[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 17, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9963-9968]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03087]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91094; File No. SR-MEMX-2021-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MEMX LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
Exchange's Fee Schedule

February 10, 2021.
    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 January 29, 2021, MEMX LLC (``MEMX'' or the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the 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 is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
to amend the Exchange's fee schedule applicable to Members \3\ (the
``Fee Schedule'') pursuant to Exchange Rules 15.1(a) and (c). The
Exchange proposes to implement the changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant
to this proposal on February 1, 2021. The text of the proposed rule
change is provided in Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(p).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Fee
Schedule to (i) increase the standard rebate for executions of orders
(other than Retail Orders \4\) in securities priced at or above $1.00
per share that add displayed liquidity to the Exchange; (ii) increase
the standard rebate for executions of Retail Orders in securities
priced at or above $1.00 per share that add displayed liquidity to the
Exchange; (iii) increase the standard fee for executions of orders in
securities priced at or above $1.00 per share that remove liquidity
from the Exchange; and (iv) adopt a fee for executions of orders in
securities priced below $1.00 per share that are routed to and executed
on an away market and that remove liquidity from the market to which
they are routed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A ``Retail Order'' means an agency or riskless principal
order that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 that originates
from a natural person and is submitted to the Exchange by a Retail
Member Organization, provided that no change is made to the terms of
the order with respect to price or side of market and the order does
not originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized
methodology. See Exchange Rule 11.21(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or rebates/incentives to be insufficient. More specifically,
the Exchange is only one of 16 registered equities exchanges, as well
as a number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange
venues, to which market participants may direct their order flow. Based
on publicly available information, no single registered equities
exchange currently has more than approximately 15% of the total market
share of executed volume of equities trading.\5\ Thus, in such a low-
concentrated and highly competitive market, no single equities trading
venue possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order
flow, and the Exchange currently represents less than 1% of the overall
market share.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Market share percentage calculated month-to-date for January
2021 as of January 28, 2021. The Exchange receives and processes
data made available through consolidated data feeds (i.e., CTS and
UTDF).
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Increased Standard Rebate for Added Displayed Volume
    The Exchange proposes to increase the standard rebate provided for
executions of orders (other than Retail Orders) in securities priced at
or above $1.00 per share that are displayed on the MEMX Book \7\ and
add liquidity to the Exchange (``Added Displayed Volume''). Currently,
the Exchange provides a standard rebate of $0.0029 per share for
executions of Added Displayed Volume. The Exchange now proposes to
increase the standard rebate provided for executions of Added Displayed
Volume to $0.0034 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``MEMX Book'' refers to the Exchange system's electronic
file of orders. See Exchange Rule 1.5(q).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Increased Standard Rebate for Added Displayed Retail Volume
    The Exchange also proposes to increase the standard rebate provided
for executions of Retail Orders in securities priced at or above $1.00
per share that are displayed on the MEMX Book and add liquidity to the
Exchange (``Added Displayed Retail Volume''). Currently, the Exchange
provides a standard rebate of $0.0034 per share for executions of Added
Displayed Retail Volume. The Exchange now proposes to increase the
standard rebate provided for executions of Added Displayed Retail
Volume to $0.0037 per share. As a recent entrant in the equities market
and to attract additional order flow to the Exchange to help it compete
with other equities trading venues, the Exchange previously adopted a
higher standard rebate for executions of Added Displayed Retail Volume
relative to the standard rebate for executions of Added Displayed
Volume to incentivize Members to submit additional order flow in the
form of Retail Orders to the Exchange.\8\ The proposed increase rebate
for executions of Added Displayed Retail Volume is designed to maintain
a higher rebate for such orders relative to the standard rebate for
Added Displayed Volume, which the Exchange is proposing to increase
from $0.0029 per share to $0.0034 per share, as described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90555 (December 3,
2020), 85 FR 79244 (December 9, 2020) (SR-MEMX-2020-14).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Increased Standard Fee for Removed Volume
    The Exchange also proposes to increase the standard fee charged for
executions of orders in securities priced at or above $1.00 per share
that remove liquidity from the Exchange (``Removed Volume'').
Currently, the Exchange charges a standard fee of $0.0025 per share for
executions of Removed Volume. The Exchange now proposes to increase the
standard fee charged for executions of Removed Volume to $0.0026 per
share.
Adoption of Standard Fee for Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume
    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to adopt a standard fee for
executions of orders in securities priced below $1.00 per share that
are routed to and executed on an away market and that remove liquidity
from the market to which they are routed (``Routed Removed Sub-Dollar
Volume''). Currently, the Exchange does not charge a fee or provide a
rebate for executions of Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume. The Exchange
now proposes to charge a standard fee of 0.30% of the total dollar
value of each execution of Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume. The
Exchange notes that the routing services offered by the Exchange and
its affiliated broker-dealer are completely optional and market
participants can readily select between various providers of routing
services, including other exchanges and broker-dealers.
Additional Discussion
    The purpose of the proposed increased standard rebates for
executions of Added Displayed Volume

