 or less, $0.15, from the Auction Reference Price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The term ``minimum price increment'' means $0.01 in the
case of a System Security priced at $1 or more per share, and
$0.0001 in the case of a System Security priced at less than $1 per
share. See Rule 4107(k). Thus, for example, if adding 10% of the
Auction Reference Price to the MWCB Auction Collar would result in a
tenth of a penny, the Exchange would round down to the nearest penny
when the calculation results in one to four tenths of a penny, and
the Exchange would round up to the nearest penny when the
calculation results in five to nine tenths of a penny.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The upper MWCB Auction Collar is derived by adding 5% of
the Auction Reference Price, rounded to the nearest minimum price
increment, or in the case of securities with an Auction Reference Price
of $3 or less, $0.15, to the Auction Reference Price.
    In contrast, the initial price collar thresholds currently used for
the LULD mechanism are applied only in the direction of the trading
that invoked the Trading Pause.\18\ In this case, because there would
not be a security-specific pricing direction reason for the MWCB Halt,
the Exchange believes that it is appropriate to apply the initial
thresholds on both sides of the Auction Reference Price. For example,
if the Nasdaq last sale price (either round or odd lot) after 9:15 a.m.
ET but prior to the MWCB Halt for a security is $100.00, then the lower
and upper initial MWCB Auction Collar prices would be $95 and $105--
i.e., 5% below and above the Nasdaq last sale price. This mirrors the
application of the initial halt auction collars on both Arca and BZX
today.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Rule 4120(c)(10)(A)(ii).
    \19\ See Arca Rule 7.35-E(e)(7)(B)(ii) and BZX Rule
11.23(d)(2)(C)(i)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rules 4121(d)(2) and (d)(3) will specify the circumstances
when the Exchange would extend the Display Only Period for a MWCB Halt
re-opening process, and how the Exchange would adjust the MWCB Auction
Collars for each extension. The proposed process for initiating
extensions will follow the process currently used for extending Trading
Pauses under LULD \20\ as well as the MWCB extension processes on Arca
and BZX.\21\ In particular, at the conclusion of the Initial Display
Only Period, the security will be released for trading unless, at the
end of the Initial Display Only Period, Nasdaq detects an order
imbalance in the security.\22\ In that case, Nasdaq will extend the
Display Only Period for an additional 5-minute period (``Extended
Display Only Period''), and the MWCB Auction Collar prices will be
adjusted as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Rule 4120(c)(10)(B)-(C).
    \21\ See Arca Rule 7.35-E(e)(7)(C) and BZX Rule
11.23(d)(2)(C)(ii).
    \22\ As discussed below, an order imbalance under the proposed
re-opening process for MWCB Halts will be established in the same
manner as an order imbalance under the current LULD re-opening
process as set forth in Rule 4120(c)(10)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     If the Display Only Period is extended because the
calculated price at which the security would be released for trading is
below the lower MWCB Auction Collar price or all sell market orders
would not be executed in the cross, then the new lower MWCB Auction
Collar price is derived by subtracting 5% of the Auction Reference
Price, which was rounded to the nearest minimum price increment, or in
the case of securities with an Auction Reference Price of $3 or less,
$0.15, from the previous lower MWCB Auction Collar price, and the upper
MWCB Auction Collar price will not be changed.
     If the Display Only Period is extended because the
calculated price at which the security would be released for trading is
above the upper MWCB Auction Collar price or all buy market orders
would not be executed in the cross, then the new upper MWCB Auction
Collar price is derived by adding 5% of the Auction Reference Price,
which was rounded to the nearest minimum price increment, or in the
case of securities with an Auction Reference Price of $3 or less,
$0.15, to the previous upper MWCB Auction Collar price, and the lower
MWCB Auction Collar price will not be changed.
    At the conclusion of the Extended Display Only Period, the security
will be released for trading unless, at the end of the Extended Display
Only Period, Nasdaq detects an order imbalance in the security. In that
case, Nasdaq will further extend the Display Only Period, continuing to
adjust the MWCB Auction Collar prices every five minutes in the manner
described in Rule 4121(d)(2) until the security is released for
trading. During any additional Extended Display Only Period after the
first Extended Display Only Period, Nasdaq shall release the security
for trading at the first point there is no order imbalance.
    Proposed Rule 4121(d)(4) will specify that an order imbalance would
be established for purposes of the process under Rule 4121 as follows:
\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ This is the same manner in which an order imbalance is
established under the current re-opening process for Trading Pauses.
See Rule 4120(c)(10)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The calculated price at which the security would be
released for trading is above (below) the upper (lower) MWCB Auction
Collar price calculated under paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) of Rule
4121(d); or
     all market orders would not be executed in the cross.
    Proposed Rule 4121(d)(5) will describe how the MWCB Auction Collars
will function in the event of more than one trading halt initiated
under Rule 4121 in the same day. In the event of a Level 2 Market
Decline while a security is in a Level 1 MWCB Halt and has not been
released for trading, Nasdaq will recalculate the lower and upper MWCB
Auction Collar prices in the particular security in accordance with
paragraph (1)(B) of Rule 4121.\24\ In this instance, the Exchange will
start the calculation of the new upper and lower MWCB Auction Collar
prices using 5% of the Auction Reference Price, rounded to the nearest
minimum price increment, or $0.15 for securities with an Auction
Reference Price of $3 or less. The Exchange believes that the proposed
language would bring greater transparency to market participants in how
the Exchange would handle the calculation of MWCB Auction Collars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ As currently provided in Rule 4121(b)(i), the Exchange
would halt trading based on a Level 1 or Level 2 Market Decline only
once per day. Thus for example, if a Level 1 Market Decline were to
occur and trading were halted, following the re-opening of trading,
the Exchange would not halt the market again unless a Level 2 Market
Decline were to occur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to add new paragraph (e) to Rule 4121 to
describe how the Exchange will handle the publication of MWCB Halt
Information. Specifically, at the beginning of the Initial Display Only
Period and continuing through the resumption of trading, Nasdaq will
disseminate by electronic means an Order Imbalance Indicator \25\ every
second. The Exchange also proposes to make a related change by adding
new

