[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 117 (Friday, June 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36562-36567]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13039]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95091; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2022-036]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend the Exchange's Transaction Fees at Equity 7, Section 118(a)

June 13, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 1, 2022, 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, 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 proposes to amend the Exchange's transaction fees at
Equity 7, Section 118, to: (i) eliminate the Nasdaq Growth Program, at
Equity 7, Section 114(j); (ii) adjust or eliminate several of the
Exchange's transaction credits, at Equity 7, 118(a); (iii) add a new
credit to Equity 7, Section 118(a); and (iv) re-organize, re-format,
and re-state the Exchange's schedule of transaction fees and credits at
Equity 7, Section 118(a), as described further below.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/nasdaq/rules, 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 proposed Rule change will (i) eliminate the Nasdaq Growth
Program, at Equity 7, Section 114(j); (ii) adjust or eliminate several
of the Exchange's transaction credits, at Equity 7, 118(a); (iii) add a
new credit to Equity 7, Section 118(a); and (iv) re-organize, re-
format, and re-state the Exchange's schedule of transaction fees and
credits at Equity 7, Section 118(a).
Elimination of the Nasdaq Growth Program
    The Exchange presently offers the ``Nasdaq Growth Program,'' as set
forth in Equity 7, Section 114(j),\3\ which exists to incentivize
members to increase the extent to which they add liquidity to the
Exchange over time. Under the Nasdaq Growth Program, the Exchange
provides a credit of $0.0025 per share executed (in securities priced
at $1 or more) to members that provide a certain amount of liquidity to
the Exchange and also grow the extent to which they add such liquidity
over time. Specifically, a member is eligible for the credit if it
both: (A) adds greater than 750,000 shares a day on average during the
month through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs; and (B)
increases its shares of liquidity provided through one or more of its
Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs as a percent of Consolidated Volume \4\ by
20% versus the member's Growth Baseline or (ii) have met the growth
criteria in Equity 7, Section 114(j)(1)(A) and (j)(1)(B)(i) in three
separate months and maintained or increased its shares of liquidity
provided through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs as a
percent of Consolidated Volume compared to the Growth Baseline
established when the member met the

criteria for the third month.\5\ The Exchange provides this Nasdaq
Growth Program credit in lieu of other credits that it otherwise makes
available to a member for displayed quotes/orders (other than
Supplemental Orders or Designated Retail Orders) that provide liquidity
under Equity 7, Section 118 if the former credit is greater than the
latter credit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78977 (September 29,
2016), 81 FR 69140 (October 5, 2016) (SR-NASDAQ-2016-132).
    \4\ Pursuant to Equity 7, Section 118(a), the term
``Consolidated Volume'' shall mean the total consolidated volume
reported to all consolidated transaction reporting plans by all
exchanges and trade reporting facilities during a month in equity
securities, excluding executed orders with a size of less than one
round lot. For purposes of calculating Consolidated Volume and the
extent of a member's trading activity the date of the annual
reconstitution of the Russell Investments Indexes shall be excluded
from both total Consolidated Volume and the member's trading
activity. For the purposes of calculating the extent of a member's
trading activity during the month on Nasdaq and determining the
charges and credits applicable to such member's activity, all M-ELO
Orders that a member executes on Nasdaq during the month will count
as liquidity-adding activity on Nasdaq.
    \5\ As defined in Equity 7, Section 114, the ``Growth Baseline''
is the member's shares of liquidity provided in all securities
through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs as a percent
of Consolidated Volume during the last month a member qualified for
the Nasdaq Growth Program under Equity 7, Section 114(j)(1)(B)(i).
If a member has not qualified for a credit under this program, its
May 2018 share of liquidity provided in all securities through one
or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs as a percent of
Consolidated Volume is used to establish a baseline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to eliminate the Nasdaq Growth Program
because it has not been successful in accomplishing its objectives.
That is, it has not induced members to grow materially the extent to
which they add liquidity to the Exchange over time. The Exchange has
limited resources to allocate to incentive programs like this one and
it must, from time to time, reallocate those resources to maximize
their net impact on the Exchange, market quality, and participants.
Going forward, the Exchange plans to reallocate the resources it
devotes to the Nasdaq Growth Program to other incentive programs that
it hopes will be more impactful.
Adjustments to Transaction Credits for Displayed Quotes/Orders (Other
Than Supplemental Orders or Designated Retail Orders) That Provide
Liquidity to the Exchange
    Next, the Exchange proposes to adjust several existing credits to
its members for displayed quotes/orders (other than Supplemental Orders
or Designated Retail Orders) that provide liquidity to the Exchange.
For all of these credits described below, the purpose of the changes is
to recalibrate the credits to account for changes in member behavior
over time that have rendered the credits less challenging for members
to attain. That is, the Exchange proposes to reduce the amount of the
credits because members now readily meet the volume requirements to
qualify for them, such that the credits reward these members for
remaining static in their activity on the Exchange. By reducing the
amount of these credits, the Exchange wishes to incent such members to
strive to qualify for higher available credits by further increasing
the extent to which they add liquidity to the Exchange.
    Currently, the Exchange provides a $0.0025 per share executed
credit for securities in all three Tapes to a member with shares of
liquidity provided in all securities through one or more of its Nasdaq
Market Center MPIDs that represent more than 0.10% of Consolidated
Volume. The Exchange proposes to reduce the amount of this credit to
$0.0020 per share executed for securities in all three Tapes.
    Currently, the Exchange also provides a $0.0020 per share executed
credit for securities in Tape C to a member with shares of liquidity
provided in all securities representing less than 0.10% of Consolidated
Volume, through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs; provided
that (i) the member also provides a daily average of at least 250,000
shares of liquidity provided in securities listed on an exchange other
than Nasdaq, or (ii) the member routes a daily average volume of at
least 10,000 shares during the month via the QDRK routing strategy. The
Exchange proposes to reduce the amount of this credit for securities in
Tape C to $0.0018 per share executed.
    Currently, the Exchange provides a $0.0025 per share executed
credit for securities in all three Tapes to a member that provides a
daily average of at least 4 million shares of liquidity, of which more
than 1.5 million shares per day must consist of non-displayed
liquidity, excluding midpoint orders, or Midpoint Extended Life Orders
(``M-ELOs''). The Exchange proposes to reduce the amount of this credit
to $0.0020 per share executed for securities in all three Tapes.
    Finally, the Exchange currently provides a credit of $0.0020 per
share executed for securities in Tapes A and B and $0.0015 per share
executed for securities in Tape C for all other displayed quotes/orders
that provide liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to reduce
the amount of this credit to $0.0018 per share executed for securities
in Tapes A and B, and to $0.0013 per share executed for securities in
Tape C.
Elimination of Two Credits for Non-Displayed Orders (Other Than
Supplemental Orders) That Provide Liquidity to the Exchange
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate two credits for non-displayed
orders (other than Supplemental orders) that provide liquidity to the
Exchange.
    Presently, the Exchange provides a credit of $0.0019 per share
executed for securities in Tapes and B [sic], and $0.0013 per share
executed for securities in Tape C, to a member with midpoint orders
(excluding buy (sell) orders with Midpoint pegging that receive an
execution price that is lower (higher) than the midpoint of the NBBO)
if the member (i) executes a combined volume of 1 million or more
shares in midpoint orders provided and M-ELO executed during the month
through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs and (ii) has a
10% or greater increase in midpoint orders provided and M-ELO executed
through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs during the month
over the month of April 2019. The Exchange proposes to eliminate this
credit.
    The Exchange also provides a credit of $0.00125 per share executed
for securities in Tapes A and B, and $0.0010 per share executed for
securities in Tape C, to a member with other non-displayed orders if
the member, during the month (i) provides 0.30% or more of Consolidated
Volume through non-displayed orders (including midpoint orders) and
through M-ELO Orders; and (ii) increases providing liquidity through
non-displayed orders (including midpoint orders) and through M-ELO
Orders by 0.10% or more as a percentage of Consolidated Volume relative
to the member's August 2020 Consolidated Volume provided through non-
displayed orders (including midpoint orders) and through M-ELO. The
Exchange also proposes to eliminate this credit.
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate these two credits because the
baseline months for the growth elements of these tiers--April 2019 and
August 2020--are no longer relevant benchmarks, as substantial
increases in trading volumes have occurred since times. As such, these
credits no longer provide growth incentives that are aligned with the
Exchange's needs. Again, the Exchange has limited resources to devote
to incentive programs, and it is appropriate for the Exchange to
reallocate these incentives periodically in a manner that best achieves
the Exchange's overall mix of objectives.
Adjustment to Existing Credits and Addition of New Credit for Non-
Displayed Orders (Other Than Supplemental Orders) That Provide
Liquidity to the Exchange
    The Exchange proposes to adjust and add to a series of credits that
the Exchange presently offers to members that either grow the extent of
their volumes of M-ELO or midpoint orders relative to a baseline month
or execute a substantial number of such orders on the Exchange during
the month.
    Presently, the Exchange provides a credit of $0.0001 per share
executed to