and Added Displayed Retail Volume is for business and competitive
reasons, as the Exchange believes such increased rebates would
incentivize Members to submit additional displayed liquidity-adding
order flow (including both Retail Orders and non-retail orders) to the
Exchange, which the Exchange believes would promote price discovery and
price formation, provide more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads, and deepen liquidity that is subject to the Exchange's
transparency, regulation and oversight, thereby enhancing market
quality to the benefit of all Members and investors.
    The purpose of the proposed increased standard fee for executions
of Removed Volume and the proposed adoption of a standard fee for
executions of Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume is also for business and
competitive reasons, as the Exchange believes such fees would generate
additional revenue to offset some of the costs associated with the
proposed increased rebates for executions of Added Displayed Volume and
Added Displayed Retail Volume described above, and the Exchange's
operations generally, in a manner that is consistent with the
Exchange's overall pricing philosophy of encouraging added displayed
liquidity. The proposed standard fee for executions of Routed Removed
Sub-Dollar Volume is also intended to recoup some of the Exchange's
costs associated with handling such orders, including the costs of
operating the Exchange's affiliated routing broker-dealer and the
applicable fees charged by the away market for removing liquidity, as
the current pricing structure would require the Exchange to absorb all
such costs.
    The proposed rule change does not include different fees or rebates
that depend on the amount of orders submitted to, and/or transactions
routed or executed on or through, the Exchange or its affiliated
routing broker-dealer. Accordingly, all fees and rebates described
above are applicable to all Members, regardless of the overall volume
of a Member's routing or trading activities on or through the Exchange
or its affiliated routing broker-dealer.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented
and competitive market in which market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular
venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient, and the
Exchange represents only a small percentage of the overall market. The
Commission and the courts have repeatedly expressed their preference
for competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and also recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow or discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to new or different pricing structures being
introduced into the market. The Exchange also reiterates that the
routing services offered by the Exchange and its affiliated broker-
dealer are completely optional and that the Exchange operates in a
highly competitive market in which market participants can readily
select between various providers of routing services with different
product offerings and different pricing. Accordingly, competitive
forces constrain the Exchange's transaction fees and rebates generally,
including with respect to Added Displayed Volume, Added Displayed
Retail Volume, Removed Volume and Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume, and
market participants can readily trade on and/or or utilize the routing
services of competing venues if they deem pricing levels or product
offerings at those other venues to be more favorable. The Exchange
believes the proposed rule change reflects a reasonable and competitive
pricing structure designed to incentivize market participants to add
aggressively priced displayed liquidity and direct their order flow to
the Exchange, which the Exchange believes would promote price discovery
and price formation, provide more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads, and deepen liquidity that is subject to the Exchange's
transparency, regulation and oversight, thereby enhancing market
quality to the benefit of all Members and investors.
Increased Standard Rebate for Added Displayed Volume
    The Exchange believes the proposed increased standard rebate for
executions of Added Displayed Volume is reasonable, equitable and
consistent with the Act because it is designed to incentivize Members
to submit additional displayed liquidity-adding orders to the Exchange,
which would enhance liquidity on the Exchange and promote price
discovery and price formation. The Exchange further believes the
proposed increased standard rebate is reasonable and appropriate
because it is comparable to, and competitive with, the rebates provided
by other exchanges for executions of liquidity-adding displayed non-
retail orders in securities priced at or above $1.00 per share.\12\
However, the Exchange notes that certain of these exchanges provide a
tiered pricing structure that provides a comparable rebate for
executions of liquidity-adding displayed non-retail orders in
securities priced at or above $1.00 per share only when certain volume
thresholds are met.\13\ The Exchange believes that, consistent with the
Exchange's existing pricing structure, it is reasonable, equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory to provide a higher rebate for executions
of displayed orders that add liquidity than to non-displayed orders as
this rebate structure is designed to incentivize Members to submit
displayed orders to the Exchange, thereby contributing to price
discovery and price formation, consistent with the overall goal of
enhancing market quality. The

