[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20597-20601]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07144]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97236; File No. SR-PEARL-2023-15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Exchange
Rules 2617 and 2626 Regarding Retail Orders Routed Pursuant to the
Route to Primary Auction Routing Option

March 31, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 28, 2023, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX Pearl'' or the ``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 Exchange Rules 2617(b)(5) and
2626(f) related to Retail Orders \3\ routed

pursuant to the Route to Primary (``PAC'') routing option when trading
equity securities on the Exchange's equity trading platform (referred
to herein as ``MIAX Pearl Equities'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Retail Order'' is an agency or riskless principal order
that meets the criteria of FINRA Rule 5320.03 that originates from a
natural person and is submitted to the Exchange by a Retail Member
Organization, provided that no change is made to the terms of the
order with respect to price or side of market and the order does not
originate from a trading algorithm or any other computerized
methodology. See Exchange Rule 2626(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
Pearl's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Exchange Rule
2617(b)(5) related to Retail Orders routed pursuant to the PAC routing
option when trading equity securities on MIAX Pearl Equities. Exchange
Rule 2626 defines Retail Orders and sets forth the requirements \4\
that Equity Members \5\ must complete prior to sending Retail Orders to
the Exchange. Equity Members that seek to become a Retail Member
Organization (``RMO'') \6\ must complete an attestation in a form
required by the Exchange that substantially all orders submitted as
Retail Orders will qualify as such under Exchange Rule 2626. Such
Equity Members must then be approved by the Exchange as a RMO and then
may designate a Retail Order to be identified as Retail on the
Exchange's proprietary data feeds on an order-by-order or port-by-port
basis pursuant to Exchange Rule 2626(f). As proposed, those same Equity
Members that are approved as RMOs would then be able to also identify
Retail Orders as Retail when routed to the primary listing market's
opening, re-opening, or closing process pursuant to the PAC routing
option,\7\ described in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Members must submit a signed written attestation, in a form
prescribed by the Exchange, that they have implemented policies and
procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that substantially
all orders designated by the Member as a ``Retail Order'' comply
with the above requirements. See Exchange Rule 2626(b).
    \5\ The term ``Equity Member'' is a Member authorized by the
Exchange to transact business on MIAX Pearl Equities. See Exchange
Rule 1901.
    \6\ A ``Retail Member Organization'' or ``RMO'' is an Equity
Member (or a division thereof) that has been approved by the
Exchange under Exchange Rule 2626 to submit Retail Orders. See
Exchange Rule 2626(a)(1).
    \7\ See Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers its Equity Members optional routing
functionality that allows them to use the Exchange to access liquidity
on other Trading Centers.\8\ The functionality includes routing
algorithms that determine the destination or pattern of routing.
Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5) sets forth that there is a particular pattern
of routing to other Trading Centers, known as the ``System routing
table'', as well as sets forth the Exchange's available routing
options. All routing is designed to be conducted in a manner consistent
with Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 242.600(b)(95) (defining ``Trading Center'' as ``a
national securities exchange or national securities association that
operates an SRO trading facility, an alternative trading system, an
exchange market maker, an OTC market maker, or any other broker or
dealer that executes orders internally by trading as principal or
crossing orders as agent'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange recently launched the PAC routing option,\9\ which
enables an Equity Member to designate that their order be routed to
participate in the primary listing market's opening, re-opening, or
closing process. In sum, Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B) describes PAC as a
routing option for Market Orders \10\ and displayed Limit Orders \11\
with a time-in-force of Regular Hours Only (``RHO'') \12\ that the
entering firm wishes to designate for participation in the opening, re-
opening (following a regulatory halt, suspension, or pause), or closing
process of a primary listing market (Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX''),
the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
(``Nasdaq''), NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American''), or NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``NYSE Arca'')) if received before the opening, re-opening, or closing
process of such market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94301 (February 23,
2022), 87 FR 11739 (March 2, 2022) (SR-PEARL-2022-06). See also MIAX
Pearl Equities--Expansion of Functionality Through New Route to
Primary Auction (PAC) Strategy--Rollout Postponed until June 27,
2022, dated June 8, 2022, available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/alerts/2022/06/08/miax-pearl-equities-expansion-functionality-through-new-route-primary-auction-pac (last visited June 28, 2022).
    \10\ See Exchange Rule 2614(a)(2).
    \11\ See Exchange Rule 2614(a)(1).
    \12\ Exchange Rule 2614(b)(2) defines ``Regular Hours Only'' or
``RHO'' as ``[a]n order that is designated for execution only during
Regular Trading Hours, which includes the Opening Process for equity
securities. An order with a time-in-force of RHO entered into the
System before the opening of business on the Exchange as determined
pursuant to Exchange Rule 2600 will be accepted but not eligible for
execution until the start of Regular Trading Hours.'' To ensure that
orders coupled with the PAC routing option are eligible to
participate in the primary listing market's opening, re-opening, or
closing process, the Exchange routes Market Orders and displayed
Limit Orders designated as RHO upon entry with a time-in-force
accepted or required by the primary listing market. See Exchange
Rule 26174(b)(5)(B). As such, the Exchange converts an order's time-
in-force to a time-in-force accepted or required by the primary
listing market when necessary only for purposes of routing that
order to an away market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(i) describes how orders are routed
to participate in the primary listing market's opening or re-opening
process pursuant to the PAC routing option and provides, in sum, that
displayed Limit Orders and Market Orders with a time-in-force of RHO
received before the security has opened on the primary listing market
will be routed to participate in the primary listing market's opening
process prior to the primary listing market's order entry cut-off time.
Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(i) further provides that if a displayed
Limit Order or Market Order designated as RHO is received at or after
the time the Exchange begins to route existing orders to participate in
the primary listing exchange's opening process, but before market open,
the Exchange will route such orders to participate in the primary
listing market's opening process upon receipt.
    Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(ii) describes how orders are routed
to participate in the primary listing market's closing process pursuant
to the PAC routing option. Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(ii)(a) covers
Limit Orders and provides, in sum, that a Limit Order designated as RHO
will be routed to participate in the primary listing market's closing
process prior to the primary listing market's order entry cut-off time.
If a Limit Order designated as RHO is received at or after the time the
Exchange begins to route existing orders to participate in the primary
listing market's closing process, but before market close, the Exchange
will check the System for available shares and then route the remaining
shares to participate in the primary listing market's closing process.
Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(ii)(b) covers Market Orders and
provides, in sum, that a Market Order designated as RHO is not eligible
to be routed to participate in the primary listing market's closing
process,