a member, through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs,
either: (i) increases the extent of its ADV of M-ELO Orders and/or
midpoint orders (that execute against M-ELO Orders) in all securities
by an ADV of 1 million shares or more during the month relative to the
month of June 2021; or (ii) executes a combined volume of at least 3
million shares ADV through midpoint orders provided and M-ELO Orders
during the month and increases the extent of its ADV of midpoint orders
provided and M-ELO Orders in all securities by 100% or more during the
month relative to the month of June 2021. Alternatively, the Exchange
provides a credit of $0.00015 per share executed to a member which,
through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs, either: (i)
increases the extent of its ADV of M-ELO Orders and/or midpoint orders
(that execute against M-ELO Orders) in all securities by an ADV of 2
million shares or more during the month relative to the month of June
2021; or (ii) executes a combined volume of at least a 4 million shares
ADV through midpoint orders provided and M-ELO Orders during the month
and increases the extent of its ADV of midpoint orders provided and M-
ELO Orders in all securities by 150% or more during the month relative
to the month of June 2021. The Exchange proposes to lower first of
these credits from $0.0001 to $0.00005 per share executed and lower the
second of these credits from $0.00015 to $0.00010 per share executed.
    Next, the Exchange proposes to add a new credit of $0.0015 per
share executed for a member that, through one or more of its Nasdaq
Market Center MPIDs, executes a combined volume of at least a 5 million
shares ADV through midpoint orders provided and M-ELO Orders during the
month. This new proposed credit will not be combinable with the other
two existing credits.
    Together, the adjustments to the two existing credits, and the
addition of the third, will re-align existing incentives for members to
grow or add M-ELO or midpoint liquidity while introducing a new
incentive for members to add even larger volumes of M-ELO and midpoint
orders during the month to attain the highest existing level of
credits. To the extent that the Exchange succeeds through these
proposals in increasing the addition of midpoint or M-ELO liquidity or
executions on the Exchange, all participants will benefit from the
increase in market quality.
    Additionally, and as part of the reorganization described below,
the Exchange proposes to relocate the two existing credits and the new
credit in the section of the schedule entitled ``Supplemental credit to
member for displayed quotes/orders (other than Supplemental Orders or
Designated Retail Orders) that provide liquidity (per share executed.''
The Exchange believes that the three credits are, in fact, supplemental
credits and belong logically in that section of the schedule.
    Finally, for ease of reference, the Exchange proposes to refer to
these three credits as ``M-ELO Supplemental Credits,'' and label them
M-ELO Supplemental Credit A ($0.00005), B ($0.0001), and C ($0.00015),
respectively.
Elimination of Supplemental Credit for Certain Midpoint Orders
    Presently, the Exchange provides a supplemental credit for midpoint
orders (excluding buy (sell) orders with midpoint pegging that receive
an execution price that is lower (higher) than the midpoint of the
NBBO). A member currently receives a credit of either: (a) $0.0001 per
share executed for orders in securities in all three Tapes if the
member, during the month (i) provides at least 15 million shares of
midpoint liquidity per day during the month and (ii) increases
providing liquidity through midpoint orders by 10% or more relative to
the member's May 2021 ADV provided through midpoint orders; or (b)
$0.0002 per share executed for orders in securities in all three Tapes
if the member, during the month (i) provides at least 15 million shares
of midpoint liquidity per day during the month; and (ii) increases
providing liquidity through midpoint orders by 30% or more relative to
the member's May 2021 ADV provided through midpoint orders. The
Exchange proposes to eliminate the $0.001 per share executed credit but
retain the $0.0002 per share executed credit.
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate the credit because many members
now readily meet the volume requirements to qualify for it, such that
the credit in many cases rewards these members for remaining static in
their activity on the Exchange. By eliminating the lower of these two
credits, the Exchange wishes to incent such members to strive to
qualify for the higher credit by further increasing the extent to which
they add liquidity to the Exchange.
Reorganization and Re-Formatting of Exchange's Schedule of Transaction
Credits and Charges
    In addition to the above changes to the substance of the Exchange's
schedule of credits and fees, at Equity 7, Section 118(a), the Exchange
also proposes non-substantive amendments to the schedule that will re-
organize and re-format it to render it shorter, better and more
logically organized, and easier to read and comprehend.
    Most notably, the Exchange proposes to consolidate the schedule of
charges and fees and restate it as a single chart. Presently, the Rule
lists the contents of the schedule three times successively--once for
securities in Tape A, once for securities in Tape B, and once for
securities in Tape C. This format is cumbersome for participants to
read and onerous for the Exchange to maintain. The proposed amendments
will shorten and simplify the schedule by listing all of the Exchange's
transaction credits and charges one time. It will do so by reformatting
the schedule into a chart with rows listing each tier of credit/charge
and columns listing the applicable amounts of those credits/charges for
transactions in securities in each of the three Tapes. In the proposed
amended and restated schedule, when a credit or charge does not apply
to securities in a particular Tape, the chart will so indicate with the
term ``N/A.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The proposed rule change is similar to the formatting and
organization changes made to the Exchange's sister exchange, Nasdaq
BX, Inc., in 2019. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85912
(May 22, 2019); 84 FR 24834 (May 29, 2019) (SR-BX-2019-013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to re-format and emphasize in bold type
the headings for the credits and fees that comprise the schedule so
that members can distinguish these sections more easily. The proposal
will simplify the schedule by removing redundant explanatory text, such
as the phrase ``per share executed'' for each credit/charge (the
headings of the chart already indicate that all credits and charges
apply on a per share executed basis), ``charge to . . .'' (as the
headings of the schedule already state where they are charges and
credits), and ``in additional to the credits provided for . . .''
(which is not needed for credits already under the heading
``Supplemental credit to member . . .'').
    The proposed amendments will consolidate existing definitions of
certain terms used within Section 118(a) into a single bulleted
definitions paragraph at the outset of the Rule, including the terms
``ADV'' (or ``Average Daily Volume''), ``Consolidated Volume,'' and
``Designated Retail Order.'' The proposal will not make any substantive
changes to the meanings of these terms.
    The proposal will also re-format aspects of the schedule where
presently, multiple credits and charges are listed in the same cells,
and are thus difficult to read. For example, the proposed rule