Exchange further believes that this fee is equitably allocated and not
unfairly discriminatory because it applies equally to all Members and,
when coupled with lower fees for removing liquidity, is designed to
facilitate increased activity on the Exchange to the benefit of all
Members by providing more trading opportunities and promoting price
discovery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., the MIAX PEARL, LLC equities trading fee
schedule on its public website (available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_PEARL_Equities_Fee_Schedule_01012021.pdf), which reflects a
standard rebate of $0.0032 per share to add displayed liquidity in
Tape A and Tape C securities priced at or above $1.00 per share and
a standard rebate of $0.0035 per share to add displayed liquidity in
Tape B securities priced at or above $1.00 per share; the NYSE Arca,
Inc. (``NYSE Arca'') equities trading fee schedule on its public
website (available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/NYSE_Arca_Marketplace_Fees.pdf), which reflects rebates up
to $0.0033 per share to add displayed liquidity in Tape A and Tape C
securities priced at or above $1.00 per share depending on the
applicable tier and rebates up to $0.0034 per share to add displayed
liquidity in Tape B securities priced at or above $1.00 per share
depending on the applicable tier.
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that under this proposal the Exchange will
continue to pay a higher rebate for Added Displayed Volume than the fee
it charges for removing such volume, and as such the Exchange will
continue to have a negative net capture (i.e., will lose money) with
respect to such transactions. The Exchange notes that, as a recent
entrant in the equities market, it will only utilize a pricing
structure whereby it maintains a negative net capture with respect to
such transactions for a limited time in an effort to encourage market
participants to join, connect to, and participate on the Exchange. As
noted above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market, and
the Exchange believes this pricing structure will enable it to
effectively compete with other exchanges by attracting Members and
order flow to the Exchange, which will help the Exchange to gain market
share for executions. The Exchange expects to modify its pricing
structure after it has gained sufficient participation from market
participants and market share for executions to eliminate the negative
net capture and instead be profitable with respect to such
transactions.
Increased Standard Rebate for Added Displayed Retail Volume
    Similarly, the Exchange believes the proposed increased standard
rebate for executions of Added Displayed Retail Volume is reasonable,
equitable and consistent with the Act because it is designed to
incentivize Members to submit additional displayed liquidity-adding
Retail Orders to the Exchange, which would enhance liquidity in Retail
Orders on the Exchange and promote price discovery and price formation.
The Exchange further believes the proposed increased standard rebate is
reasonable and appropriate because it is comparable to, and competitive
with, the rebates provided by other exchanges for executions of
liquidity-adding displayed retail orders in securities priced at or
above $1.00 per share.\14\ However, the Exchange notes that these
exchanges provide a tiered pricing structure that provides a comparable
rebate for executions of liquidity-adding displayed retail orders in
securities priced at or above $1.00 per share only when certain volume
thresholds are met.\15\ The Exchange believes that it is reasonable,
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to provide a higher rebate
for executions of displayed Retail Orders that add liquidity than to
non-displayed Retail Orders as this rebate structure is designed to
incentivize Members to submit displayed orders to the Exchange, thereby
contributing to price discovery and price formation, consistent with
the overall goal of enhancing market quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See e.g., the NYSE Arca equities trading fee schedule on
its public website (available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/NYSE_Arca_Marketplace_Fees.pdf), which
reflects rebates ranging from $0.0033-$0.0038 per share, depending
on the applicable tier, for retail orders in securities priced at or
above $1.00 per share that add displayed liquidity; the Cboe EDGX
Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe EDGX'') equities trading fee schedule on its
public website (available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edgx/), which reflects rebates ranging from
$0.0032-$0.0037 per share, depending on the applicable tier, for
retail orders in securities priced at or above $1.00 per share that
add liquidity.
    \15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange understands that Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \16\
prohibits an exchange from establishing rules that are designed to
permit unfair discrimination between market participants. However,
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act does not prohibit exchange members or other
broker-dealers from discriminating, so long as their activities are
otherwise consistent with the federal securities laws. While the
Exchange believes that markets and price discovery optimally function
through the interactions of diverse flow types, it also believes that
growth in internalization has required differentiation of Retail Order
flow from other order flow types. The differentiation proposed herein
by the Exchange to maintain a higher rebate for Added Displayed Retail
Volume relative to the standard rebate for Added Displayed Volume
(i.e., non-retail orders) is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination, but instead to promote a competitive process around
Retail Order executions such that retail investors would continue to
receive better rebates on the Exchange than comparable non-retail
orders in order to encourage entry of Retail Orders to the Exchange.
Accordingly, the Exchange believes the proposed increased standard
rebate for executions of Added Displayed Retail Volume is equitably
allocated and not unfairly discriminatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Increased Standard Fee for Removed Volume
    The Exchange believes the proposed increased standard fee for
executions of Removed Volume is reasonable, equitable and consistent
with the Act because it is designed to generate additional revenue to
offset some of the costs associated with the proposed increased
standard rebates for executions of Added Displayed Volume and Added
Displayed Retail Volume in a manner that is consistent with the
Exchange's overall pricing philosophy of encouraging added displayed
liquidity. The Exchange further believes this proposed standard fee is
reasonable and appropriate because it represents a modest increase from
the current fee and remains lower than or comparable to, and
competitive with, the fees charged by other exchanges for executions of
orders in securities priced at or above $1.00 per share that remove
liquidity.\17\ The Exchange further believes that this proposed
standard fee is equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory
because it will apply equally to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See, e.g., the Cboe EDGX equities trading fee schedule on
its public website (available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edgx/), which reflects a standard
fee of $0.0027 per share to remove liquidity in securities priced at
or above $1.00 per share; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'')
trading fee schedule on its public website (available at http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2), which
reflects a standard fee of $0.0030 per share to remove liquidity in
securities priced at or above $1.00 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adoption of Standard Fee for Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume
    The Exchange believes the proposed adoption of a standard fee of
0.30% of the total dollar value of executions of Routed Removed Sub-
Dollar Volume is reasonable, equitable and consistent with the Act
because it is designed to generate additional revenue to offset some of
the costs associated with the proposed increased standard rebates for
executions of Added Displayed Volume and Added Displayed Retail Volume,
as well as to recoup some of the Exchange's costs associated with
handling such orders, including the costs of operating the Exchange's
affiliated routing broker-dealer and the applicable fees charged by the
away market for removing liquidity, as the current pricing structure
would require the Exchange to absorb all such costs, in a manner that
is consistent with the Exchange's overall pricing philosophy of
encouraging added displayed liquidity. The Exchange further believes
this proposed standard fee is reasonable