Rule 4753(a)(3)(G), which will provide that for purposes of a MWCB Halt
initiated pursuant to Rule 4121, the Order Imbalance Indicator will
include Auction Reference Prices and MWCB Auction Collars, as defined
in Rule 4121(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ As described in Rule 4753(a)(3), an ``Order Imbalance
Indicator'' is a message disseminated by electronic means containing
information about Eligible Interest and the price at which such
interest would execute at the time of dissemination. ``Eligible
Interest'' is defined as any quotation or any order that has been
entered into the system and designated with a time-in-force that
would allow the order to be in force at the time of the Halt Cross.
See Rule 4753(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange plans to implement the proposed changes during April
2020, and will provide prior notice in an Equity Trader Alert.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\26\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\27\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the Act because it would amend the halt auction process following
a MWCB Halt to be more closely aligned with the process currently
implemented for halt auctions following a Trading Pause under the LULD
Plan. The Exchange amended its re-opening process following a Trading
Pause to better account for buy or sell pressure by changing the manner
in which initial LULD Auction Collars are established, and widening the
collars as appropriate to accommodate trading interest submitted to
participate in the auction. The Exchange believes that these changes
have been generally successful in facilitating a fair and orderly
process for re-opening securities following a Trading Pause. The
Exchange has therefore decided to use a similar process for halt
auctions following a MWCB Halt. The Exchange believes that its proposal
would benefit investors by facilitating price discovery and promoting
more consistency in how the Exchange conducts the re-opening process
following a Trading Pause or a MWCB Halt.
    While the proposed re-opening process following MWCB Halts would
largely follow the re-opening process in place today for Trading
Pauses, there would be several notable differences. These differences
are primarily designed to ensure that suitable MWCB Auction Collars are
utilized for the re-opening process following MWCB Halts. For instance,
while an Auction Reference Price based on the Price Band that triggered
the Trading Pause continues to be appropriate in the context of the re-
opening process following Trading Pauses, the Exchange believes that a
different reference is necessary for the re-opening process for MWCB
Halts. The Exchange has chosen to use the Nasdaq last sale price and,
if none, the prior trading day's NOCP as the MWCB Auction Reference
Price in these circumstances as this price is reflective of the current
market for the halted security. Similarly, the Exchange believes that
it is appropriate to calculate both upper and lower MWCB Auction
Collars that are a specified percentage or dollar amount from this
reference price because MWCB Halts do not involve security specific buy
or sell pressure. These differences are similar to the application of
MWCB halt auction collars on Arca and BZX today,\28\ and would
therefore provide both a fair and more consistent experience for
members and investors trading Nasdaq listed securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See supra note 6. Similar to BZX's use of FLSET for its
auction reference price for BZX-listed securities, the Exchange also
believes that it is appropriate to use the Nasdaq last sale price as
the reference price for Nasdaq listed securities. See supra note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Otherwise, the proposed re-opening process for MWCB Halts is
consistent with the current LULD re-opening process. Similar to the
current LULD re-opening process, the Exchange also believes that the
proposed process is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest because they are designed to facilitate price discovery
by ensuring that all market order interest could be satisfied in the
auction process following MWCB Halts. Furthermore, the Exchange
believes that the standardized procedures to extend MWCB Halt auctions
an additional five minutes are appropriate because this would provide
additional time to attract offsetting liquidity. If at the end of such
extension, market orders still cannot be cannot be satisfied within the
applicable collars, or if the re-opening price would be outside of the
applicable collars, the Exchange would extend the halt auction process
an additional five minutes. The Exchange believes that extending the
auction in these circumstances would protect investors and the public
interest by reducing the potential for significant price disparity in
post-auction trading. With each such extension, the Exchange believes
that it is appropriate to widen the price collar threshold on the side
of the market on which there is buying or selling pressure as market
conditions may prevent an order imbalance from being resolved within
the prior auction collars.
    The Exchange also believes it is appropriate to add language
clarifying how the MWCB Auction Collars will function in the event of
more than one trading halt initiated under Rule 4121 in the same day.
The proposed changes would increase transparency in how the Exchange
would handle the calculation of MWCB Auction Collars, and is therefore
consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.
The Exchange likewise believes that specifying how it will handle the
publication of MWCB Halt information will bring greater transparency
around the operation of the Exchange's auction process.