will separate the single cells listing a ``charge or credit to [a]
member entering TFTY, MOPB, MOPP, SAVE, SOLV, CART, QDRK, QCST or
directed order that executes in a venue other than the Nasdaq Market
Center'' into multiple rows corresponding to each of them individually.
    Additionally, the proposal will amend the existing line item
entitled ``Credit to other members'' by retitling it ``Credit for all
other displayed quotes/order that provide liquidity (per share
executed).'' This proposal will clarify that this credit applies to
members for all other displayed quotes/orders not otherwise covered by
all of the preceding credits for displayed quotes or orders that
provide liquidity to the Exchange (rather than a subset thereof).
    The Exchange will relocate several charges and credits that are
either misplaced or logically belong in other sections of the schedule.
For example, in the section entitled ``Charge to enter orders that
execute in the Nasdaq Market Center,'' the Exchange proposes to move
the $0.0030 per share executed credit for ``all other orders that
execute in the Nasdaq Market Center'' to the end of the section, as it
is a baseline charge absent the availability of discounted charges.
Additionally, the Exchange proposes to move from the displayed credits
section of the schedule to the section listing supplemental credits for
displayed orders/quotes that provide liquidity (other than Supplemental
orders or Designated Retail Orders) the following three credits, as
these credits logically are supplemental, rather than regular credits:
(a) a $0.0005 per share executed credit for securities in Tape B for a
member with shares of liquidity provided in all securities through one
or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that represent at least 1.75%
of Consolidated Volume, including shares of liquidity provided with
respect to securities that are listed on exchanges other than Nasdaq or
NYSE that represent at least 0.60% of Consolidated Volume; (b) a
$0.0001 per share executed credit for securities in Tape B for a member
with shares of liquidity provided in securities that are listed on
exchanges other than Nasdaq or NYSE during the month representing at
least 0.10% of Consolidated Volume through one or more of its Nasdaq
Market Center MPIDs; and (c) a $0.0005 per share executed credit for
securities in Tape A for a member with shares of liquidity provided in
Tape A securities through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs
that represent at least 0.75% of Consolidated Volume, and shares of
liquidity provided in Tape B securities through one or more of its
Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs that represent at least 0.60% of
Consolidated Volume. Similarly, the Exchange proposes to relocate to
the regular displayed credits section of the schedule two credits that
are misplaced now in the supplemental credits section: (a) a $0.0026
per share executed credit for securities in all Tapes to a member that,
through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs: (i) provides
shares of liquidity in all securities that represent equal to or
greater than 0.15% of Consolidated Volume; (ii) increases the extent to
which it provides liquidity in all securities as a percentage of
Consolidated Volume by 20% or more during the month relative to the
month of May 2021; and (iii) has a ratio of at least 50% NBBO liquidity
provided (as defined in Equity 7, Section 114(g)) to liquidity provided
by displayed quotes/orders (other than Supplemental Orders or
Designated Retail Orders) during the month; and (b) a $0.0027 per share
executed credit for securities in all Tapes to a member that, through
one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs: (i) provides shares of
liquidity in all securities that represent equal to or greater than
0.20% of Consolidated Volume; (ii) increases the extent to which it
provides liquidity in all securities as a percentage of Consolidated
Volume by 35% or more during the month relative to the month of May
2021; and (iii) has a ratio of at least 60% NBBO liquidity provided (as
defined in Equity 7, Section 114(g)) to liquidity provided by displayed
quotes/orders (other than Supplemental Orders or Designated Retail
Orders) during the month. Finally, the Exchange proposes to relocate to
the section entitled ``Supplemental credit to member for displayed
quotes/orders (other than Supplemental Orders) that provide liquidity
(per share executed) the following credit, which was also misplaced in
error: a $0.0005 per share executed credit for securities in Tape B to
a member with shares of liquidity provided in securities that are
listed on exchanges other than Nasdaq or NYSE during the month
representing at least 0.10% of Consolidated Volume through one or more
of its Nasdaq Market Center MPIDs.
    Other non-substantive changes include correcting current
inconsistencies in terminology, capitalizing defined terms, de-
capitalizing undefined terms, and de-capitalizing the first word in the
row. Misspellings of certain terms, including ``RTFY,'' ``TFYY,'' and
``MELO,'' will be corrected to ``RFTY,'' ``TFTY,'' and ``M-ELO,''
respectively. The proposal also reconciles terminological
inconsistencies among the three existing statements of the schedule,
e.g., ``nondisplayed'' and ``non-displayed'', and ``of'' and ``of
which.'' The proposal also duly capitalizes the defined terms
``Order,'' ``Customer,'' and ``Market Hours.''
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that it provides for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
members and issuers and other persons using any facility, and is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. The proposal is also consistent with Section 11A
of the Act relating to the establishment of the national market system
for securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposals are Reasonable, an Equitable Allocation of Fees, and are
not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange's proposals are reasonable in several respects. As a
threshold matter, the Exchange is subject to significant competitive
forces in the market for equity securities transaction services that
constrain its pricing determinations in that market. The fact that this
market is competitive has long been recognized by the courts. In
NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 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' . . . .'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, while adopting a series of steps to improve the current market
model, 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.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9, 2005),