and appropriate because it is identical to the fees charged by several
other exchanges for executions of orders in securities priced below
$1.00 per share that are routed to and executed on an away market and
that remove liquidity from the market to which they are routed.\18\ The
Exchange further believes that this proposed standard fee is equitably
allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because it will apply equally
to all Members that choose to use the Exchange's routing services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See, e.g., the Cboe EDGX equities trading fee schedule on
its public website (available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edgx/), which reflects a standard
fee of 0.30% of the total dollar value of executions of routed
orders in securities priced below $1.00 per share that remove
liquidity from the destination venue; the Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc.
equities trading fee schedule on its public website (available at
https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edga/),
which reflects a standard fee of 0.30% of the total dollar value of
executions of routed orders in securities priced below $1.00 per
share that remove liquidity from the destination venue; the Nasdaq
equities trading fee schedule on its public website (available at
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=pricelisttrading2), which
reflects a standard fee of 0.30% of the total dollar value of
executions of routed orders in securities priced below $1.00 per
share that remove liquidity from the destination venue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also notes that the proposal does not include
different fees or rebates that depend on the amount of orders submitted
to, and/or transactions routed or executed on or through, the Exchange
or its affiliated routing broker-dealer. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes the proposed pricing changes are reasonable, equitable, and
non-discriminatory as such changes are applicable to all Members,
regardless of the overall volume of a Member's routing or trading
activities on or through the Exchange or its affiliated broker-dealer.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Instead, as
discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes would
encourage the submission of additional order flow to the Exchange,
thereby promoting market depth, enhanced execution opportunities, as
well as price discovery and transparency for all Members. Furthermore,
the Exchange believes that the proposed changes would allow the
Exchange to continue to compete with other routing and execution venues
by providing competitive pricing for transactions in Added Displayed
Volume, Added Displayed Retail Volume, Removed Volume, and Routed
Removed Sub-Dollar Volume, thereby making it a desirable destination
venue for its customers. As a result, the Exchange believes that the
proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation
NMS of fostering competition among orders, which promotes ``more
efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders, large
and small.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes would continue to
incentivize market participants to direct order flow to the Exchange.
Greater liquidity benefits all Members by providing more trading
opportunities and encourages Members to send orders to the Exchange,
thereby contributing to robust levels of liquidity, which benefits all
Members. The proposed fees and rebates for transactions in Added
Displayed Volume, Added Displayed Retail Volume, Removed Volume, and
Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume would be available to all similarly-
situated market participants, and, as such, the proposed change would
not impose a disparate burden on competition among market participants
on the Exchange. As such, the Exchange believes the proposed changes
would not impose any burden on intramarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intermarket Competition
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market with respect
to execution and routing services. Members have numerous alternative
venues that they may participate on and direct their order flow to,
including 15 other equities exchanges and numerous alternative trading
systems and other off-exchange venues. As noted above, no single
registered equities exchange currently has more than approximately 15%
of the total market share of executed volume of equities trading. Thus,
in such a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no single
equities trading venue possesses significant pricing power in the
execution of order flow. Moreover, the Exchange believes that the ever-
shifting market share among the exchanges from month to month
demonstrates that market participants can shift order flow or
discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of products, in
response to new or different pricing structures being introduced into
the market. Additionally, market participants can readily select
between various providers of routing services with different product
offerings and different pricing. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain the Exchange's transaction fees and rebates generally,
including with respect to Added Displayed Volume, Added Displayed
Retail Volume, Removed Volume, and Routed Removed Sub-Dollar Volume,
and market participants can readily choose to send their orders to
other exchange and off-exchange venues for execution and/or routing
services if they deem fee levels or product offerings at those other
venues to be more favorable. As described above, the proposed changes
are competitive proposals through which the Exchange is seeking to
encourage certain order flow to be sent to the Exchange.
    Additionally, the Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \20\ The fact
that this market is competitive has also long been recognized by the
courts. In NetCoalition v. SEC, the D.C. Circuit stated as follows:
``[n]o one disputes that competition for order flow is `fierce.' . . .
As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S. national market system, buyers and
sellers of securities, and the broker-dealers that act as their order-
routing agents, have a wide range of choices of where to route orders
for execution'; [and] `no exchange can afford to take its market share
percentages for granted' because `no exchange possesses a monopoly,
regulatory or otherwise, in the execution of order flow from broker
dealers'. . . .''.\21\ Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its
proposed fee change imposes any burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
    \21\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2006-21)).

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

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \22\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \23\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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-MEMX-2021-02 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-MEMX-2021-02. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MEMX-2021-02, and should be submitted on
or before March 10, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-03087 Filed 2-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 31, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 167)]
[Notices]
[Page 44864-44865]
[DOCID:fr31au09-102]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2009-0396]

Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management
and Budget: OMB Control Number: 1625-0008.

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
request for comments announces that the U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding
an Information Collection Request (ICR), abstracted below, to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) requesting an extension of its approval for
the following collection of information: 1625-0008, Regattas and Marine
Parades. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the
public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork
burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.

DATES: Please submit comments on or before September 30, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2009-0396] to the Docket Management Facility (DMF) at the
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) or to OIRA. To avoid
duplication, please submit your comments by only one of the following
means:
    (1) Electronic submission: (a) To Coast Guard docket at http://
www.regulation.gov. (b) To OIRA by e-mail via: oira_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Mail or Hand delivery: (a) DMF (M-30), DOT, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590-0001. Hand deliver between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-
366-9329. (b) To OIRA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503,
attention Desk Officer for the Coast Guard.
    (3) Fax: (a) To DMF,<PHONE_NUMBER>. (b) To OIRA at<PHONE_NUMBER>. To
ensure your comments are received in time, mark the fax, attention Desk
Officer for the Coast Guard.
    The DMF maintains the public docket for this Notice. Comments and
material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in
this Notice as being available in the docket, will become part of the
docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room W12-140
on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. You may also find the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
Commandant (CG-611), ATTN Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S. Coast
Guard, 2100 2nd St., SW., Stop 7101, Washington, DC 20593-7101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Arthur Requina, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for
questions on these documents. Contact Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions on the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard invites comments on whether
this ICR should be granted based on it being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
collections; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the
collections; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
information subject to the collections; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of collections on respondents, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
    Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Control Number
of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number of this request,
[USCG 2009-0396]. For your comments to OIRA to be considered, it is
best if they are received on or before the September 30, 2009.
    Public participation and request for comments: We encourage you to
respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials.
We will post all comments received, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov. They will include any personal information you
provide. We have an agreement with DOT to use their DMF. Please see the
``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.
    Submitting comments: If you submit a comment, please include the
docket number [USCG-2009-0396], indicate the specific section of the
document to which each comment applies, providing a reason for each
comment. We recommend you include your name,

mailing address, an e-mail address, or other contact information in the
body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission. You may submit comments and material by
electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address
under ADDRESSES; but please submit them by only one means. If you
submit them by mail or 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 them by mail and would like to know that they
reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. In response to your comments, we may revise the ICR or
decide not to seek an extension of approval for this collection. The
Coast Guard and OIRA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period.
    Viewing comments and documents: Go to http://www.regulations.gov to
view documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the
docket. Click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2009-0396''
and click ``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the
``Actions'' column. You may also visit the DMF in room W12-140 on the
West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments
received in dockets by the name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Privacy
Act statement regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008
issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Previous Request for Comments

    This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The
Coast Guard has published the 60-day notice (74 FR 26874, June 4, 2009)
required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no comments.