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. The proposed rule change is
designed to provide for a measured and transparent process for re-
opening Nasdaq listed securities after a MWCB Halt that is similar to
the current re-opening process following a Trading Pause initiated
under the LULD Plan and the process already implemented on Arca and BZX
for non-LULD regulatory halts.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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)(iii) of the Act \30\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \31\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 investor and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and public interest because
the proposed rule change is designed to establish price protections for
MWCB Level 1 and Level 2 re-openings that are substantially similar to
the price protections in the context of LULD, as well as on other
equities exchanges like Arca and BXZ. Accordingly, the Commission
hereby waives the operative delay and designates the proposal 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 has also 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 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-2020-012 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-2020-012. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2020-012 and
should be submitted on or before April 9, 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. 2020-05680 Filed 3-18-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79011-79012]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26930]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2741-036]

Kings River Conservation District; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Amendment of license to change the project
boundary.
    b. Project No: 2741-036.
    c. Date Filed: November 13, 2020.
    d. Applicant: Kings River Conservation District.
    e. Name of Project: Pine Flat Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located at the Pine Flat Dam on the
Kings River in Fresno County, California. The dam is operated by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: David M. Merritt, Kings River Conservation
District, 4886 E. Jensen Ave, Fresno, CA 93725; telephone (559) 237-
5567; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Tara Perry,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: January 4, 2021.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's
eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without
prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may
submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must
be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should
include the docket number P-2741-036. Comments emailed to Commission
staff are not considered part of the Commission record.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee filed an application to
remove approximately 7.40 acres of lands and waters from the project
boundary that it states are not needed for safe project operation and
maintenance or fulfillment of any other license purpose. The licensee
proposes to remove 0.71 acres of land south of the project powerhouse
and downstream of the dam, owned by the Corps, and 6.68 acres of
submerged lands extending into the river channel, owned by the state of
California.
    l. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. At this time, the
Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly
from the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those

who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's
Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title COMMENTS, PROTEST, or MOTION TO INTERVENE as
applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and
the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3)
furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person
commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with
the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments,
motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary
basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied by proof of
service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2010.

    Dated: December 2, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-26930 Filed 12-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 182 (Monday, September 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57043-57044]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23592]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0387]

Qualification of Drivers; Application for Exemptions; Hearing

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

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that 14 individuals have applied for a medical
exemption from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). In accordance with the statutory
requirements concerning applications for exemptions, FMCSA requests
public comments on these requests. The statute and implementing
regulations concerning exemptions require that exemptions must provide
an equivalent or greater level of safety than if they were not granted.
If the Agency determines the exemptions would satisfy the statutory
requirements and decides to grant theses requests after reviewing the
public comments submitted in response to this notice, the exemptions
would enable these 14 individuals to operate CMVs in interstate
commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 21, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0387 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 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., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket numbers
for this notice. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below for further
information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to 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., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The 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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles A. Horan, III, Director,
Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety,<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

    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has authority to
grant exemptions from many of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), as amended by
Section 4007 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(TEA-21) (Pub. L. 105-178, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 107, 401). FMCSA has
published in 49 CFR part 381, subpart C final rules implementing the
statutory changes in its exemption procedures made by section 4007, 69
FR 51589 (August 20, 2004).\1\ Under the rules in part 381, subpart C,
FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal
Register. The Agency must provide the public with an opportunity to
inspect the information relevant to the application, including any
safety analyses that have been conducted and any research reports,
technical papers and other publications referenced in the application.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity to submit public comment on
the applications for exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This action adopted as final rules the interim final rules
issued by FMCSA's predecessor in 1998 (63 FR 67600 (Dec. 8, 2008)),
and adopted by FMCSA in 2001 [66 FR 49867 (Oct. 1, 2001)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be
achieved without the exemption. The decision of the Agency must be
published in the Federal Register. If the Agency denies the request, it
must state the reason for doing so. If the decision is to grant the
exemption, the notice must specify the person or class of persons
receiving the exemption and the regulatory provision or provisions from
which an exemption is granted. The notice must also specify the
effective period of the exemption (up to 2 years) and explain the terms
and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed.
    The current provisions of the FMCSRs concerning hearing state that
a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that person

    First perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at
not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if
tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average
hearing loss in the better ear

greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or
without a hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to
American National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.