70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (``Regulation NMS Adopting
Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Numerous indicia demonstrate the competitive nature of this market.
For example, clear substitutes to the Exchange exist in the market for
equity security transaction services. The Exchange is only one of
several equity venues to which market participants may direct their
order flow. Competing equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing
structures to that of the Exchange, including schedules of rebates and
fees that apply based upon members achieving certain volume thresholds.
The Exchange is also subject to intense competition for retail order
flow with off-exchange competitors, including wholesale market makers.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory to eliminate the Nasdaq Growth Program because the
Program has not been successful in inducing members to grow materially
the extent to which they add liquidity to the Exchange over time. The
Exchange has limited resources to allocate to incentive programs like
this one and it must, from time to time, reallocate those resources to
maximize their net impact on the Exchange, market quality, and
participants. Going forward, the Exchange plans to reallocate the
resources it devotes to the Nasdaq Growth Program to other incentive
programs that it hopes will be more impactful.
    It is also reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory
for the Exchange to adjust several existing credits for displayed
quotes/orders (other than Supplemental Orders or Designated Retail
Orders) that provide liquidity to the Exchange. These adjustments will
recalibrate the credits to account for changes in member behavior over
time that have rendered the credits less challenging for members to
attain. That is, the Exchange proposes to reduce the amount of the
credits because many members now readily meet the volume requirements
to qualify for them, such that the credits in many cases reward these
members for remaining static in their activity on the Exchange. By
reducing the amount of these credits, the Exchange wishes to incent
such members to strive to qualify for higher available credits by
further increasing the extent to which they add liquidity to the
Exchange.
    It is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory for
the Exchange to eliminate two credits for non-displayed orders (other
than Supplemental orders) that provide liquidity to the Exchange. The
baseline months for the growth elements of these tiers--April 2019 and
August 2020--are no longer relevant benchmarks, as substantial
increases in trading volumes have occurred since these dates. As such,
these credits no longer provide growth incentives that are aligned with
the Exchange's needs. Again, the Exchange has limited resources to
devote to incentive programs, and it is appropriate for the Exchange to
reallocate these incentives periodically in a manner that best achieves
the Exchange's overall mix of objectives.
    It is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory for
the Exchange to lower two existing credits for members that add or grow
the extent to which they add midpoint or M-ELO liquidity to the
Exchange, as well as add a new such credit. Together, the adjustments
to the two existing credits, and the addition of the third, will re-
align existing incentives for members to grow or add M-ELO or midpoint
liquidity while introducing a new incentive for members to add even
larger volumes of M-ELO and midpoint orders during the month to attain
the highest existing level of credits. To the extent that the Exchange
succeeds through these proposals in increasing the addition of midpoint
or M-ELO liquidity or executions on the Exchange, all participants will
benefit from the increase in market quality.
    Furthermore, it is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory for the Exchange to eliminate one of its supplemental
credits for midpoint orders (excluding buy (sell) orders with midpoint
pegging that receive an execution price that is lower (higher) than the
midpoint of the NBBO). Many members now readily meet the volume
requirements to qualify for this credit, such that it rewards these
members for remaining static in their activity on the Exchange. By
eliminating the lower of these two credits, the Exchange wishes to
incent such members to strive to qualify for the higher credit by
further increasing the extent to which they add liquidity to the
Exchange.
    The Exchange notes that the credits affected by this proposal are
voluntary. Moreover, nothing about the Exchange's volume-based tiered
pricing model, as set forth in Equity 7, is inherently unfair; instead,
it is a rational pricing model that is well-established and ubiquitous
in today's economy among firms in various industries--from co-branded
credit cards to grocery stores to cellular telephone data plans--that
use it to reward the loyalty of their best customers that provide high
levels of business activity and incent other customers to increase the
extent of their business activity. It is also a pricing model that the
Exchange and its competitors have long employed with the assent of the
Commission. It is fair because it enhances price discovery and improves
the overall quality of the equity markets.
    Those participants that are dissatisfied with the elimination of
the Nasdaq Growth Program or the amendments to the Exchange's schedule
of credits are free to shift their order flow to competing venues that
provide more generous incentives or less stringent qualifying criteria.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable to re-
organize, re-format, and re-state its schedule of credits and charges,
Equity 7, Section 118(a). As noted above, the existing schedule is
needlessly long, complex, and repetitive, and it contains unintended
inconsistencies in terminology and capitalization, as well as several
typographical errors. The Exchange believes that its proposals to
address these issues will render the schedule shorter, simpler, more
consistent, better and more logically organized, and more readable, to
the benefit of investors, participants, and the public. It will also
ease the burden to the Exchange of administering the schedule when it
proposes to make substantive changes thereto, as it will no longer need
to make three amendments to the schedule to accomplish a single change.
The Exchange does not intend for the reorganization, reformatting, or
restatement of the schedule to themselves effect any substantive
changes to existing credits or charges.