Information Collection Request.

    Title: Regattas and Marine Parades.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0008.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: Sponsors of marine events.
    Abstract: The Coast Guard needs to determine whether a marine event
may present a substantial threat to safety of human life on navigable
waters and determine which measures are necessary to ensure safety of
life during these events. The Coast Guard must be made aware of these
events and sponsors must notify the Coast Guard via the most efficient
means and address environmental impacts.
    Forms: CG-4423.
    Burden Estimate: The estimated annual burden remains 3,000 hours
per year.

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: August 20, 2009.
M.B. Lytle,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Assistant Commandant for Command,
Control, Communications, Computers and Information Technology.
[FR Doc. E9-20863 Filed 8-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 75 (Thursday, April 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23276-23277]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09077]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2013-0012; OMB No. 1660-NEW]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request: Community Drill Day Registration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a new information collection. In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning
the online registration process for the FEMA Community Drill Day.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 17, 2013.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2010-0012. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Room 835, Washington, DC
20472-3100, referencing Docket ID FEMA-2010-0012.
    (3) Facsimile. Submit comments to<PHONE_NUMBER> referencing Docket
ID FEMA-2010-0012.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chad Stover, Individual and Community
Preparedness Division Program Specialist, FEMA,<PHONE_NUMBER> for
additional information. You may contact the Records Management Division
for copies of the proposed collection of information at facsimile
number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of Presidential Policy Directive 8
(PPD-8): National Preparedness, the President tasked the Secretary of
Homeland Security to ``coordinate a comprehensive campaign to build and
sustain national preparedness, including public outreach and community-
based and private-sector programs to enhance national resilience.''
FEMA intends to conduct one or more Community Drill Days, coordinated
nationally by FEMA. Schools, businesses, faith-based organizations,
governments at all levels, other community organizations, and families
will participate in this Community Drill Day by voluntarily taking part
in a simultaneous multi-hazard drill and public education effort.

    In order to fulfill its mission, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency Individual and Community Preparedness Division; will collect
information from individuals and organizations through the Community
Drill Day online registration.
    FEMA's Individual and Community Preparedness Division would like to
create a new online information collection process by which individuals
and organizations submit information via a Web site. Registration
provides an individual or organization links to educational information
and activities about preparedness and response related to specific
hazards. Registrants will receive important updates and messages from
FEMA. This registry supports the mission of FEMA's Individual and
Community Preparedness Division, to help achieve greater community
resiliency nationwide.

Collection of Information

    Title: Community Drill Day Registration.
    OMB Control Number: 1660-NEW.
    Type of Information Collection: New information collection.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 008-0-8, Community Drill Day.
    Abstract: FEMA's Individual and Community Preparedness Division is
requesting comments on a new information collection for its
registration of individuals and organizations for the Community Drill
Day. The registration process allows for individuals and organizations
to submit information on their participation in Community Drill Day.
The registration process will provide FEMA with valuable information
about the public's participation in Community Drill Day that will
inform future outreach strategies related to participation in Community
Drill Day.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households; Farms; Business or
other for-profit; Federal Government; Not-for-profit institutions;
State, local or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 50,000.
    Number of Responses: 50,000.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 15,000 hours.

                                                 Table A.1--Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Number of                                      Total                     Total
                                                          Number of    responses      Total      Avg. burden per      annual    Avg. hourly     annual
        Type of respondent          Form name/form No.   respondents      per       number of     response  (in    burden  (in   wage rate    respondent
                                                                       respondent   responses         hours)          hours)                     cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individuals or Households; Farms;  FEMA Form 008-0-8/         50,000            1       50,000  .3 hour..........       15,000      $21.74*  $326,100.00
 Business or other for-profit;      Community Drill Day                                         (18 mins.).......
 Federal Government; Not-for-       Registration.
 profit institutions; State,
 local or Tribal Government.
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total........................  ....................       50,000  ...........       50,000  .................       15,000  ...........  $326,100.00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: The ``Avg. Hourly Wage Rate'' for each respondent includes a 1.4 multiplier to reflect a fully-loaded wage rate. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.htm

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $326,100.00. There are no annual costs to respondents
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There is no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$49,210.00.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: April 10, 2013.
Charlene D. Myrthil,
Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2013-09077 Filed 4-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-27-P