49 CFR 391.41(b)(11). This standard was adopted in 1970, with a
revision in 1971 to allow drivers to be qualified under this standard
while wearing a hearing aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36
FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
    FMCSA also issues instructions for completing the medical
examination report and includes advisory criteria on the report itself
to provide guidance for medical examiners in applying the hearing
standard. See 49 CFR 391.43(f). The current advisory criteria for the
hearing standard include a reference to a report entitled ``Hearing
Disorders and Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers'' prepared for the
Federal Highway Administration, FMCSA's predecessor, in 1993.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This report is available on the FMCSA Web site at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/publications/medreport_archives.htm.
_____________________________________-

FMCSA Requests Comments on the Exemption Applications

    FMCSA requests comments from all interested parties on whether a
driver who cannot meet the hearing standard should be permitted to
operate a CMV in interstate commerce. Further, the Agency asks for
comments on whether a driver who cannot meet the hearing standard
should be limited to operating only certain types of vehicles in
interstate commerce, for example, vehicles without air brakes. The
statute and implementing regulations concerning exemptions require that
the Agency request public comments on all applications for exemptions.
The Agency is also required to make a determination that an exemption
would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or
greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption
before granting any such requests.

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 www.regulations.gov and in the
search box insert the docket number ``FMCSA-2014-0387'' 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, go to www.regulations.gov and in the search box
insert the docket number ``FMCSA-2014-0387'' and click ``Search.''
Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and
comments related to the proposed rulemaking.

Information on Individual Applicants

John B. Burley

    Mr. Burley, 44, holds an operator's license in Colorado.

Jennifer Lenore Campbell

    Ms. Campbell, 39, holds a class A CDL in Texas.

Carlos Campos

    Mr. Campos, 43, holds a class A CDL in California.

Richard A. Carter

    Mr. Carter, 58, holds a class B CDL in Maryland.

Charles Christopher Curran

    Mr. Curran, 41, holds an operator's license in Florida.

Joy L. Dalen

    Ms. Dalen, 41, holds an operator's license in Nebraska.

James Wels Hanson

    Mr. Hanson, 25, holds an operator's license in Wyoming.

Clint I. Homon

    Mr. Homan, 35, holds an operator's license in Illinois.

Sean C. Jackson

    Mr. Jackson, 42, holds an operator's license in Arizona.

Keith Kaimuloa

    Mr. Kaimuloa, 47, holds an operator's license in Hawaii.

John David Kielczewski, Jr.

    Mr. Kielczewski, 43, holds an operator's license in Rhode Island.

Timothy Knipp II

    Mr. Knipp, 32, holds an operator's license in Pennsylvania.

Donnie Lamar McEntire, Jr.

    Mr. McEntire, 42, holds an operator's license in Georgia.

Tami S. Richardson-Nelson

    Ms. Richardson-Nelson, 56, holds an operator's license in Nebraska.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b)(4), FMCSA
requests public comment from all interested persons on the exemption
petitions described in this notice. The Agency will consider all
comments received before the close of business October 21, 2015.
Comments will be available for examination in the docket at the
location listed under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency
will file comments received after the comment closing date in the
public docket, and will consider them to the extent practicable. In
addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in the
public docket, relevant information that becomes available after the
comment closing date. Interested persons should monitor the public
docket for new material.

    Issued on: September 8, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
 Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-23592 Filed 9-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION COMPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR PESTICIDE
PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Registration Division contact: [insert name and telephone number
with area code]

INSTRUCTIONS:  Please utilize this outline in preparing the pesticide
petition.  In cases where the outline element does not apply, please
insert “NA-Remove” and maintain the outline. Please do not change
the margins, font, or format in your pesticide petition. Simply replace
the instructions that appear in green, i.e., “[insert company
name],” with the information specific to your action.

TEMPLATE:

[Bayer CropScience],]

[Insert petition number]

	EPA has received a pesticide petition ([insert petition number]) from
[Bayer CropScience], [P.O. Box 12014, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709] proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to
amend 40 CFR part 180. by establishing a tolerance for residues of
[imidacloprid,
1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2-imidazolidinimine] and its
metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
the parent, in or on the raw agricultural commodity [cereal, grain,
group 15] at [0.05] ppm.

Bayer CropScience is also proposing use of the currently established
tolerances for residues of [imidacloprid,
1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2-imidazolidinimine] and its
metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
the parent, in or on the raw agricultural commodity [vegetable, root,
except sugar beet, subgroup 01B],  [vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 01C], [vegetable, leafy greens, except Brassica, subgroup 04A],
[vegetable, Brassica, leafy, group 05], [vegetable, fruiting, group 08],
 [vegetable, cucurbit, group 09] to support the use of imidacloprid as a
seed treatment on these crops.

EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in section 408 (d)(2) of  FDDCA;
however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted
data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the petition.
Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

	1. Plant metabolism. [The nature of the imidacloprid residue in plants
and livestock is adequately understood. The residues of concern are
combined residues of imidacloprid and it metabolites containing the
6-chloropyridinyl moiety, all calculated as imidacloprid.

	2. Analytical method. [All required analytical methods have previously
been submitted to the Agency and validated. Therefore, no additional
methods are needed.]