unless such Market Order is: (i) entered at or after 3:50 p.m. Eastern
Time, but before market close, (ii) the primary listing market has
declared a regulatory halt; and (iii) the primary listing market is to
conduct its closing process according to their applicable rules.\13\
All other Market Orders designated as RHO received at or after the time
the Exchange begins to route existing orders to participate in the
primary listing market's closing process, but before market close, will
be cancelled.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Exchange notes that this functionality was implemented
on March 28, 2023. See MIAX Pearl Equities--Enhancement for Market
Orders with a Primary Auction (PAC) Routing Strategy will be
Activated on Tuesday, March 28, 2023, available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/alerts/2023/03/22/miax-pearl-equities-enhancement-market-orders-primary-auction-pac-routing. See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 95298 (July 15, 2022), 87 FR
43579 (July 21, 2022) (SR-PEARL-2022-29).
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Going forward, the Exchange proposes that Retail Orders that a RMO
has designated as Retail pursuant to Exchange Rule 2626(f) would also
be identified as Retail when routed to the primary listing market's
opening, re-opening, or closing process pursuant to the PAC routing
option,\15\ so that such order may receive preferred pricing available
to Retail Orders offered by the primary listing market.\16\ The
Exchange notes that the proposal will primarily benefit displayed Limit
Orders identified as Retail that are routed to participate in the
primary listing market's closing process because, unlike before the
opening or re-opening process, continuous trading is in effect prior to
the closing process during which such routed Retail Orders may be
executed and eligible to receive preferred pricing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Exchange currently designates all routable orders,
other than those routed pursuant to the PAC routing option, as IOC
when routing such order to an away market, regardless of the time-
in-force included with the order upon entry. Exchange Rule
2617(b)(4) describes this functionality and currently provides that
the System will designate Market Orders and marketable Limit Orders
that are fully or partially routed to an away Trading Center as IOC.
The Exchange does not propose to identify as Retail a Retail Order
that is being routed as IOC and not pursuant to the PAC routing
option because such orders would remove liquidity on entry or be
cancelled and, therefore, not be eligible to receive preferred
pricing available to liquidity adding orders by primary listing
markets, which primarily employ maker/taker fee structures. See
infra note 16. Orders routed pursuant to the PAC routing option
include a time-in-force of RHO when entered on the Exchange and,
therefore, may provide liquidity (and receive a preferred rebate) on
the primary listing market prior to participating in the primary
listing market's closing process if the time-in-force employed by
the primary listing market allows the order to provide liquidity.
The Exchange notes that it would convert an order's time-in-force to
a time-in-force accepted or required by the primary listing market
when necessary only for purposes of routing that order to an away
market.
    \16\ See, e.g., Cboe BZX fee schedule available at https://www.cboe.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/ (providing an
enhanced rebate of $0.0032 to Retail Orders that add liquidity); and
NYSE fee schedule available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Price_List.pdf (providing an enhanced rebate of
$0.0032 to Retail Orders that add liquidity).
    \17\ While the proposal may benefit Market Orders, the Exchange
notes that it would be an edge case because of the limited scenario
where the Exchange would route Market Orders to the primary listing
market's closing process, namely, when the security is halted and
continuous trading is not in effect. See Exchange Rule
2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(ii)(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange routes orders in equity securities via one or more
routing brokers that are not affiliated with the Exchange.\18\ Those
routing broker-dealers are required to complete the required
attestation to qualify as RMOs on the Exchange pursuant to Exchange
Rule 2626, described above. Those routing broker dealers would likewise
be required to complete any requirements by the primary listing market
to enter Retail Orders on that market and to qualify for any enhanced
pricing. To the extent the Exchange routes a Retail Order identified as
Retail via a routing broker-dealer to a primary listing market, it will
ensure that it does so in compliance with that market's rules governing
its retail orders, including that the order satisfies that market's
definition of ``Retail Order.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ This routing process is described under Exchange Rule
2617(b)(1).
    \19\ Any portion of a routed Retail Order that is not executed
on the primary listing market that is returned the Exchange will
continue to be treated as a Retail Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, RMOs may designate a Retail Order to be
identified as Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds on an
order-by-order or port-by-port basis pursuant to Exchange Rule 2626(f).
Those same Retail Orders that are to be identified as Retail pursuant
to Exchange Rule 2626(f) would also be identified as Retail when routed
pursuant to the PAC routing option. The identification of a Retail
Order as Retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feed and when being
routed pursuant to the PAC routing option would implicate orders
entered during continuous trading that are to be routed to participate
in the primary listing market's closing process pursuant to the PAC
routing option. Such Retail Orders that are to be identified as Retail
when routed pursuant to the PAC routing option entered before market
open that are to be routed to participate in the primary listing
market's opening process or entered when a security is halted that are
to be routed to participate in the primary listing market's re-opening
process are entered during times when continuous trading is not in
effect on the Exchange \20\ and would, therefore, only be identified as
Retail when being routed pursuant to the PAC routing option. The
Exchange will not identify a Retail Order as Retail when routed
pursuant to the PAC routing option unless instructed by the RMO to do
so pursuant to Exchange Rule 2626, either on an order-by-order or port-
by-port basis. This behavior would be codified under new subparagraph
(iii) under Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B), which would state that, a RMO
(as defined in Rule 2626(a)(1)) may designate a Retail Order (as
defined in Rule 2626(a)(2)) to be identified as Retail on an order-by-
order basis or instruct the Exchange to identify all of its Retail
Orders as Retail on a port-by-port basis. Proposed Exchange Rule
2617(b)(5)(B)(iii) would also provide that if so designated, a Retail
Order will be identified as Retail when routed pursuant to Exchange
Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(i) and (ii), as well as on the Exchange's
proprietary data feeds pursuant to Rule 2626(f). Proposed Exchange Rule
2617(b)(5)(B)(iii) would further provide that a RMO that instructs the
Exchange to identify all its Retail Orders as Retail on a particular
port will be able to override such setting and designate any individual
Retail Order from that port to not be identified as Retail when routed
to the primary listing market pursuant to Exchange Rule
2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(i) and (ii).\21\ As stated above, RMOs may designate
their orders as Retail in accordance with Exchange Rule 2626(f) for
purposes of order attribution on the MIAX Pearl Equities proprietary
data feeds. A RMO may designate a Retail Order to be identified as
Retail when routed pursuant to the PAC routing option on an order-by-
order basis or port-by-port basis,\22\ which is the same manner as