Year State Species Metric TonsPounds $ 1980 Maryland PERCH, W 435.6 960,300 341,541 1980 Virginia PERCH, W 75.3 166,000 54,805 1981 Maryland PERCH, W 302.1 666,100 264,569 1981 Virginia PERCH, W 55.6 122,500 54,717 1982 Maryland PERCH, W 312.3 688,600 355,973 1982 Virginia PERCH, W 49.2 108,500 52,600 1983 Maryland PERCH, W 260.2 573,700 341,855 1983 Virginia PERCH, W 33.4 73,700 31,351 1984 Maryland PERCH, W 325.7 718,000 353,259 1984 Virginia PERCH, W 50.5 111,400 47,955 1985 Maryland PERCH, W 209.5 461,918 178,369 1985 Virginia PERCH, W 72.4 159,523 74,034 1986 Maryland PERCH, W 236.1 520,600 244,989 1986 Virginia PERCH, W 109.4 241,100 112,904 1987 Maryland PERCH, W 214.6 473,000 259,903 1987 Virginia PERCH, W 111.3 245,300 106,991 1988 Maryland PERCH, W 332.1 732,100 371,747 1988 Virginia PERCH, W 93.1 205,200 93,557 1989 Maryland PERCH, W 301.8 665,300 380,802 1989 Virginia PERCH, W 28.4 62,600 46,265 1990 Maryland PERCH, W 379.3 836,176 390,826 1990 Virginia PERCH, W 21.2 46,793 33,254 1991 Maryland PERCH, W 266.6 587,798 335,099 1991 Virginia PERCH, W 47.5 104,629 55,668 1992 Maryland PERCH, W 318.4 702,018 1,321,026 1992 Virginia PERCH, W 21.5 47,456 37,524 1993 Maryland PERCH, W 417.2 919,675 715,530 1993 Virginia PERCH, W 84.1 185,496 109,554 1994 Maryland PERCH, W 442.1 974,652 762,835 1994 Virginia PERCH, W 37.4 82,489 65,617 1995 Maryland PERCH, W 555.2 1,223,919 950,032 1995 Virginia PERCH, W 53.3 117,444 83,384 1996 Maryland PERCH, W 620.1 1,367,120 800,554 1996 Virginia PERCH, W 69.2 152,491 113,478 1997 Maryland PERCH, W 933.7 2,058,330 884,786 1997 Virginia PERCH, W 88.9 195,881 110,935 1998 Maryland PERCH, W 660.7 1,456,531 884,453 1998 Virginia PERCH, W 55.7 122,748 94,485 1999 Maryland PERCH, W 687.7 1,516,148 762,790 1999 Virginia PERCH, W 62.2 137,213 120,728 2000 Maryland PERCH, W 871.6 1,921,423 940,789 2000 Virginia PERCH, W 81.7 180,113 57,315 2001 Maryland PERCH, W 883.2 1,947,134 800,547 2001 Virginia PERCH, W 86.1 189,772 145,316 2002 Maryland PERCH, W 718 1,582,971 558,759 2002 Virginia PERCH, W 50.1 110,460 61,861 2003 Maryland PERCH, W 669.8 1,476,669 555,641 2003 Virginia PERCH, W 49.5 109,049 67,487


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35671-35674]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13119]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0340]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zones; Safety Zones Within the Captain of the Port New
Orleans Zone; New Orleans to Baton Rouge, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish temporary safety zones
for multiple locations and dates within the Captain of the Port New
Orleans' zone. These safety zones are necessary to protect persons and
vessels from potential safety hazards associated with fireworks
displays on or over federal waterways. Entry into these zones is
prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
New Orleans or a designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before June 20, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0340 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Commander (LCDR) James
Gatz, Sector New Orleans, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

BNM Broadcast Notice to Mariners
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
MSIB Marine Safety Information Bulletin
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Coast Guard proposes establishment of temporary safety zones
for the following upcoming fireworks displays:
    (1) A corporate event scheduled for one hour in the evening between
6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on June 15, 2016. The fireworks barge will be
positioned adjacent to the foot of Dumaine Street in New Orleans, LA,
at approximate mile marker 94.5 above Head of Passes on the Lower
Mississippi River. The Coast Guard was notified about this event on
April 18, 2016.
    (2) The Llamasoft Convention scheduled for one hour in the evening
between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on June 16, 2016. The fireworks barge
will be positioned adjacent to Spanish Plaza in New Orleans, LA, at
approximate mile marker 95.0 above Head of Passes on the Lower
Mississippi River. The Coast Guard was notified about this event on
April 1, 2016.
    (3) The U.S. Travel Association's ``IPW'' Conference scheduled for
one hour in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on June 22,
2016. The fireworks barge will be positioned adjacent to Mardi Gras
World in New Orleans, LA, at approximate mile marker 96.2 above Head of
Passes on the Lower Mississippi River. The Coast Guard was notified
about this event on April 1, 2016.
    (4) The St. John the Baptist Parish Independence Day Celebration
scheduled for one hour in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
on June 30, 2016. The fireworks barge will be positioned adjacent to
the Parish Courthouse in Edgard, LA, at approximate mile marker 138.0
above Head of Passes on the Lower Mississippi River. The Coast Guard
was notified about this event on March 15, 2016. This is an annually
recurring event that is published in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5, line no.
2. This year's occurrence is scheduled for a different date and
location than currently listed in the CFR. Should a permanent change be
necessary for this safety zone, we will include it in a future
rulemaking proposing permanent updates to 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5.
    (5) The L'Auberge Casino Independence Day Celebration scheduled for
one hour in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on July 4,
2016. The fireworks barge will be positioned adjacent to the L'Auberge
Casino in Baton Rouge, LA, at approximate mile marker 216.5 above Head
of Passes on the Lower Mississippi River. The Coast Guard was notified
about this event on January 27, 2016. This is an annually-recurring
event that is not currently published in Table 5 of 33 CFR 165.801. We
plan to include it in a future rulemaking proposing permanent updates
to 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5.
    (6) The City of Mandeville Independence Day Celebration scheduled
for one hour in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on July 4,
2016. The fireworks barge will be positioned adjacent to the Mandeville
City Lakefront in Mandeville, LA, at approximate position 30[deg]
21.200 N., 90[deg] 04.500 W. The Coast Guard was notified about this
event on March 14, 2016. A safety zone was established in 2015 for a
similar event. Based on the history of this event and safety zone need,
we are considering making this safety zone a permanent recurring
regulation, and may include it in a future rulemaking proposing
permanent updates to 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5.
    (7) The American Psychological Association Convention scheduled for
one hour in the evening between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on September
23, 2016. The fireworks barge will be positioned adjacent to Dumaine
Street in New Orleans, LA, at approximate mile marker 94.5 above Head
of Passes on the Lower Mississippi River. The Coast Guard was notified
about this event on February 24, 2016.
    Due to the risks associated with aerial barge-based fireworks
displays taking place on and over these sections of navigable
waterways, the proposed safety zones are needed to protect persons and
property. The Coast Guard would notify the public and maritime
community of the proposed safety zones and their respective enforcement
periods via broadcast notices to mariners (BNM). The Coast Guard
proposes this rulemaking under authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to establish multiple temporary safety
zones within the Captain of the Port New Orleans (COTP) Zone on several
different dates and in several different locations. The safety zones to
be established would be enforced on the respective dates listed above
and in the proposed regulatory text as provided at the end of this
document. Each safety zone will be limited to a duration of one hour,
and will occur during the evenings on the dates specified, between the
hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. Entry into these safety zones is
prohibited unless permission has been granted by the COTP New Orleans,
or a designated representative.
    The COTP New Orleans will inform the public through BNMs of the
enforcement period for each safety zone as well as any changes in the
planned schedule. Mariners and other members of the public may also
contact Coast Guard Sector New Orleans Command Center to inquire about
the status of the safety zone by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory

approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes
the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing
costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM
has not been designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget.
    Six of these proposed safety zones would be no greater than 1 river
mile in length and would restrict navigation on the Lower Mississippi
River for no longer than one hour each. The remaining proposed safety
zone would be limited to a circular area 1200 feet in diameter located
along the North Shore of Lake Pontchartrain, in an area with ample room
for other traffic to navigate around the safety zone, and would be in
effect for no longer than one hour. Due to the limited scope and short
duration of each proposed safety zone, the impacts on routine
navigation are expected to be minimal. Additionally, the Coast Guard
would issue maritime notices widely available to waterway users and
deviation from the proposed safety zones may be requested and would be
considered on a case-by-case basis.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zones may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator. If you think that your
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a
small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic
impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why
you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would
economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This rule proposes to establish seven
temporary safety zones within the Captain of the Port New Orleans zone.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist and
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include

any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0340 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0340  Safety Zones; Captain of the Port New Orleans Zone;
New Orleans to Baton Rouge, LA.

    (a) Safety zones. The following areas are safety zones:
    (1) Fireworks display, New Orleans, LA. (i) Location. All waters of
the Lower Mississippi River from mile marker 94.0 to mile marker 95.0
Above Head of Passes.
    (ii) Effective date and time. June 15, 2016, for one hour in the
evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (2) LLamasoft Convention fireworks display, New Orleans, LA. (i)
Location. All waters of the Lower Mississippi River from mile marker
94.5 to mile marker 95.5 Above Head of Passes.
    (ii) Effective date and time. June 16, 2016, for one hour in the
evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (3) U.S. Travel Association fireworks display, New Orleans, LA. (i)
Location. All waters of the Lower Mississippi River from mile marker
95.7 to mile marker 96.7 Above Head of Passes.
    (ii) Effective date and time. June 22, 2016, for one hour in the
evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (4) St. John the Baptist Independence Day Celebration fireworks
display, Edgard, LA. (i) Location. All waters of the Lower Mississippi
River from mile marker 137.5 to mile marker 138.5 Above Head of Passes.
    (ii) Effective date and time. June 30, 2016, for one hour in the
evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (5) L'Auberge Casino Independence Day Celebration fireworks
display, Baton Rouge, LA. (i) Location. All waters of the Lower
Mississippi River from mile marker 216.0 to mile 217.0 Above Head of
Passes.
    (ii) Effective date and time. July 4, 2016, for one hour in the
evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (6) City of Mandeville Independence Day Celebration fireworks
display, Mandeville, LA. (i) Location. All waters of Lake Pontchartrain
extending 600 feet in any direction from 30[deg] 21.200 N., 090[deg]
04.500 W.
    (ii) Effective date and time. July 4, 2016, for one hour in the
evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (7) American Psychological Association Convention fireworks
display, New Orleans, LA. (i) Location. All waters of the Lower
Mississippi River from mile marker 94.0 to mile marker 95.0 Above Head
of Passes.
    (ii) Effective date and time. September 23, 2016, for one hour in
the evening between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m.
    (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into these zones is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) New Orleans
or designated personnel. Designated personnel include commissioned,
warrant and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard assigned to units
under the operational control of USCG Sector New Orleans. For each
event, the COTP New Orleans designated representative will be announced
via Marine Safety Information Bulletin and Notice to Mariners.
    (2) Vessels requiring deviation from this rule must request
permission from the COTP New Orleans or a COTP New Orleans designated
representative. They may be contacted via the U.S. Coast Guard Sector
New Orleans Command Center, via VHF-FM Channel 16 or by phone at (504)
365-2200.
    (3) Persons and vessels permitted to deviate from this safety zone
regulation and enter the restricted areas must transit at the slowest
safe speed and comply with all lawful directions issued by the COTP New
Orleans or the designated representative.
    (c) Information Broadcasts. The COTP New Orleans or designated
representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to
mariners of the enforcement periods for the safety zones as well as any
changes in the planned schedules.

    Dated: May 13, 2016.
P.C. Schifflin,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port New Orleans.
[FR Doc. 2016-13119 Filed 6-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: May 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 104)]
[Notices]
[Page 30912]
[DOCID:fr29my08-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM93-11-000]

Revisions to Oil Pipeline Regulations Pursuant to the Energy
Policy Act of 1992; Notice of Annual Change in the Producer Price Index
for Finished Goods