	3. Magnitude of residues. [Imidacloprid grain tolerances (all at 0.05
ppm) currently exist for the cereal grains: barley, corn, popcorn,
millet, oats, rye, sorghum and wheat, all of which are on the current
Gaucho seed treatment label. The residue data used to register these
crops can be used to support a crop group 15 tolerance at 0.05 ppm.

Studies were previously conducted and submitted to the USEPA that
demonstrate that residues of imidacloprid from seed treatment will be
substantially lower than those resulting from soil or foliar
applications, especially foliar applications.  The lower residues result
from lower seed treatment application rates and significantly longer
pre-harvest intervals. Therefore, residue data generated for the soil
and foliar uses will support the seed treatment uses where specific seed
treatment residue data do not exist.]

B. Toxicological Profile

	1. Acute toxicity.  [Imidacloprid has low acute toxicity via the dermal
and inhalation routes and moderate acute toxicity via the oral route.
The acute oral LD50 value for imidacloprid technical was found to be 424
mg/kg for male rats and >450 mg/kg for female rats.  The acute dermal
LD50 is >5,000 mg/kg and the 4 hour rat inhalation LC50 is >5.33 mg/L in
the rat.  Imidacloprid is not irritating to rabbit skin or eyes.
Imidacloprid did not cause skin sensitization in guinea pigs.]

	2. Genotoxicty. [Imidacloprid has been evaluated for genotoxicity using
in vivo and in vitro tests, including mammalian cell gene mutation
tests, chromosomal aberration tests, unscheduled DNA synthesis tests,
bacterial DNA repair tests and other mutagenicity studies.  The weight
of evidence shows that imidacloprid is not mutagenic.]

	3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. [In a developmental
toxicity study with Sprague Dawley rats, pregnant animals received an
oral administration of imidacloprid at 0, 10, 30, or 100 mg/kg/day
during gestation. The maternal NOAEL was 10 mg/kg/day based on decreased
body weight gain and the fetal NOAEL was 30 mg/kg/day based on a slight
increase in the incidence of wavy ribs in the presence of maternal
toxicity.

In a developmental toxicity study with rabbits, pregnant animals were
given oral doses of imidacloprid at 0, 8, 24, or 72 mg/kg bwt/day during
gestation. For maternal toxicity, the NOAEL was 24 mg/kg /day and the
LOEL was 72 mg/kg/day based on mortality, decreased body weight gain,
and decreased food consumption. For developmental toxicity, the NOAEL
was 24 mg/kg bwt/day and the LOAEL was 72 mg/kg bwt/day based on
decreased fetal body weight and increased resorptions.

In a 2-generation reproductive toxicity study, imidacloprid was
administered to rats at dietary levels of 0, 100, 250, or 700 ppm. For
parental/systemic toxicity, the NOAEL was 250 ppm (16.5 mg/kg/day) and
the LOAEL was 700 ppm based on decreased body weight in both sexes.  The
reproductive NOAEL was the highest dose tested, 700 ppm.]

	4. Subchronic toxicity. [In a dermal toxicity study, groups of 5 male
and 5 female New Zealand White rabbits received repeated dermal
applications of imidacloprid at 1,000 mg/kg body weight/day, 6
hours/day, 5 days/week for 3 weeks. No dermal or systemic toxicity was
seen.  For systemic and dermal toxicity, the no observable adverse
effect level (NOAEL) was >1,000 mg/kg/day.]

	5. Chronic toxicity. [A chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study was
performed with imidacloprid administered to male and female rats for two
years at dietary levels of 100, 300, 900 or 1,800 ppm.  There was no
evidence of carcinogenicity.  At 300 ppm, there was an increased
incidence of mineralized particles in thyroid colloid of male rats.  The
NOAEL was 100 ppm (5.7 mg/kg/day for males and 7.6 mg/kg/day for
females).

The oncogenic potential of imidacloprid was investigated in B6C3F1 mice.
 Dietary doses were 0, 100, 330, 1,000 or 2,000 ppm.  Decreased body
weights, decreased food consumption and hepatocellular hypertrophy were
seen at the highest dose level.  There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity.  The NOAEL was 2,000 ppm (208 mg/kg for males and 274
for females). ]

	6. Animal metabolism. [The metabolism of NTN 33893 (imidacloprid) in
rats was reported in seven studies. These data show that imidacloprid
was rapidly absorbed and eliminated in the excreta (90% of the dose
within 24 hours), demonstrating no biologically significant differences
between sexes, dose levels, or route of administration. Elimination was
mainly renal (70 - 80% of the dose) and fecal (17 - 25%). The major part
of the fecal activity originated in the bile. Total body accumulation
after 48 hours consisted of 0.5% of the radioactivity with the liver,
kidney, lung, skin and plasma being the major sites of accumulation.
Therefore, bioaccumulation of imidacloprid is low in rats. Maximum
plasma concentration was reached between 1.1 and 2.5 hours. Two major
routes of biotransformation were proposed for imidacloprid. The first
route included an oxidative cleavage of the parent compound rendering
6-chloronicotinic acid and its glycine conjugate. Dechlorination of this
metabolite formed the 6-hydroxynicotinic acid and its mercapturic acid
derivative. The second route included the hydroxylation followed by
elimination of water of the parent compound rendering NTN 35884. A
comparison between [methylene -14C] imidacloprid and [imidazolidine
4,5-14C] imidacloprid showed that while the rate of excretion was
similar, the renal portion was higher with the imidazolidine labeled
compound. In addition, accumulation in tissues was higher with the
imidazolidine labeled compound (approximately 1% of the recovered
radioactivity).]