when as order is to be identified as Retail on the Exchange's
proprietary data feeds pursuant to Exchange Rule 2626(f).\23\ Proposed
Exchange Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(iii) is based on current Exchange Rule
2626(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The Exchange does not disseminate quote and trade data on
its proprietary data feeds when it is not engaged in continuous
trading.
    \21\ In such case, the Retail Order would also not be identified
as retail on the Exchange's proprietary data feeds pursuant to
Exchange Rule 2626(f).
    \22\ A RMO may designate a Retail Order to be identified as
Retail when routed pursuant to the PAC routing option on an order-
by-order basis via standard order entry protocols. A RMO may
designate that all Retail Orders be identified as Retail when routed
pursuant to the PAC routing option on a particular port by
instructing the Exchange's Trading Operations personnel to designate
that port as Retail or the RMO may designate a port as on their own
via the Exchange's online portal. The Exchange provides an internet-
facing portal via its website that Equity Members, including RMOs,
access using unique login credentials. The online portal provides
self-service functions to Equity Members. See Member Firm Portal
User Manual, available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/sites/default/files/knowledge-center/2022-06/MIAX_Exchanges_Member_Firm_Portal_User_Manual_05262022.pdf. A RMO
that instructs the Exchange to identify all its Retail Orders as
Retail on a particular port will be able to override such setting
and designate any individual Retail Order from that port to not be
identified as Retail via standard order entry protocols when
submitting that particular order to the Exchange.
    \23\ The Exchange proposes to make a related change to Exchange
Rule 2626(f) to, likewise, specify that a Retail Order to be
identified as Retail pursuant to Exchange Rule 2626(f) will also be
identified as Retail when being routed pursuant to the PAC routing
option under Rule 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
    Due to the technological changes associated with this proposed
change, the Exchange will issue a trading alert publicly announcing the
implementation date of the proposed rule change. The Exchange
anticipates that the implementation date will be in the second or third
quarter of 2023.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\24\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5),\25\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.
The proposal promotes just and equitable principles of trade because it
enables RMOs to instruct the Exchange to identify a Retail Order as
Retail when routed pursuant to the PAC routing option and potentially
receive preferred pricing available to Retail Orders offered by the
primary listing market, which primarily employ maker/taker fee
structures. In addition, the proposal promotes just and equitable
principles of trade because Retail Orders that a RMO has designated as
Retail on an order-by-order or port-by-port-basis pursuant to Exchange
Rule 2626(f) would also be identified as Retail when routed pursuant to
the PAC routing option and this order-by-order or port-by-port
optionality provides RMOs flexibility to identify their Retail Orders
as Retail based upon how they manage their order flow. The proposal
removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system because it would enable the
Exchange to better compete for Retail Order flow with another exchange
that offers similar functionality.\26\ The proposal would also promote
just and equitable principles of trade because the potential to receive
preferred pricing on the primary listing market should incentivize RMOs
to enter additional Retail Order flow on the Exchange. This additional
order flow would come in the form of displayed Limit Orders designated
as RHO entered during continuous trading that may first check the
System for available shares and then be posted to the MIAX Pearl
Equities Book prior to being routed pursuant to the PAC routing
option.\27\ This may, in turn, deepen the available liquidity on the
Exchange and attract additional order flow, benefiting all Exchange
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \26\ See Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe EDGX'') Rule 11.21(e).
See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75824 (September 3,
2015), 80 FR 54638 (September 10, 2015) (SR-EDGX-2015-40).
    \27\ See Exchange Rules 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(ii)(a) and
(b)(5)(B)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes the
proposal would enhance competition for retail order flow among
exchanges by allowing the Exchange to provide Retail Orders with
increased opportunities to receive preferred pricing provided to Retail
Orders by the primary listing market when being routed pursuant to the
PAC routing option. The proposal would not impede the national market
system because it would not disrupt the ability of the primary listing
market to conduct their opening, re-opening, and closing processes. The
Exchange would continue to route orders in a form and manner currently
accepted by the primary listing markets, which the Exchange understands
currently includes accepting orders with a Retail identifier. The
proposal would also enhance intermarket competition because it would
enable the Exchange to better compete with other exchanges that offer
similar functionality.\28\ The proposal may further enhance intermarket
competition by attracting additional Retail Order flow to the Exchange
since a displayed Limit Order designated as RHO that is entered during
continuous trading may first check the System for available shares and
may be posted to the MIAX Pearl Equities Book prior to being routed
pursuant to the PAC routing option.\29\ This may, in turn, deepen the
available liquidity on the Exchange and attract additional order flow,
benefiting all Exchange participants, and improving competition between
exchange markets. The proposal would also enhance intramarket
competition because the proposed functionality would be available to
all Equity Members that may qualify as a RMO and elect to have their
Retail Orders identified as Retail when routed pursuant to the PAC
routing option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Cboe EDGX Rule 11.21(e). See also Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 75824 (September 3, 2015), 80 FR 54638 (September
10, 2015) (SR-EDGX-2015-40).
    \29\ See Exchange Rules 2617(b)(5)(B)(1)(ii)(a) and
(b)(5)(B)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \30\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \31\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2023-15 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2023-15. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting
comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal
identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2023-15 and should be
submitted on or before April 27, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-07144 Filed 4-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: August 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 164)]
[Notices]
[Page 49734-49735]
[DOCID:fr22au08-127]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2008-36]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief

from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before September 11, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2008-
0826 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenna Sinclair<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-113, Federal Aviation
Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98055-4056; or Fran
Shaver<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591.
This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 18, 2008.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2008-0826.
    Petitioner: The Boeing Company.
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  25.841(a)(2) and
25.841(a)(3).
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner is requesting an
exemption from certain pressurized cabin requirements in regard to
uncontained engine failure for Boeing Model 747-8/8F series airplanes.

 [FR Doc. E8-19461 Filed 8-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 81]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00025]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP19-504-000.
    Applicants: MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Conforming and Nonconforming
Negotiated Rate Service Agreements to be effective 1/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/28/18.
    Accession Number: 20181228-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-505-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 122818 Negotiated Rates--
Mercuria Energy America, Inc. R-7540-02 to be effective 1/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/28/18.
    Accession Number: 20181228-5155.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-506-000.
    Applicants: Crossroads Pipeline Company.
    Description: Penalty Revenue Crediting Report of Crossroads
Pipeline Company under RP19-506.
    Filed Date: 12/28/18.
    Accession Number: 20181228-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-507-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Penalty Revenue Crediting Report of Columbia Gulf
Transmission, LLC under RP19-507.
    Filed Date: 12/28/18.
    Accession Number: 20181228-5180.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-508-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Penalty Revenue Crediting Report of Columbia Gas
Transmission, LLC under RP19-508.
    Filed Date: 12/28/18.
    Accession Number: 20181228-5182.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 31, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-00025 Filed 1-7-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 31, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 54735]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC19-9-000]

Notice of Filing; Avista Corporation

    Take notice that on October 17, 2018, Avista Corporation filed a
request approval for electric companies to use Account 439, authorized
by the Financial Accounting Standards Board.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the
website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 16, 2018.