May 21, 2008.
    The Commission's regulations include a methodology for oil
pipelines to change their rates through use of an index system that
establishes ceiling levels for such rates. The Commission bases the
index system, found at 18 CFR 342.3, on the annual change in the
Producer Price Index for Finished Goods (PPI-FG), plus one point three
percent (PPI+1.3). The Commission determined in an ``Order Establishing
Index For Oil Price Change Ceiling Levels'' issued March 21, 2006, that
PPI+1.3 is the appropriate oil pricing index factor for pipelines to
use.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 114 FERC ] 61,293 at P 2 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulations provide that the Commission will publish annually,
an index figure reflecting the final change in the PPI-FG, after the
Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes the final PPI-FG in May of each
calendar year. The annual average PPI-FG index figures were 160.4 for
2006 and 166.6 for 2007.\2\ Thus, the percent change (expressed as a
decimal) in the annual average PPI-FG from 2006 to 2007, plus 1.3
percent, is positive .051653.\3\ Oil pipelines must multiply their July
1, 2007, through June 30, 2008, index ceiling levels by positive
1.051653 \4\ to compute their index ceiling levels for July 1, 2008
through June 30, 2009, in accordance with 18 CFR Sec.  342.3(d). For
guidance in calculating the ceiling levels for each 12 month period
beginning January 1, 1995,\5\ see Explorer Pipeline Company, 71 FERC
61,416 at n.6 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes the final figure
in mid-May of each year. This figure is publicly available from the
Division of Industrial Prices and Price Indexes of the BLS, at (202)
691-7705, and in print in August in Table 1 of the annual data
supplement to the BLS publication Producer Price Indexes via the
Internet at http://www.bls.gov/ppi/home.htm. To obtain the BLS data,
click on ``Get Detailed PPI Statistics,'' and then under the heading
``Most Requested Statistics'' click on ``Commodity Data.'' At the
next screen, under the heading ``Producer Price Index-Commodity,''
select the first box, ``Finished goods-WPUSOP3000,'' then scroll all
the way to the bottom of this screen and click on Retrieve data.
    \3\ [166.6--160.4]/160.4 = 0.038653 + .013 = 0.051653
    \4\ 1 + 0.051653 = 1.051653
    \5\ For a listing of all prior multipliers issued by the
Commission, see the Commission's Web site, http://www.ferc.gov. The
table of multipliers can be found under the headings ``Oil'' and
``Index.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this Notice in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print this Notice via the Internet through
FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public Reference
Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at
888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. The full text of
this Notice is available on FERC's Home Page at the eLibrary link. To
access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the
last three digits of this document in the docket number field and
follow other directions on the search page.
    User assistance is available for eLibrary and other aspects of
FERC's website during normal business hours. For assistance, please
contact the Commission's Online Support at 1-866-208-3676 (toll free)
or<PHONE_NUMBER> (e-mail at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov), or the Public
Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-Mail the Public
Reference Room at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-11912 Filed 5-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 46 (Tuesday, March 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 12628]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05444]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9924-27-Region-6]

Clean Water Act Section 303(d): Availability of List Decisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA's) decision to partially approve and proposal to
partially disapprove Louisiana's 2014 Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
submission of water quality limited segments and associated pollutants.
EPA requests public comment on waters associated with the proposed
disapproval and may, based on comment, amend its proposal prior to
final action.
    On February 26, 2015, EPA partially approved and proposed to
partially disapprove Louisiana's 2014 Section 303(d) submission, or
list. Specifically, EPA approved Louisiana's listing of 279 waterbody-
pollutant combinations, and associated priority rankings. EPA proposed
to disapprove Louisiana's decision not to list 43 water quality limited
segments and associated pollutants constituting 93 waterbody-pollutant
combinations. EPA also proposed to add these waterbody-pollutant
combinations to the 2014 Section 303(d) list because applicable numeric
water quality standards were not attained in these segments for one of
the following parameters: Dissolved oxygen (marine criterion);
turbidity; and minerals (individually or a combination of sulfates,
chlorides, and/or total dissolved solids).
    EPA is providing the public the opportunity to review its proposed
additions to Louisiana's 2014 Section 303(d) list. EPA will consider
and respond to public comments specific to the proposed addition of 43
segments and associated pollutants and may, based on comment, amend its
proposed additions before finalizing Louisiana's 2014 Section 303(d)
list. Comments not associated with the segments proposed for addition
to the 2014 Section 303(d) list or associated with the 279 waterbody
pollutant combinations previously approved by EPA are not solicited.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing to EPA on or before March
30, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the decisions should be sent to Evelyn
Rosborough, Environmental Protection Specialist, Water Quality
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6,
1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, TX 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Oral
comments will not be considered. Copies of the documents which explain
the rationale for EPA's decisions and a list of the 43 water quality-
limited segments and associated pollutant combinations EPA proposes for
inclusion on Louisiana's Final 2014 Section 303(d) list can be obtained
at EPA Region 6's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/tmdl/index.htm, or by writing or calling Ms. Rosborough at the above
address. Underlying documents from the administrative record for these
decisions are available for public inspection at the above address.
Please contact Ms. Rosborough to schedule an inspection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evelyn Rosborough at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
requires that each State identify those waters for which existing
technology-based pollution controls are not stringent enough to attain
or maintain State water quality standards. For those waters, States are
required to establish Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) according to a
priority ranking. EPA's Water Quality Planning and Management
regulations include requirements related to the implementation of
Section 303(d) of the CWA (40 CFR 130.7). The regulations require
States to identify water quality-limited waters still requiring TMDLs
every two years. The list of waters still needing TMDLs must also
include priority rankings and must identify the waters targeted for
TMDL development during the next two years (40 CFR 130.7).
    Consistent with EPA's regulations, Louisiana submitted to EPA its
listing decisions under Section 303(d) on August 19, 2014. On February
26, 2015, EPA approved Louisiana's listing of 279 waterbody-pollutant
combinations and associated priority rankings. EPA proposed to
disapprove Louisiana's decisions not to list 43 waterbodies. These
waterbodies were proposed for addition by EPA because the applicable
numeric water quality standards for dissolved oxygen; or turbidity; or
mineral(s) were not attained in these segments. EPA solicits public
comment on its identification of 43 additional waters and associated
pollutants constituting 93 waterbody pollutant combinations for
inclusion on Louisiana's Final 2014 Section 303(d) list.

    Dated: February 26, 2015.
William K. Honker,
Director, Water Quality Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-05444 Filed 3-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P