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.
Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that its proposals will place any
category of Exchange participant at a competitive disadvantage.
    As noted above, the Exchange's intends for its proposed substantive
changes to its credits to reallocate its limited resources more
efficiently and

for optimized effect, to recalibrate them to reflect changing market
behavior, and to align them with the Exchange's overall mix of
objectives. The Exchange notes that its members are free to trade on
other venues to the extent they believe that these proposals are not
attractive. As one can observe by looking at any market share chart,
price competition between exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and
market share moving freely between exchanges in reaction to fee and
credit changes.
Intermarket Competition
    In terms of inter-market competition, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants
can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities available at
other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its credits and fees to remain competitive with
other exchanges and with alternative trading systems that have been
exempted from compliance with the statutory standards applicable to
exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify their own credits and
fees in response, and because market participants may readily adjust
their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to
which credit or fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. The proposals are reflective of this
competition.
    Even as one of the largest U.S. equities exchanges by volume, the
Exchange has less than 20% market share, which in most markets could
hardly be categorized as having enough market power to burden
competition. Moreover, as noted above, price competition between
exchanges is fierce, with liquidity and market share moving freely
between exchanges in reaction to fee and credit changes. This is in
addition to free flow of order flow to and among off-exchange venues,
which comprises upwards of 50% of industry volume.
    In sum, if the change proposed herein is unattractive to market
participants, it is likely that the Exchange will lose market share as
a result. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe that the proposed
change will impair the ability of members or competing order execution
venues to maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.
    Finally, the Exchange does not believe that its proposal to re-
organize, re-format, and re-state its schedule of credits and fees, at
Equity 7, Section 118(a), will have any impact on competition, as it
will merely render the schedule shorter, simpler, more consistent,
better and more logically organized, and more readable, to the benefit
of investors, participants, and the public. It will also ease the
burden to the Exchange of administering the schedule when it proposes
to make substantive changes thereto, as it will no longer need to make
three amendments to the schedule to accomplish a single change. The
Exchange does not intend for the reorganization, reformatting, or
restatement of the schedule to themselves effect any substantive
changes to existing credits or charges.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-036 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-10

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-036.
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-2022-036 and should
be submitted on or before July 8, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-13039 Filed 6-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 233 (Monday, December 6, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75680-75681]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30502]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

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

Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on February 9, 2011, from 8
a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
    Location: FDA White Oak Campus, Building 31 Conference Center, the
Great Room (rm. 1503), 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
20993-0002. Information regarding special accommodations due to a
disability, visitor parking and transportation may be accessed at:
http:[sol][sol]www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm; under the
heading ``Resources for You,'' click on ``White Oak Conference Center
Parking and Transportation Information for FDA Advisory Committee
Meetings.'' Please note that visitors to the White Oak Campus must have
a valid driver's license or other picture ID, and must enter through
Building 1.
    Contact Person: Nicole Vesely, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
31, rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX: 301 847-
8533, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee
Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC
area), code<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date
information on this meeting. A notice in the Federal Register about
last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory
committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide
timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's Web site
and call the appropriate advisory committee hot line/phone line to
learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

    Agenda: On February 9, 2011, the committee will discuss biologics
license application (BLA) 125377, with the proposed trade name YERVOY
(ipilimumab), submitted by Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. The proposed
indication (use) for this product is for the treatment of advanced
melanoma in patients who have received prior therapy.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http:[sol][sol]www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/
default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
January 25, 2011. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 10:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Those individuals
interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the
contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of
the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses
of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time
requested to make their presentation on or before January 14, 2011.
Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of
registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably
accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may
conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open
public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested
persons regarding their request to speak by January 18, 2011.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Nicole Vesely at
least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http:[sol][sol]www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: December 1, 2010.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010-30502 Filed 12-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 106 (Tuesday, June 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33790-33791]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11820]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2020-0040]

Pipeline Safety: Request for Special Permit; Gulf South Pipeline
Company, LLC

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this notice to solicit public comments on
a request for special permit received from Gulf South Pipeline Company,
LLC (GSPC). The special permit request is seeking relief from
compliance with certain requirements in the Federal pipeline safety
regulations. At the conclusion of the 30-day comment period, PHMSA will
review the comments received from this notice as part of its evaluation
to grant or deny the special permit request.