    Dated: October 25, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-23768 Filed 10-30-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18405-18409]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06511]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94492; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2022-020]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 4756(a)(3), in Light of Planned Changes to the System as
Well as To Address Existing Issues

March 23, 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 March 11, 2022, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II

below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4756(a)(3), in light of planned
changes to the System as well as to address existing issues, 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
    Presently, the Exchange is making functional enhancements and
improvements to specific Order Types \3\ and Order Attributes \4\ that
are currently only available via the RASH Order entry protocol.\5\
Specifically, the Exchange will be upgrading the logic and
implementation of these Order Types and Order Attributes so that the
features are more streamlined across the Nasdaq Systems and order entry
protocols, and will enable the Exchange to process these Orders more
quickly and efficiently. Additionally, this System upgrade will pave
the way for the Exchange to enhance the OUCH Order entry protocol \6\
so that Participants may enter such Order Types and Order Attributes
via OUCH, in addition to the RASH Order entry protocol.\7\ The Exchange
plans to implement its enhancement of the OUCH protocol sequentially,
by Order Type and Order Attribute.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ An ``Order Type'' is a standardized set of instructions
associated with an Order that define how it will behave with respect
to pricing, execution, and/or posting to the Nasdaq Book when
submitted to Nasdaq. See Equity 1, Section 1(a)(7).
    \4\ An ``Order Attribute'' is a further set of variable
instructions that may be associated with an Order to further define
how it will behave with respect to pricing, execution, and/or
posting to the Nasdaq Book when submitted to Nasdaq. See id.
    \5\ The RASH (Routing and Special Handling) Order entry protocol
is a proprietary protocol that allows members to enter Orders,
cancel existing Orders and receive executions. RASH allows
participants to use advanced functionality, including discretion,
random reserve, pegging and routing. See http://nasdaqtrader.com/content/technicalsupport/specifications/TradingProducts/rash_sb.pdf.
    \6\ The OUCH Order entry protocol is a Nasdaq proprietary
protocol that allows subscribers to quickly enter orders into the
System and receive executions. OUCH accepts limit Orders from
members, and if there are matching Orders, they will execute. Non-
matching Orders are added to the Limit Order Book, a database of
available limit Orders, where they are matched in price-time
priority. OUCH only provides a method for members to send Orders and
receive status updates on those Orders. See https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=OUCH.
    \7\ The Exchange designed the OUCH protocol to enable members to
enter Orders quickly into the System. As such, the Exchange
developed OUCH with simplicity in mind, and it therefore lacks more
complex order handling capabilities. By contrast, the Exchange
specifically designed RASH to support advanced functionality,
including discretion, random reserve, pegging and routing. Once the
System upgrades occur, then the Exchange intends to propose further
changes to its Rules to permit participants to utilize OUCH, in
addition to RASH, to enter order types that require advanced
functionality.
    \8\ The Exchange notes that its sister exchanges, Nasdaq BX and
Nasdaq PSX, plan to file similar proposed rule changes with the
Commission shortly. However, certain Order Types affected by the
proposed rule change are associated with the Nasdaq Opening and
Closing Crosses (LOC, MOC, LOO, MOO, IO, and OIO Orders, discussed
below), and thus are not applicable to either Nasdaq BX or Nasdaq
PSX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To support and prepare for these upgrades and enhancements, the
Exchange previously submitted four rule filings to the Commission that
amended its rules pertaining to, among other things, Market Maker Peg
Orders, Orders with Reserve Size, Orders with Pegging and Trade Now
Attributes, and Discretionary Orders.\9\ The Exchange now proposes to
amend Rule 4756(a)(3), which governs the entry of Orders, so that it
aligns with how the System, once upgraded, will handle the partial
cancellation of Orders to reduce their share size. The proposed filing
also addresses issues with the existing Rule text and the current
implementation of that Rule text by the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-93245 (October 4,
2021), 86 FR 56302 (October 8, 2021) (SR-NASDAQ-2021-075);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-92180 (June 15, 2021), 86 FR
33420 (June 24, 2021) (SR-NASDAQ-2021-044); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 34-91109 (February 11, 2021), 86 FR 10141 (February 18,
2021) (SR-NASDAQ-2020-090); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-
90389 (November 10, 2020), 85 FR 73304 (November 17, 2020) (SR-
NASDAQ-2020-071).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In pertinent part, existing Rule 4756(a)(3) states as follows, with
respect how the Exchange handles partial Order cancellations to reduce
share size:

    In addition, a partial cancellation of an Order to reduce its
share size will not affect the priority of the Order on the book;
provided, however, that such a partial cancellation may not be made
with respect to an MOO Order, an LOO Order, an OIO Order, an MOC
Order, an LOC Order, an IO Order, or a Pegged Order (including a
Discretionary Order that is Pegged).

The first clause of this text states the general rule that participants
may instruct the Exchange to partially cancel their Orders to reduce
share size, and when handling such partial cancellation instructions,
the Exchange will adjust the size of the Orders without affecting their
existing priority. The second clause states an exception to this
general rule, which the Exchange intends to mean that when the Exchange
processes partial cancellations of Market On Open (``MOO''), Limit on
Open (``LOO''), Opening Imbalance Only (``OIO''), Market on Close
(``MOC''), Limit on Close (``LOC''), and Imbalance Only Orders
(``IO''), as well as Orders with the Pegging Attribute (including
Discretionary Orders with Pegging) that participants enter via RASH or
FIX or QIX (as opposed to OUCH or FLITE), the partially cancelled
Orders will lose their priority.
    Going forward, planned upgrades will provide for the Exchange to
process partial cancellations of all Order Types and Attributes entered
through all of its available and applicable Order Entry Protocols,
including RASH, OUCH, FIX, QIX and FLITE,\10\ and it will do so without
loss of priority, such that the existing exception to the general rule
in 4756(a)(3) will no longer be necessary. Thus, the Exchange proposes
to eliminate this exception by deleting the following text from the
Rule: ``provided, however, that such a partial cancellation may not be
made with respect to an MOO Order, an LOO Order, an OIO Order, an MOC
Order, an LOC Order, an IO Order, or a Pegged Order (including a
Discretionary Order that is Pegged).'' This proposal will provide
better outcomes to participants by enabling them to reduce the share
size of their Orders without the need to sacrifice the priority of
their Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange notes that while the QIX Order Entry Protocol
still exists, the Exchange plans to retire it in the near future and
has begun transitioning participants away from its use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to allow the partial