	7. Metabolite toxicology. [N/A.]

	8. Endocrine disruption. [EPA is required under the FFDCA, as amended
by FQPA, to develop a screening program to determine whether certain
substances (including all pesticide active and other ingredients) “may
have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a
naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the
Administrator may designate.”  Following recommendations of its
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC),
EPA determined that there was a scientific basis for including, as part
of the program, the androgen and thyroid hormone systems, in addition to
the estrogen hormone system.  EPA also adopted EDSTAC’s recommendation
that the Program include evaluations of potential effects in wildlife.
For pesticide chemicals, EPA will use FIFRA and, to the extent that
effects in wildlife may help determine whether a substance may have an
effect in humans, FFDCA authority to require the wildlife evaluations.
As the science develops and resources allow, screening of additional
hormone systems may be added to the Endocrine Disruptor Screening
Program (EDSP).

When additional appropriate screening and/or testing protocols being
considered under the Agency’s EDSP have been developed, imidacloprid
may be subjected to further screening and/or testing to better
characterize effects related to endocrine disruption.]

C. Aggregate Exposure

(DEEM-FCID™), which is licensed to Bayer, was used to estimate the
chronic and acute dietary exposure. This software uses the food
consumption data from the 1994_1998 USDA Continuing Surveys of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII 1994_1998).

The endpoint for acute dietary risk assessments is based on
neurotoxicity characterized by decreases in motor or locomotor activity
in female rats at 42 mg/kg bwt/day (LOEL) from an acute neurotoxicity
study. Based on an uncertainty factor of 10x for interspecies, 10x for
intraspecies and 3x for use of a LOAEL rather than a NOAEL, EPA has
established an acute reference dose (aRfD) = 0.14 mg/kg bwt/day.

For chronic dietary analyses, EPA has established the reference dose
(cRfD) for imidacloprid at 0.057 mg/kg/day based on a NOAEL of 5.7 mg/kg
bwt/day from a rat chronic toxicity carcinogenicity study and
uncertainty factors of 10x for interspecies and 10x for intraspecies.

Results from the acute and chronic dietary exposure analyses described
below demonstrate a reasonable certainty of no harm to the overall U.S.
population or any population subgroup will result from the use of
imidacloprid on currently registered and pending uses.]

	i. Food. [Tier 1 acute and Tier 2 chronic assessments were conducted
for all current and proposed uses of imidacloprid. The assessments show
that the total exposure for all registered and proposed uses of
imidacloprid is 28% and 15% of the acute (aRfD) and chronic (cRfD)
reference doses for the general US population and 71% and 42% of the
aRfD and cRfD, respectively for Children 1-2, the most exposed
population subgroup.]

	ii. Drinking water. [EPA assessment of the drinking water exposure
showed the estimated drinking water concentration to be 36 ppb and 17
ppb for acute and chronic exposure, respectively. The calculated
drinking water levels of comparison were 408 and 330 ppb, respectively.
]

	2. Non-dietary exposure. [Imidacloprid is currently registered for use
on the following residential non-dietary sites: Granular products for
application to lawns and ornamental plants; ready-to-use spray for
application to flowers, shrubs and house plants; plant spikes for
application to indoor and outdoor residential potted plants;
ready-to-use potting medium for indoor and outdoor plant containers;
liquid concentrate for application to lawns, trees, shrubs and flowers;
and ready-to-use liquid for directed spot application to cats and dogs.
In addition, there are numerous registered products intended for use by
commercial applicators to residential sites. These include gel baits for
cockroach control; products intended for commercial ornamental, lawn and
turf pest control; products for ant control; and products used as
preservatives for wood products, building materials, textiles and
plastics. The non-dietary exposure assessment is discussed in the Final
Rule on Imidacloprid Pesticide Tolerance published in Unit III.C.3. of
the Federal Register of June 13, 2003 (68 FR 35303). Addition of the
seed treatment use will have no impact on the non-dietary exposure to
imidacloprid.]

D. Cumulative Effects

	[Imidacloprid is a chloronicotinyl insecticide.  At this time, the EPA
has not made a determination that imidacloprid and other substances that
may have a common mechanism of toxicity would have cumulative effects.
Therefore, for this proposal, it is assumed that imidacloprid does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances and only the
potential risks of imidacloprid in its aggregate exposure are
considered.]