DATES: Submit any comments regarding this special permit request by
July 2, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference the docket number for this special
permit request and may be submitted in the following ways:
     E-Gov website: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management System: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: You should identify the docket number for the special
permit request you are commenting on at the beginning of your comments.
If you submit your comments by mail, please submit two (2) copies. To
receive confirmation that PHMSA has received your comments, please
include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may submit
comments at http://www.Regulations.gov.

    Note: There is a privacy statement published on http://www.Regulations.gov.

Comments, including any personal information provided, are posted
without changes or edits to http://www.Regulations.gov.

    Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this notice contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this notice, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Pursuant to 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 190.343, you may ask PHMSA to give confidential
treatment to information you give to the agency by taking the following
steps: (1) Mark each page of the original document submission
containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along with the
original document, a second copy of the original document with the CBI
deleted; and (3) explain why the information you are submitting is CBI.
Unless you are notified otherwise, PHMSA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this notice. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to Kay McIver, DOT, PHMSA-PHP-80, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Any commentary PHMSA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this matter.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General: Ms. Kay McIver by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Technical: Mr. Joshua Johnson by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA received a special permit request from
GSPC on March 16, 2020. The request is for GSPC's Index 818-9 Pipeline
which is currently in carbon dioxide (CO2) service under 49
CFR part 195 regulations. GSPC proposes to convert the line to natural
gas service. Pipeline operators converting pipelines to natural gas
service must follow 49 CFR 192.14: Conversion to service subject to
this part.
    GSPC is seeking a waiver from the requirements of 49 CFR
192.14(a)(4), which requires a pressure test to substantiate the
maximum allowable operating pressure of the pipeline (MAOP) in
accordance with 49 CFR part 192, subpart J. In lieu of a pressure test,
GSPC seeks a special permit to perform alternative risk control
activities, based on 49 CFR part 192, subpart O, integrity management
program principles, requirements, and assessments, as specified in the
proposed special permit conditions. The 16-inch diameter Index 818-9
Pipeline has a maximum operating pressure of 2,875 pounds per square
inch gauge (psig) while in CO2 service as a 49 CFR part 195
regulated pipeline. GSPC proposes to lower the Index 818-9 Pipeline
MAOP to 1,480 psig for operation as a 49 CFR part 192 regulated natural
gas transmission pipeline.
    The 16-inch diameter Index 818-9 Pipeline is 61-miles in length and
begins at a point southeast of Heidelberg, Mississippi, and runs
northeast to the Kemper County Power Plant in Kemper County,
Mississippi. The Index 818-9 Pipeline is located in Jasper, Clarke,
Lauderdale, and Kemper Counties in Mississippi.
    The special permit request for the Index 818-9 Pipeline is
available for review and public comment in the Docket No. PHMSA-2020-
0040. We invite interested persons to review and submit comments on the
special permit request in the docket. Please include any comments on
potential safety and environmental impacts that may result if the
special permit is granted. Comments may include relevant data.
    Before issuing a decision on the special permit request, PHMSA will
evaluate all comments received on or before the comment closing date.
Comments received after the closing date will be evaluated, if it is
possible to do so without incurring additional expense or delay. PHMSA
will consider each relevant comment it receives in making a decision to
grant or deny this special permit request.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2020-11820 Filed 6-1-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 94 (Wednesday, May 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21704-21706]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10090]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0322]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Corpus Christi, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard establishes two security zones. One of the
zones is a temporary fixed security zone for the receiving facility's
mooring basin while the Liquefied Natural Gas Carrier (LNGC) MARVEL
FALCON is moored at the facility. The other zone is a moving security
zone encompassing all navigable waters within a 500-yard radius around
the LNGC MARVEL FALCON while the vessel transits with cargo in the La
Quinta Channel and Corpus Christi Ship Channel in Corpus Christi, TX.
The security zones are needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the
marine environment from potential hazards created by Liquified Natural
Gas (LNG) cargo aboard the vessel. Entry of vessels or persons into
these zones is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain
of the Port Sector Corpus Christi.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from 8:45 a.m.
until 11:59 p.m. on May 14, 2019. For the purposes of enforcement,
actual notice will be used from May 9, 2019 until 11:59 p.m. on May 14,
2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0322 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Kevin Kyles, Sector Corpus Christi
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 361-939-
5125, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
LNGC Liquefied Natural Gas Carrier
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. We must
establish these security zones by May 9, 2019 and lack sufficient time
to provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments
before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to the public interest because immediate
action is needed to provide for the security of the vessel.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with Liquefied Natural Gas
Carrier (LNGC) MARVEL FALCON between May 9, 2019 and May 14, 2019 will
be a security concern while the vessel is moored at the receiving
facility and within a 500-yard radius of the vessel while the vessel is
loaded with cargo.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes two security zones around LNGC MARVEL FALCON
from May 9, 2019 through May 14, 2019. A fixed security zone will be in
effect in the mooring basin bound by 27[deg]52'53.38'' N,
097[deg]16'20.66'' W on the northern shoreline; thence to
27[deg]52'45.58'' N, 097[deg]16'19.60'' W; thence to 27[deg]52'38.55''
N, 097[deg]15'45.56'' W; thence to 27[deg]52'49.30'' N,
097[deg]15'45.44'' W; thence west along the shoreline to
27[deg]52'53.38'' N, 097[deg]16'20.66'' W, while LNGC MARVEL FALCON is
moored. A moving security zone will cover all navigable waters within a
500-yard radius of the LNGC MARVEL FALCON while the vessel transits
outbound with cargo through the La Quinta Channel and Corpus Christi
Ship Channel. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the
security zones without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative.
    Entry into these security zones is prohibited unless authorized by
the COTP or a designated representative. A designated representative is
a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector Corpus
Christi. Persons or vessels desiring to enter or pass through the zones
must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative on
VHF-FM channel 16 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If permission is
granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the COTP or designated representative. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through Broadcast Notices to
Mariners (BNMs) of the enforcement times and dates for these security
zones.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this 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 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
duration, and location of the security zone. This rule will impact a
small designated area of the Corpus Christi Ship Channel and La Quinta
Channel while the vessel is moored at the receiving facility and