cancellation of an Order without the Order losing priority because the
participant that entered the Order continues to express its willingness
to trade at the price entered when the Order first came onto the Book.
Moreover, if the Order is displayed, other participants quoting at the
same price are aware of the priority of their Orders relative to the
partially cancelled Order. While a partial cancellation may provide
these other participants with greater opportunities to provide a fill,
the Exchange does not believe that it would be reasonable for these
participants to jump ahead of an Order with time priority merely
because the size of the Order has been reduced. Similarly, if the
partially cancelled Order is non-displayed, other participants would
have no awareness of its price, its original size, or its reduced size.
Again, while other participants at that price may have an increased
opportunity to provide a fill when the Order's size is reduced, they
would not have an expectation that the priority of their Orders would
change vis-[agrave]-vis that of an Order that arrived on the Book at an
earlier time.
    Moreover, the Exchange notes that the proposal will simplify and
harmonize the Exchange's processing of partial cancellations across its
Order Entry Protocols.
    Additionally, the proposed Rule change will address ambiguities in
the existing Rule text. The existing Rule text does not state expressly
the Exchange's current practice of restricting the loss of priority
following a partial cancellation to LOO, MOO, MOC, LOC, and Pegged
Orders when such Orders are entered through RASH or FIX or QIX. The
existing language suggests that partial cancellations of these Orders
cause a loss of priority in all cases, regardless of the Exchange's
Order Entry Protocol utilized to enter the Orders. In fact, the
Exchange does process partial cancellations of these Orders without
loss of priority when the Orders are entered through OUCH and FLITE.
The proposed Rule change will address this issue by providing for
consistent handling of partial cancellations across all Orders and all
applicable and available Order Entry Protocols and by eliminating
exceptions in the existing Rule text.
    Similarly, the existing Rule is ambiguous as to the intended scope
of its exception to the general rule for ``Pegged Orders.'' Although
the Rule states that the exception applies to ``Pegged Orders
(including a Discretionary Order that is Pegged),'' the Exchange does
not intend for Orders with Midpoint Pegging to be part of this
exception, and it applies the Rule accordingly. In other words, the
Exchange processes partial cancellations for Orders with Midpoint
Pegging (i.e., Midpoint Peg Post-Only Orders, Midpoint Extended Life
Orders, and Midpoint Extended Life Plus Continuous Book Orders, as well
as Non-Display Orders assigned the Midpoint Peg Attribute) without loss
of priority. The Exchange recognizes that the Rule text does not
specifically address Orders with Midpoint Pegging. Again, the proposed
Rule change will eliminate this issue going forward because the
Exchange will adopt consistent handling of partial cancellations across
all Orders and available and applicable Order Entry Protocols.
    Finally, the proposed Rule change will address a problem that the
Exchange has uncovered with the manner in which the System presently
processes OIO and IO Orders entered though RASH and FIX and QIX. As
noted above, the Exchange intends for the existing Rule to mean that
partially cancelled OIO and IO Orders entered through RASH or FIX or
QIX lose priority. Nevertheless, the Exchange discovered, during the
course of preparing its upgrades that the System presently processes
partial cancellations of OIO and IO Orders entered through RASH or FIX
or QIX without loss of priority. The Exchange believes that the
proposed Rule will render the existing Rule text problem moot, and will
better serve participants by improving the efficiency of their activity
on the Exchange as well as their potential outcomes.
    The Exchange intends to implement the foregoing changes during the
Second Quarter of 2022. The Exchange will issue an Equity Trader Alert
at least 7 days in advance of implementing the changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\11\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposed amendment to Rule
4756(a)(3) is consistent with the Act. Eliminating the exception to the
general Rule providing for the Exchange to process partial
cancellations without loss of priority will benefit participants by
enabling them to reduce the share size of their Orders without the need
to sacrifice the priority of their Orders.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to allow the partial
cancellation of an Order without the Order losing priority because the
participant that entered the Order continues to express its willingness
to trade at the price entered when the Order first came onto the Book.
Moreover, if the Order is displayed, other participants quoting at the
same price are aware of the priority of their Orders relative to the
partially cancelled Order. While a partial cancellation may provide
these other participants with greater opportunities to provide a fill,
the Exchange does not believe that it would be reasonable for these
participants to jump ahead of an Order with time priority merely
because the size of the Order has been reduced. Similarly, if the
partially cancelled order is non-displayed, other participants would
have no awareness of its price, its original size, or its reduced size.
Again, while other participants at that price may have an increased
opportunity to provide a fill when the Order's size is reduced, they
would not have an expectation that the priority of their Orders would
change vis-[agrave]-vis that of an Order that arrived on the Book at an
earlier time.
    Moreover, the proposal will simplify and harmonize the Exchange's
processing of partial cancellations across its Order Entry Protocols.
This proposed amendment reflects planned upgrades that will allow the
Exchange to process partial cancellation of Orders entered through all
pertinent and available Order Entry Protocols without loss of priority.
    Additionally, the proposed Rule change is consistent with the Act
because it will eliminate ambiguities in the existing Rule text that do
not fully reflect the Exchange's intended meaning or application of the
Rule. As noted above, the existing Rule text does not state that the
Exchange limits the loss of priority for partially cancelled Orders to
LOO, MOO, MOC, LOC, and Pegged Orders when such Orders are entered
through RASH or FIX or QIX. The existing language suggests that partial
cancellations of these Orders lose priority in all cases, regardless of
the Exchange's Order Entry Protocol utilized to enter the Orders. In
fact, the Exchange does process partial cancellations of these Orders
without loss of priority when the Orders are entered through OUCH or
FLITE. The

proposed Rule change will address this issue by providing for
consistent handling of partial cancellations across all applicable and
available Orders and Order Entry Protocols and by eliminating
exceptions in the existing Rule text.
    Similarly, the existing Rule does not reflect the Exchange's intent
that Orders with Midpoint Pegging are not included in this exception,
even though it applies the Rule in this manner. In other words, the
Exchange processes partial cancellations for Midpoint Pegging Orders
without loss of priority. The Exchange recognizes that the Rule text
does not specifically address Orders with Midpoint Pegging. Again, the
proposed Rule change will eliminate this issue going forward because
the Exchange will adopt consistent handling of partial cancellations
across all Orders and applicable and available Order Entry Protocols.
    The proposed Rule change is consistent with the Act because it will
address a problem that the Exchange has uncovered with the manner in
which the System presently processes OIO and IO Orders entered though
RASH and FIX and QIX. As noted above, the Exchange intends for the
existing Rule to mean that partially cancelled OIO and IO Orders
entered through RASH or FIX or QIX lose priority. Nevertheless, during
the course of preparing its upgrades, the Exchange discovered that the
System presently does process partial cancellations of OIO and IO
Orders entered through RASH and FIX and QIX without loss of priority.
The Exchange believes that the proposed Rule will render the existing
Rule text problem moot, and will better serve participants by improving
the efficiency of their activity on the Exchange as well as their
potential outcomes. Furthermore, it is consistent with the Act to
ensure that the Exchange's Rules and practices are, and remain, in
sync.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that its proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As a general principle, the
proposed changes are reflective of the significant competition among
exchanges and non-exchange venues for order flow. In this regard,
proposed changes that facilitate enhancements to the Exchange's System
and Order Entry Protocols as well as those that amend and clarify the
Exchange's Rules regarding its Order Types and Attributes, are pro-
competitive because they bolster the efficiency, integrity, and overall
attractiveness of the Exchange in an absolute sense and relative to its
peers.
    Moreover, the proposed changes will not unduly burden intra-market
competition among various Exchange participants. The Exchange's
proposal to allow the partial cancellation of an Order without the
Order losing priority will not impact intra-market competition because
the participant that entered the Order continues to express its
willingness to trade at the price entered when the Order first came
onto the Book. Moreover, if the Order is displayed, other participants
quoting at the same price are aware of the priority of their Orders
relative to the partially cancelled Order. While a partial cancellation
may provide these other participants with greater opportunities to
provide a fill, the Exchange does not believe that it would be
reasonable for these participants to jump ahead of an Order with time
priority merely because the size of the Order has been reduced.
Similarly, if the partially cancelled Order is non-displayed, other
participants would have no awareness of its price, its original size,
or its reduced size. Again, while other participants at that price may
have an increased opportunity to provide a fill when the Order's size
is reduced, they would not have an expectation that the priority of
their Orders would change vis-[agrave]-vis that of an Order that
arrived on the Book at an earlier time.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-020 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2022-020. 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-2022-020, and should
be submitted on or before April 20, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-06511 Filed 3-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61040-61041]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21840]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0902]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Medication Guides for
Prescription Drug Products