E. Safety Determination

	1. U.S. population. [Using the conservative exposure assumptions
described above and based on the completeness of the toxicity data, it
can be concluded that aggregate exposure to residues of imidacloprid
present a reasonable certainty of no harm.  Exposure from residues in
crops (based on a Tier 1 assessment) utilizes 28% of the aPAD and 15% of
the cPAD.  EPA generally has no concerns for exposures below 100% of the
Population Adjusted Doses.  Drinking water levels of concern are well
above the estimated drinking water concentrations as calculated by
conservative models.  An aggregate assessment for all uses for
imidacloprid demonstrated that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the US Population from these uses of imidacloprid.]

	2. Infants and children. [EPA has considered data from developmental
toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit and a 2 generation reproduction
study in the rat. These studies are discussed under Section B
(Toxicology Profile) above.  The developmental toxicity data
demonstrated no increased sensitivity of rats or rabbits to in utero
exposure to imidacloprid. In addition, the multi generation reproductive
toxicity study did not identify any increased sensitivity of rats to in
utero or post natal exposure. Parental NOAELs were lower or equivalent
to developmental or offspring NOAELs. The developmental toxicity studies
are designed to evaluate adverse effects on the developing organism
resulting from maternal pesticide exposure during gestation.
Reproduction studies provide information relating to effects from
exposure to the pesticide on the reproductive capability of mating
animals and data on systemic toxicity.

FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold
margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold
effects to account for pre and post natal toxicity and the completeness
of the data base unless EPA determines that a different margin of safety
will be safe for infants and children. EPA has determined that the
toxicological database is complete for FQPA purposes and that there are
no residual uncertainties for pre-/post-natal toxicity for imidacloprid.
 Based on the available toxicity data the EPA has recommended that the
Special FQPA Safety Factor be reduced to 1x.

Based on the exposure assessments described above and on the
completeness and reliability of the toxicity data, it can be concluded
that the dietary exposure from all label and pending uses of
imidacloprid consumes 71% of the aPAD at the 95th percentile and 42% of
the cPAD for the most sensitive population subgroup, all infants and
children 1-2 years, respectively.  Thus, it can be concluded that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate
exposure to imidacloprid residues.]

B*

!

"

B*

B*

B*

B*

B*

&

(

r

·

ú

û

!

"

3

<

E

f

g

r

h

‚

ƒ

’

“

–

—

ž

Ÿ

±

²

³

´

¹

º

»

¼

Í

Î

ã

 h

$ h

h

h

 h

h

h

F. International Tolerances

	[Imidacloprid is an insecticide used throughout the world to control
insect pests in crops, trees, ornamental plants and turf. Codex MRLs
have been established for numerous uses of imidacloprid.

 PAGE

 PAGE   6


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48741-48743]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22659]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; Fiat Chrysler Automobiles US LLC

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Fiat Chrysler Automobiles US
LLC's, (FCA) petition for exemption of the Jeep Wrangler vehicle line
in accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has
determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard.
(Theft Prevention Standard).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
2018 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West Building, W43-
439, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's
phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated June 2, 2017, FCA
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard for its Jeep Wrangler vehicle line beginning with
MY 2018. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard
equipment for the entire vehicle line.
    Under 49 CFR part 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
grant an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its
petition, FCA provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for its Jeep Wrangler vehicle line. FCA stated that its MY 2018
Jeep Wrangler vehicle line will be installed with the Sentry Key
Immobilizer System (SKIS) antitheft device as standard equipment on the
entire vehicle line. The SKIS will provide passive vehicle protection
by