during the vessel's transit while loaded with cargo. Moreover, the
Coast Guard will issue BNMs via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the
zones and the rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the
zones.

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 rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
temporary moving security zone may be small entities, for the reasons
stated in section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this 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.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will 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 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 rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does 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 rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

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 rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined 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 involves
a temporary fixed security zone while LNGC MARVEL FALCON is moored at
the receiving facility mooring basin bound by 27[deg]52'53.38'' N,
097[deg]16'20.66'' W on the northern shoreline; thence to
27[deg]52'45.58'' N, 097[deg]16'19.60'' W; thence to 27[deg]52'38.55''
N, 097[deg]15'45.56'' W; thence to 27[deg]52'49.30'' N,
097[deg]15'45.44'' W; thence west along the shoreline to
27[deg]52'53.38'' N, 097[deg]16'20.66'' W, and a temporary moving
security zone while the vessel transits with cargo within the La Quinta
Channel and Corpus Christi Ship Channel, that will prohibit entry
within 500-yard radius of LNGC MARVEL FALCON. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A,
Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
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: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 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.T08-0322 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0322  Security Zone; Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Corpus
Christi, TX.

    (a) Location. The following areas are security zones:
    (1) The mooring basin bound by 27[deg]52'53.38'' N,
097[deg]16'20.66'' W on the northern shoreline; thence to
27[deg]52'45.58'' N, 097[deg]16'19.60'' W; thence to 27[deg]52'38.55''
N, 097[deg]15'45.56'' W; thence to 27[deg]52'49.30'' N,
097[deg]15'45.44'' W; thence west along the shoreline to
27[deg]52'53.38'' N, 097[deg]16'20.66'' W, while Liquefied Natural Gas
Carrier (LNGC) MARVEL FALCON is moored.
    (2) All navigable waters encompassing a 500-yard radius around the
LNGC MARVEL FALCON while transiting outbound with cargo through the La
Quinta Channel and Corpus Christi Ship Channel.

    (b) Effective period. This section is effective without actual
notice from 8:45 a.m. until 11:59 p.m. on May 14, 2019. For the
purposes of enforcement, actual notice will be used from May 9, 2019
until 11:59 a.m. on May 14, 2019.
    (c) Period of enforcement. This section will be enforced from the
time LNGC MARVEL FALCON moors and while the vessel is transiting
outbound through the La Quinta Channel and Corpus Christi Ship Channel
from May 9, 2019 through May 14, 2019.
    (d) Regulations. (1) The general regulations in Sec.  165.33 apply.
Entry into these zones is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) or a designated
representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard assigned to units under the
operational control of USCG Sector Corpus Christi.
    (2) Persons or vessels desiring to enter or pass through the zones
must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative on
VHF-FM channel 16 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply
with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.
    (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public through Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs) of
the enforcement times and date for these security zones.

    Dated: May 6, 2019.
E.J. Gaynor,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi.
[FR Doc. 2019-10090 Filed 5-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29056-29058]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10163]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0401; FRL-9783-01-OCSPP]

Streptomyces sp. Strain SYM00257; Exemption From the Requirement
of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 in or
on all food commodities when used in accordance with label directions
and good agricultural practices. Indigo Ag, Inc. submitted a petition
to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 under FFDCA when used
in accordance with this exemption.

DATES: This regulation is effective May 12, 2022. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 11, 2022 and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0401, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room and OPP Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Due to the public health
concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and
Reading Room is open to visitors by appointment only. For the latest
status information on EPA/DC services and access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511M), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Office of the Federal Register's e-CFR site at
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0401 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
July 11, 2022. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b), although EPA
strongly encourages those interested in submitting objections or a
hearing request to submit objections and hearing requests
electronically. See Order Urging Electronic Service and Filing (April
10, 2020), https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-05/documents/2020-04-10_-_order_urging_electronic_service_and_filing.pdf.
At this time, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the judges and staff of
the Office of Administrative Law Judges are working remotely and not
able to accept filings or correspondence by courier, personal delivery,
or commercial delivery, and the ability to receive filings or
correspondence by U.S. Mail is similarly limited. When submitting
documents to the U.S. EPA Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ), a
person should utilize the OALJ e-filing system at https://yosemite.epa.gov/OA/EAB/EAB-ALJ_upload.nsf.
    Although EPA's regulations require submission via U.S. Mail or hand
delivery, EPA intends to treat submissions filed via electronic means
as properly filed submissions during this time that the Agency
continues to maximize telework due to the pandemic; therefore, EPA
believes the preference for submission via electronic means will not be
prejudicial. If it is

impossible for a person to submit documents electronically or receive
service electronically, e.g., the person does not have any access to a
computer, the person shall so advise OALJ by contacting the Hearing
Clerk at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If a person is without access to a computer
and must file documents by U.S. Mail, the person shall notify the
Hearing Clerk every time it files a document in such a manner. The
address for mailing documents is U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Administrative Law Judges, Mail Code 1900R, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0401, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background

    In the Federal Register of September 22, 2021 (86 FR 52624) (FRL-
8792-03-OCSPP), EPA issued notification pursuant to FFDCA section
408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
tolerance exemption petition (PP 0F8886) by Indigo Ag, Inc., 500
Rutherford Ave., Boston, MA 02129. The petition requested that 40 CFR
part 180 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 in or
on all food commodities. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by the petitioner Indigo Ag, Inc. and available in
the docket via https://www.regulations.gov. No comments were received
on the filing.