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Submit written comments (including recommendations) on the
collection of information by November 7, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by using the search function. The OMB control number for
this information collection is 0910-0393. Also include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Medication Guide Requirements for Prescription Drug Product Labeling

OMB Control Number 0910-0393--Extension

    This information collection supports FDA regulations pertaining to
the distribution of patient labeling, called Medication Guides, for
human prescription drug and biological products used primarily on an
outpatient basis, and required for products that pose a serious and
significant public health concern. Applicable regulations are codified
at part 208 (21 CFR part 208): Medication Guides for Prescription Drug
Products, and set forth general content and format requirements, as
well as provide for exemptions and deferrals. Medication Guides provide
patients with important written information about drug products,
including the drug's approved uses, contraindications, adverse drug
reactions, and cautions for specific populations, and are required in
accordance with Agency regulations.
    To assist consumers and industry with understanding applicable
regulatory requirements in part 208 pertaining to developing,
distributing, and submitting certain Medication Guides, we have
developed the guidance document entitled ``Medication Guides--
Distribution Requirements and Inclusion in Risk Evaluation and
Mitigation Strategies (REMS)'' (available at https://www.fda.gov/media/79776/download). The guidance document includes: (1) a discussion of
the applicable regulations; (2) FDA enforcement policy with regard to
Medication Guides associated with products dispensed to healthcare
professionals, or patient caregivers, instead of being dispensed
directly to the patient for self-administration; and (3) Medication
Guides required as part of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy.
    In the Federal Register of March 22, 2022 (87 FR 16199), we
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                        Average
    Activity; 21 CFR section         Number of     responses per   Total annual     burden per      Total hours
                                    respondents     respondent       responses       response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content and format of a                       41               1              41             320          13,120
 Medication Guide; Sec.   208.20
Exemptions and deferrals; Sec.                 1               1               1               4               4
 208.26(a)......................
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............              42  ..............          13,124
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Upon evaluation of the information collection, we have removed
burden we attributed to reporting associated with supplements and other
changes to approved abbreviated new drug applications, new drug
applications, and biologics license applications (21 CFR
314.70(b)(3)(ii) and 601.12(f)). We now account for burden associated
with these regulatory provisions in OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and
0910-0338 and have decreased the burden associated with this collection
accordingly.

                           Table 2--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
                                     Number of      disclosures    Total annual       Average
    Activity; 21 CFR section        respondents         per         disclosures     burden  per     Total hours
                                                    respondent                    disclosure \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribute Medication Guides to              191           9,000       1,719,000            1.25       2,148,750
 authorized dispensers; Sec.
 208.24(c)......................
Distribute and Dispense                   88,000           5,705     502,040,000         0.05 (3      25,102,000
 Medication Guides to Patients;                                                         minutes)
 Sec.   208.24(e)...............
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............     503,759,000  ..............      27,250,750
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.
\2\ Numbers may not sum due to rounding.

    We have decreased our estimated burden associated with disclosures
to reflect a decrease in related submissions over the past 3 years.

    Dated: September 30, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-21840 Filed 10-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30600-30601]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11573]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Application
for Employment With the Federal Aviation Administration; Withdrawal

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: This action withdraws the Notice to collect information to
process and report Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) airborne and ground
based observations by the public of drone behavior that they consider
suspicious or illegal. The document contained errors, and needs further
clarification.

DATES: May 17, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ronda Thompson, Room 441, Federal
Aviation Administration, ASP-110, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Washington,
DC 20024, by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA published in the Federal Register of
May 10, 2016 (81 FR 28930) a Notice and request for comments on the
FAA's intention to request Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
approval for a new information collection to process and report UAS
airborne and ground based observations by the public of drone behavior
that they consider suspicious or illegal. The Notice and request for
comments contained errors; therefore the Notice and request for
comments is being withdrawn.

The Withdrawal

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Notice and request for
comments as published in the Federal Register of May 10, 2016 (81 FR
28930) FR Doc. 2016-10976, is hereby withdrawn.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 12, 2016.
Lorelei Peter,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2016-11573 Filed 5-12-16; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


FOR FURTHER NFORMATION CONTACT: AKIVA ABRAMOVITCH at 703 308 8328 PP# 6F7051 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION EPA has received a pesticide petition ( PP# 6F7051 from Nippon Soda Co., Ltd. c/ o Nisso America Inc., 45 Broadway, , Suite 2120, New York, NY, 10006. This petition proposes, pursuant to Section 408( d) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), 21 U. S. C. section 346a( d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 by establishing tolerances for the residues of acetamiprid in/ on bulb vegetables ( crop group 3), edible podded legume vegetables ( subgroup 6a), succulent shelled pea and beans ( subgroup 6b), and berries ( crop group 13) as given below. The proposed analytical method is by LC/ MS/ MS.

Pursuant to section 408( d)( 2) of the FFDCA, as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act ( FQPA), Nippon Soda Co., Ltd. has submitted the following summary of information, data and rationales in support of their pesticide petition and authorization for the summary to be published in the Federal Register in a notice of receipt of the petition. This summary was prepared by Nippon Soda Co., Ltd.; EPA is in the process of evaluating the petition and has not determined whether the data supports granting of the petition. EPA may have made minor edits to the summary for the purpose of clarity.

A. Residue Chemistry

1. Plant Metabolism The metabolism of acetamiprid in plants is well understood, having been investigated in eggplant, apples, cabbage, carrots, and cotton. Metabolism in plants primarily involves demethylation of the N methyl group with subsequent hydrolysis of the acetamidine function to give the N acetyl compound. This compound is then hydrolyzed to the corresponding amine followed by oxidation to the alcohol and acid. Conjugation of the alcohol with glucose is also significant. Degradation of the side chain without loss of the N methyl group is seen in carrots since this is the major metabolic route in soil.