preventing the engine from operating unless a valid electronically
encoded key is inside the cabin of the vehicle and a valid key code is
detected in the ignition system of the vehicle. Key components of the
antitheft device will include an immobilizer, a Radio Frequency Hub
Module (RFHM), Engine Control Module (ECM), Body Controller Module
(BCM), a Transponder Key/Finger Operated Button (FOB) with Integrated
Key (FOBIK) and an Instrument Panel Cluster (IPC) which contains the
telltale function only. According to FCA, these components work
collectively to perform the immobilizer function. FCA will not provide
an audible alert, however, the vehicle will be equipped with a security
indicator in the instrument panel cluster that will flash if an invalid
transponder key is detected. Specifically, FCA stated that its Wrangler
vehicles will be equipped with a security indicator that acts as a
diagnostic indicator. If the RFHM detects an invalid transponder key or
if a transponder key related fault occurs, the security indicator will
flash. If the RFHM detects a system malfunction or the SKIS becomes
ineffective, the security indicator will stay on. The SKIS also
performs a self-test each time the ignition system is turned to the RUN
position and will store fault information in its RFHM memory if a
system malfunction is detected.
    FCA's submission is considered a complete petition as required by
49 CFR 543.7 in that it meets the general requirements contained in
543.5 and the specific content requirements of 543.6.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 49 CFR part
543.6, FCA provided information on the reliability and durability of
the device. FCA conducted tests based on its own specified standards
(i.e., voltage range and temperature range) and stated its belief that
the device meets the stringent performance standards prescribed.
Specifically, FCA stated that its device must demonstrate a minimum of
95 percent reliability with 90 percent confidence and 100 percent
system functionality prior to being shipped from the supplier to the
vehicle assembly plant for installation in the vehicles. FCA also
stated that each transponder key has a unique identification code that
is permanently programmed into it by the manufacturer and must be
programmed into the RFHM. Once a transponder key has been programmed to
a particular vehicle, it cannot be used on any other vehicle.
    FCA stated that the SKIS immobilizer feature is activated when the
transponder key is removed from the ignition system (whether the doors
are open or not) and the ignition system is in the ``OFF'' position.
Specifically, once the SKIS is activated, only a valid transponder key
that is recognized by the ignition system will disable it and allow the
vehicle to start and continue to run. FCA stated that the functions and
features of the SKIS are all integral to the BCM in this vehicle. The
RFHM contains a Radio Frequency (RF) transceiver and a microprocessor
and it initiates the ignition process by communicating with the BCM.
The RFHM and the ECM both use software that includes a rolling code
algorithm strategy which helps to reduce the possibility of
unauthorized SKIS disarming. The microprocessor-based SKIS hardware and
software also uses electronic messages to communicate with other
electronic modules in the vehicle over the Controller Area Network
(CAN) data bus.
    FCA further stated that the SKIS uses RF communication with an
Advanced Encryption System (AES) to obtain confirmation that the
transponder key is a valid FOBIK for operating the vehicle. The RFHM
initiates the ignition process by communicating with the BCM. The RFHM
contains an RF transceiver and a microprocessor. The RFHM is paired
with a Keyless Go START/STOP push button (also known as the Keyless
Ignition Node (``KIN'')). The RFHM receives Low Frequency (LF) and/or
RF signals from the Sentry Key transponder through a tuned RF antenna.
When the Keyless Go START/STOP button is pressed on the KIN, the RFHM
transmits an LF signal to the transponder key. The RFHM then waits for
a RF signal response from the transponder in the FOBIK. If the response
received identifies the FOBIK as valid, the communication between the
RFHM, the BCM, and the ECM proceeds, and the ECM allows the engine to
start. If the ECM receives an invalid key message or receives no
message from the RFHM over the CAN data bus, the engine will be
disabled. FCA further stated that its antitheft immobilizer device
prevents the engine from running for more than two seconds unless a
valid transponder key is recognized by the ignition system.
Additionally, FCA stated that only six consecutive invalid start
attempts will be permitted and that all other attempts will be locked
out by preventing the fuel injectors from firing and disabling the
starter.
    FCA stated that it expects the Jeep Wrangler vehicle line to mirror
the lower theft rate results achieved by the Jeep Grand Cherokee
vehicle line when ignition immobilizer systems were installed as
standard equipment on the line. FCA stated that it has offered the SKIS
immobilizer device as standard equipment on all Jeep Grand Cherokee
vehicles since MY 1999. According to FCA, the average theft rate for
Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles, based on NHTSA's theft rate data for the
four model years prior to 1999 (1995-1998), when a vehicle immobilizer
device was not installed as standard equipment was 5.3574 per one
thousand vehicles produced. This was significantly higher than the
1990/1991 median theft rate of 3.5826. However, FCA also indicated that
the average theft rate for the Jeep Grand Cherokee for the nine model
years (1999-2009, excluding MY 2007 and 2009) after installation of the
standard immobilizer device was 2.5704, significantly lower than the
median. The Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicle line was also granted an
exemption from the parts-marking requirements beginning with MY 2004
(67 FR 79687, December 30, 2002). FCA further exerts that NHTSA's theft
rate data for the Jeep Grand Cherokee indicates that the inclusion of a
standard immobilizer device resulted in a 52 percent net average
reduction in vehicle thefts. Theft rate data reported in the Federal
Register notices published by the agency show that the theft rate for
the Jeep Wrangler vehicle line, using an average of three MYs' data
(2012-2014) is also 0.3980, which is significantly lower than the
median theft rate established by the agency.
    Based on the evidence submitted by FCA, the agency believes that
the antitheft device for the Jeep Wrangler vehicle line is likely to be
as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard (49 CFR 41). The agency concludes that the device will provide
four of the five types of performance listed in 49 CFR part
543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; preventing defeat or circumvention
of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the
vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and
durability of the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR part 543.7(b), the agency
grants a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of
part 541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541. The agency
finds that FCA has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft

device for the vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing
and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). This
conclusion is based on the information FCA provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full FCA's
petition for exemption for its Jeep Wrangler vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with its MY
2018 Jeep Wrangler vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541,
Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft
Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f)
contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all
part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future
product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is
granted and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary
in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines
exempted from the parts marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard. FCA stated that an official nameplate for the vehicle has not
yet been determined.
    If FCA decides not to use the exemption for this vehicle line, it
must formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the
vehicle line must be fully marked as required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if FCA wishes in the future to modify the device
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. 49 CFR part 543.7(d) states that a
part 543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line
exempted under this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on
which the line's exemption is based. Further, 49 CFR part 543.9(c)(2)
provides for the submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to
permit the use of an antitheft device similar to but differing from the
one specified in that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that 49 CFR
part 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and
itself. The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
part 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-22659 Filed 10-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P