III. Final Rule

A. EPA's Safety Determination

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings but does not include
occupational exposure. Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance or tolerance exemption and
to ``ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue . . . .'' Additionally, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D)
requires that EPA consider ``available information concerning the
cumulative effects of [a particular pesticide's] . . . residues and
other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA evaluated the available toxicological and exposure data on
Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 and considered their validity,
completeness, and reliability, as well as the relationship of this
information to human risk. A full explanation of the data upon which
EPA relied and its risk assessment based on those data can be found
within the document entitled ``Human Health Risk Assessment of
Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257, a New Active Ingredient.'' This
document, as well as other relevant information, is available in the
docket for this action as described under ADDRESSES.
    The available data and rationale demonstrated that, with regard to
humans, Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 has no demonstrated
infectivity and low acute toxicity based on the toxicity and
infectivity study results and information presented for the active
ingredient and its closely related species. It is not toxic,
pathogenic, or infective via the oral route of exposure and is not
expected to be toxic via dermal or inhalation routes of exposure based
on the data presented in those acute toxicity studies. Additionally, in
the acute oral toxicity/pathogenicity study, Streptomyces sp. strain
SYM00257 was not detected in the blood and organs of the test animals.
Based on the lack of adverse effects seen in the available toxicity/
pathogenicity data, EPA did not identify any points of departure for
assessing risk; thus, no quantitative risk assessment was conducted.
Significant dietary and non-occupational exposures to residues of
Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 are not anticipated because it will be
used only as a pre-planting seed treatment application. Additionally,
while Streptomyces is present in soil, it is not expected to reach deep
well water and therefore, it is not expected to be present in drinking
water, which is either obtained from a deep well, or treated and
disinfected prior to consumption. Even if dietary and non-occupational
exposures to residues of Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 were to
occur, there is no concern due to the lack of potential for adverse
effects. Because there are no threshold levels of concern with the
toxicity, pathogenicity, or infectivity of Streptomyces sp. strain
SYM00257, EPA determined that no additional margin of safety is
necessary to protect infants and children as part of the qualitative
assessment conducted. Based upon its evaluation in the Streptomyces sp.
strain SYM00257 Human Health Assessment, which concludes that there are
no risks of concern from aggregate exposure to Streptomyces sp. strain
SYM00257, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the U.S. population, including infants and
children, from aggregate exposure to residues of Streptomyces sp.
strain SYM00257.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for Streptomyces sp. strain
SYM00257 because EPA is establishing an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. Conclusion

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established for residues of Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 in or on
all food commodities when used in accordance

with label directions and good agricultural practices.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to EPA. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review
under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001), or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance
exemption in this action, do not require the issuance of a proposed
rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.) do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes. As a result, this
action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, EPA has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or Tribal
Governments, on the relationship between the National Government and
the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the
Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, EPA has determined that
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), and Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not
impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require EPA's consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

V. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 29, 2022.
Edward Messina,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter I as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Add Sec.  180.1392 to subpart D to read as follows:

Sec.  180.1392  Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257; exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.

    An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for
residues of Streptomyces sp. strain SYM00257 in or on all food
commodities when used in accordance with label directions and good
agricultural practices.

[FR Doc. 2022-10163 Filed 5-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65188-65189]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27404]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84817; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-037]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed
Rule Change To Permit the Listing and Trading of P.M.-Settled Series on
Certain Broad-Based Index Options on a Pilot Basis

December 13, 2018.
    On October 11, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission

(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to permit the listing and trading of P.M.-settled
series on certain broad-based index options on a pilot basis. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on October 30, 2018.\3\ The Commission has received no comment letters
on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84481 (Oct. 24,
2018), 83 FR 54624.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is December 14, 2018. The Commission is extending this 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change.
Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ designates January 28, 2019 as the date by which the Commission
shall either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-CboeEDGX-2018-037).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-27404 Filed 12-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 21, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7432-7433]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03406]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1147; Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-29]

Proposed Revocation of Class E Airspace; Sunol, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to remove Class E airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface at Sunol, CA. This airspace is
wholly contained within the Sacramento en route airspace area and
duplication is not necessary.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 9, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1
(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2017-1147; Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-29, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Clark, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW, Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would remove Class E airspace at Sunol, CA.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (Docket No. FAA-
2017-1147; Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-29) and be submitted in
triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for address
and phone number).
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this notice must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2017-1147, Airspace Docket No. 17-AWP-29''. The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of
the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed
in the docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined between 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays, at the
Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal Aviation
Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service Center,
Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW, Renton, WA 98057.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective
September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

History

    The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (82 FR
27988; June 20, 2017) for Docket No. FAA-2016-9476 establishing Class E
en route airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface
centered near Sacramento, CA. The FAA found that this airspace
encompasses the Class E 1,200-foot airspace for Sunol, CA.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by removing Class E airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface at Sunol, CA. The existing
airspace area designated for Sunol, CA, is wholly contained within the
Sacramento en route airspace area, and duplication is not necessary.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017 and effective September 15,
2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an

established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AWP CA E5 Sunol, CA [Removed]

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on February 7, 2018.
B.G. Chew,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-03406 Filed 2-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P