2. Analytical Method Based upon the metabolism of acetamiprid in plants and the toxicology of the parent and metabolites, quantification of the parent acetamiprid is sufficient to determine toxic residues. As a result a method has been developed which involves extraction of acetamiprid from crops with methanol, filtration, partitioning and cleanup, and analysis by LC/ MS/ MS methods. The limit of quantification ( LOQ) is 0.009 ppm for berries, edible podded legume vegetables, and succulent shelled pea and beans and 0.006 ppm for bulb vegetables. The method limit of detection ( LOD) is 0.003 ppm for berries, edible podded legume vegetables and succulent shelled pea and beans, and 0.002 for bulb vegetables. 3. Magnitude of Residues Magnitude of the residue studies were conducted in bulb vegetables ( crop group 3 representative commodities: onions, green and onions, dry bulb), edible podded legume vegetables ( crop subgroup 6a representative commodities: green bean and edible podded pea), succulent shelled pea and beans ( crop group 6b representative commodities: lima bean and green pea), and berries ( crop group 13 representative commodities: blackbery/ raspberry and blueberry). Trials were conducted in all of the major use areas for each of the crops as specified in the Residue Chemistry Guidelines OPPTS 860.1500 with applications at the maximum label use rate for each crop. As a result of the field trials the following tolerances are proposed: 3 ppm ( bulb vegetables), 0.5 ppm ( edible podded legume vegetables), 0.5 ppm ( succulent shelled pea and beans), and 1 ppm ( berries).

A. Toxicological Profile

1. Acute Toxicity for Technical Acetamiprid The acute oral LD 50 for acetamiprid was 146 mg/ kg for female Sprague Dawley rats and 217 for male rats. The acute dermal LD 50 for acetamiprid was greater than 2000 mg/ kg in rats. The acute 4 hour inhalation LC 50 for acetamiprid was greater than 1.15 mg/ L, the highest attainable concentration. Acetamiprid was not irritating to the eyes or skin and was not considered to be a sensitizing agent. The NOEL for acute neurotoxicity was 10mg/ kg and no evidence of neuropathy was noted.

Acute Toxicity for Formulated Acetamiprid 70WP The acute oral LD 50 for Acetamiprid 70WP was 944 mg/ kg for female Sprague Dawley rats and 1107mg/ kg for male rats. The acute dermal LD 50 for formulated acetamiprid was greater than 2000mg/ kg in rats. The acute inhalation LC 50 ( four hour) for Acetamiprid 70WP was determined to be greater than 2.88 mg/ L, the highest attainable concentration. Acetamiprid 70WP was concluded to be a mild eye irritant and slight skin irritant. There were no indications of skin sensitization for the formulated product.

2. Genetic Toxicity for Technical Acetamiprid Based on the weight of the evidence provided by a complete test battery, acetamiprid is neither mutagenic nor genotoxic. The compound was found to be devoid of mutagenic activity ( with and without metabolic activation) in Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli ( Ames assay). Acetamiprid was also not mutagenic in an in vitro mammalian cell gene mutation assay on Chinese hamster ovary ( CHO) cells ( HPRT locus, with and without metabolic activation). Acetamiprid did not induce unscheduled DNA synthesis ( UDS) in either rat liver primary cell cultures or in mammalian liver cells in vivo. In an in vitro chromosomal aberration study using CHO cells, acetamiprid was positive when tested under metabolic activation at cytotoxic dose levels; no effect was detected without metabolic activation. Acetamiprid was non clastogenic in an in vivo chromosomal aberration study in rat bone marrow. It also was negative in an in vivo mouse bone marrow micronucleus assay. 3. Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In the multi generation rat reproduction study a NOEL of 100 ppm was established based on decreased body weight gains and a reproduction NOEL of 800 ppm ( highest dose tested) was established for reproductive performance and fertility. In the rat teratology study the developmental NOEL was 50 mg/ kg/ day ( maternal NOEL of 16 mg/ kg/ day based on decreased body weight and food consumption) and in the rabbit teratology study the developmental NOEL was 30 mg/ kg/ day ( maternal NOEL of 15 mg/ kg/ day based on decreased body weight and food consumption). In both the rat and rabbit studies there were no fetotoxic or teratogenic findings.

A developmental neurotoxicity study in rats with acetamiprid was conducted. The test article was administered orally by gavage to Crl: CD( SD) IGS BR rats once daily from gestation day 6 through lactation day 21 inclusive at dosage levels of 2.5, 10, and 45 mg/ kg/ day. One female in the 45 mg/ kg/ day group died during parturition on gestation day 23, following delivery of one pup. All other females survived to the scheduled necropsies. No adverse clinical signs were noted. F0 maternal toxicity was expressed at a dose level of 45 mg/ kg/ day by a single mortality and reductions in body weight gain and food consumption. No maternal toxicity was exhibited at dose levels of 2.5 and 10 mg/ kg/ day. F1 developmental toxicity was expressed at a dose level of 45 mg/ kg/ day by early postnatal mortality and reduced post weaning body weights. No developmental toxicity was exhibited at dose levels of 2.5 and 10 mg/ kg/ day. Deficits in auditory startle response occurred in the 45 mg/ kg/ day group F1 males and females without concomitant effects in other functional endpoints ( FOB), neuropathology or brain morphometry. Based on the results of this study, the NOAEL for maternal toxicity, developmental toxicity and developmental neurotoxicity is considered to be 10 mg/ kg/ day.

4. Subchronic Toxicity In the 3 month dog feeding study a NOEL of 800 ppm ( 32 mg/ kg/ day for both males and females) was established based on growth retardation and decreased food consumption.

In the 3 month rat feeding study a NOEL of 200 ppm ( 12.4 and 14.6 mg/ kg/ day respectively for male and female rats) was established based on liver cell hypertrophy at a dose of 800 ppm.

In the 3 month mouse feeding study a NOEL of 400 ppm ( 53.2 and 64.6 mg/ kg/ day respectively for male and female mice) was established based on increased liver/ body weight ratio and decreased cholesterol in females at 800 ppm.

A 13 week dietary neurotoxicity study for acetamiprid established a NOEL of 200 ppm ( 14.8 and 16.3 mg/ kg for male and female rats) based on reduced body weight and food consumption decreases at 800 ppm. There was no evidence of neurotoxicity.

A 21 day dermal study in rabbits at dose levels up to 1000 mg/ kg/ day caused no systemic toxicity, dermal irritation or histomorphological lesions in either sex tested. 5. Chronic Toxicity In the 1 year dog study, the NOEL was established at 600 ppm ( 20 and 21 mg/ kg/ day for male and female dogs, respectively) based on growth retardation and decreased food consumption at a dose of 1500 ppm.

In the 18 month mouse study the NOEL was established at 130 ppm ( 20.3 and 25.2 mg/ kg/ day for male and female mice) based on growth retardation and hepatic toxicity at 400 ppm.

In the 2 year rat study the NOEL was 160 ppm ( 7.1 and 8.8 mg/ kg/ day for male and female rats) based on growth retardation and hepatic toxicity. There were no indications of carcinogenicity in either the rat or mouse chronic studies.

6. Animal metabolism The metabolism of acetamiprid is well understood and the primary animal metabolite is IM 2 1.

7. Metabolite Toxicology Testing of IM 2 1 demonstrated that it is significantly less toxic than the parent acetamiprid and it is not being considered as part of the total toxic residue in plants, therefore no tolerance is being requested by the registrant. The acute oral LD50 of IM 2 1 is 2543 mg/ kg for male rats and 1762 mg/ kg for female rats.

8. Endocrine disruption Acetamiprid does not belong to a class of chemicals known or suspected of having adverse effects on the endocrine system. Developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and a reproductive study in rats gave no indication that acetamiprid has any effects on endocrine function. The chronic feeding studies also did not show any long term effects related to endocrine systems.

C. Aggregate Exposure 1. Dietary Acute and chronic dietary analyses were conducted to estimate exposure to potential acetamiprid residues in/ on the following crops: canola, cotton, citrus crop group, pome fruit crop group, grapes, mustard seed, tuberous and corm vegetables crop subgroup , cucurbits crop group, leafy vegetables ( brassica) crop group, leafy vegetables ( except brassica), tree nuts crop group, fruiting vegetable crop group, stone fruit group, bulb vegetables ( crop group 3), edible podded legume vegetables ( subgroup 6a), succulent shelled pea and beans ( subgroup 6b), and berries ( crop group 13) using the DEEM   FCID software. Exposure estimates to drinking water were made based on conservative tier 1 FIRST and SCIGROW modeling.

2. Food The acute dietary exposure estimates at the 99.9th percentile for the US Population was calculated to be 6.2% of the acute Reference Dose ( aRfD). The population subgroup with the highest exposure was children, 1 2 years old at 20.2% of the aRfD. The acute RfD was based on the NOEL of 10 mg/ kg/ day in the acute neurotoxicity study in rats. Chronic dietary exposure estimates from residues of acetamiprid and the animal metabolite for the US Population was 0.1% of the chronic Population Adjusted Dose ( cPAD). The subpopulation with the highest exposure was children 1 2 with 0.6% of the cPAD used. These values are based on projected percentages for percent of crop treated and field trial residues at maximum label rates and minimum PHI s with no reduction factors for common washing, cooking, or preparation practices. These can be considered conservative values. The cPAD was based on the NOEL of 7.1 mg/ kg/ day in the chronic rat study. Following the Final Rule establishing tolerances for acetamiprid on canola and mustard ( Federal Register, Vol. 68, No. 170 / Wednesday , September 3, 2003 / Page 52343), an uncertainty factor of 100 to account for inter and intra species and an FQPA safety factor of 1X was deemed appropriate for the chronic and acute assessments.

3. Drinking Water US EPA s draft Standard Operating Procedure ( SOP) for Incorporating Estimates of Drinking Water Exposure Into Aggregate Risk Assessments was used to perform the drinking water analysis for acetamiprid. This SOP utilizes a variety of tools to conduct drinking water assessments. These tools include water models such as SCI GROW, FIRST, PRZM/ EXAMS, and monitoring data. If monitoring data are not available then the models are used to predict potential residues in surface water and ground water. In the case of acetamiprid, monitoring data do not exist, therefore, FIRST and SCIGROW models were used to estimate acetamiprid residues in surface and ground water, respectively. The short term drinking water levels of comparison ( DWLOCs) were 1300 ppb or greater while the modeled drinking water estimated concentration ( DWEC) was 17 ppb for surface water and 0.0008 ppb for ground water. The long term DWLOCs were 710 ppb or greater while the modeled DWEC was 4 ppb for surface water and 0.0008 ppb for ground water. The modeled DWEC surface and ground water residues were significantly less than the calculated DWLOCs for short and long term exposures for all adults and toddlers ( 1 2 years old).

4. Non dietary exposure A use allowing residential applications of formulated acetamiprid outdoors to kill termites and other general household pests in a perimeter treatment resulted in short term applicator exposure MOEs of 13,000. Please note that due to the use pattern of the product, no post application exposures are likely and were therefore not evaluated.

Short and long term aggregate exposure assessments were conducted using EPA s Draft Guidance for Performing Aggregate Exposure and Risk Assessments which suggests using the Total MOE method for aggregating exposures. In the case of acetamiprid, an MOE greater than 100 provides a reasonable certainty that no harm will occur from the assessed uses. Using the Total MOE method for aggregating exposures, children 1 2 had the lowest MOE estimates in the short term aggregate assessment and in the long term aggregate assessment. All short term aggregate MOEs were 740 or greater and all long term aggregate MOEs were 16,000 or greater. Therefore, there is reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate ( food, drinking water, and residential) exposure to acetamiprid residues.

D. Cumulative Effects A determination has not been made that acetamiprid has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. Acetamiprid does not appear to produce a common toxic metabolite with other substances. A cumulative risk assessment was therefore not performed for this analysis.

E. Safety Determination 1. U. S. Population Using the conservative assumptions described above and, based on the completeness and reliability of the toxicity data, it is concluded that aggregate exposure from the existing and proposed uses of acetamiprid will utilize at most 6.2% of the acute reference dose ( aRfD) at the 99.9 percentile of exposure and 0.1% of the chronic Population Adjusted Dose ( cPAD) for the U. S. Population. These percentages are likely to be much less as more realistic exposure data and models are developed. EPA generally has no concern for exposures below 100% of the aRfD and cPAD. Drinking water levels of comparison ( DWLOCs) based on these exposure estimates are much greater than conservative estimated concentrations, and would be expected to be well below the 100% level, if they occur at all. In addition, a use allowing residential applications of formulated acetamiprid outdoors to kill termites and general household pests in a perimeter treatment resulted in short term applicator exposure MOEs of 13,000. Please note that due to the use pattern of the product, no post application exposures are likely and were therefore not evaluated. In conclusion, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will occur to the US Population from aggregate exposure to acetamiprid.

2. Infants and Children. In multi generation reproduction and teratology studies, no adverse effects on reproduction were observed in either rats or rabbits. In the long term feeding studies in rats and mice there was no evidence of carcinogenicity. Acetamiprid was not mutagenic under the conditions of testing. There is no indication of developmental neurotoxicity associated with acetamiprid. Using the conservative assumptions described in the exposure section above, the percent of the acute reference dose ( aRfD) that will be used is 20.2% for children 1 2 years old ( the most highly exposed sub group) at the 99.9 percentile of exposure and 0.6% of the chronic Population Adjusted Dose ( cPAD). As in the adult situation, drinking water levels of comparison are much higher than the worst case drinking water estimated concentrations and would be expected to be well below 100% of the RfD, if they occur at all. Therefore, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will occur to infants and children from aggregate exposure to residues of acetamiprid.

F. International Tolerances

Acetamiprid is registered for use on food crops in several countries outside the United States.


[Federal Register: January 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 14)]
[Notices]
[Page 3723]
[DOCID:fr22ja10-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC10-43-000]

Longhorn Partners Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Filing

January 14, 2010.
    Take notice that on January 6, 2010, Longhorn Partners Pipeline
L.P. submitted a request for the waiver of the requirement to file the
2009 FERC Form No. 6 Annual Report from January 1, 2009 through July
29, 2009.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 or 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: February 3, 2010.

Kimberly Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-1191 Filed 1-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P