[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 239 (Thursday, December 14, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 86613-86614]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27450]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 239 / Thursday, December 14, 2023 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 101

[Docket No. FDA-2011-F-0172]

Menu Labeling: Supplemental Guidance for Industry (Edition 2);
Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the
availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Menu Labeling:
Supplemental Guidance for Industry (Edition 2).'' The draft guidance,
when finalized, will update the existing guidance to add new questions
and answers to address voluntary declaration of added sugars and
voluntary declaration of nutrition information for menus on third-party
platforms.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by February 12, 2024 to ensure that we consider your comment
on the draft guidance before we begin work on the final version of the
guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2011-F-0172 for ``Menu Labeling: Supplemental Guidance for
Industry.'' Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except
for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable
at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' We will review
this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in our
consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed
confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for
public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both
copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name
and contact information to be made publicly available, you can provide
this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your
comments and you must identify this information as ``confidential.''
Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except
in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law.
For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets,
see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Office of Nutrition and Food Labeling, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr.,
College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to
assist that office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft guidance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sonia Hudson, Office of Nutrition and
Food Labeling (HFS-820), Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740,
240-402-2731; or Holli Kubicki, Office of Regulations and Policy (HFS-
024), Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug
Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of December 1, 2014 (79 FR 71156), we
published a final rule on nutrition labeling of standard menu items in
restaurants and similar retail food establishments to implement the
menu labeling provisions

of section 403(q)(5)(H) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 343(q)(5)(H)) (``Food Labeling; Nutrition Labeling of Standard
Menu Items in Restaurants and Similar Retail Food Establishments'').
The menu labeling requirements are codified at Sec.  101.11 (21 CFR
101.11). Before these requirements, consumers could find nutrition
information on most packaged foods; however, this labeling was not
generally and consistently available in restaurants and similar retail
food establishments that serve ready-to-eat, prepared food. Providing
calorie and other nutrition information for ready-to-eat prepared foods
in restaurants and similar retail food establishments enables consumers
to make informed and healthful dietary choices.
    In the Federal Register of May 5, 2018 (83 FR 20731), we announced
the availability of a final guidance entitled ``Menu Labeling:
Supplemental Guidance for Industry'' that addresses stakeholder
questions regarding the implementation of nutrition labeling
requirements for foods sold in covered establishments and includes
examples of alternatives to aid in compliance. A ``covered
establishment'' is a restaurant or similar retail food establishment
that is a part of a chain with 20 or more locations doing business
under the same name (regardless of the type of ownership, e.g.,
individual franchises) and offering for sale substantially the same
menu items, as well as a restaurant or similar retail food
establishment that voluntarily registers with FDA to be covered by the
Federal menu labeling requirements (Sec.  101.11(a); see 21 U.S.C.
343(q)(5)(H)(i)).
    We are announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Menu Labeling: Supplemental Guidance for Industry (Edition
2).'' The draft guidance is a revision to the guidance issued in May
2018. We are including two new questions and answers regarding
voluntarily declaring added sugars as part of additional written
nutrition information and voluntarily providing nutrition information
consistent with the menu labeling requirements through third-party
platforms. The guidance, if finalized, will support further alignment
of menu labeling with our Nutrition Facts label regulation at 21 CFR
101.9, because we recommend that covered establishments voluntarily
include the declaration of ``added sugars'' as part of the additional
written nutrition information under Sec.  101.11(b)(2)(ii)(A).
Additionally, with the popularity of using third-party platforms, such
as third-party online ordering websites and delivery applications to
order food for pickup and delivery from chain restaurants and similar
retail food establishments, we recommend the voluntary disclosure of
calorie information for standard menu items to help consumers make
informed and healthful decisions when ordering their meals online using
a third-party platform.
    On November 6-8, 2023, FDA hosted a virtual public meeting and
listening session to explore what Federal Agencies, communities, and
private industry are doing to encourage the reduced consumption of
added sugars. Issuing this draft guidance is one important step that
FDA can take to make progress towards this goal.
    FDA is issuing the draft guidance to receive comments on the new
questions and answers, and, as appropriate, will move the questions and
answers to the final guidance document, after reviewing comments and
incorporating any changes to the questions and answers. For ease of
reference, a question retains the same number when it moves from the
draft guidance to the final guidance.
    We are issuing the draft guidance consistent with our good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on this topic. It
does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA
or the public. You can use an alternate approach if it satisfies the
requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance contains proposed information collection
provisions that are subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501-3521). ``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C.
3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or
requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records,
or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to publish a
60-day notice in the Federal Register for each proposed collection of
information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To
comply with this requirement, we will publish a 60-day notice of the
proposed collection of information in a future issue of the Federal
Register.
    This draft guidance also refers to previously approved FDA
collections of information. The collections of information in Sec.
101.11 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0782.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at https://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov. Use the FDA website listed in the previous
sentence to find the most current version of the guidance.

    Dated: December 8, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-27450 Filed 12-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10764-10765]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03000]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e)(1)(v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Docket No.               File date     Presenter or requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prohibited:
    1. CP13-492-000, CP13-483-        1-19-2017  Climate Writers.
     000.
    2. CP13-492-000, CP13-483-        1-19-2017  Climate Writers.
     000.
    3. CP15-138-000............       1-23-2017  Natural Gas Supply
                                                  Association.
    4. CP15-177-000............       1-26-2017  Ben Stodola.
    5. P-1494-416..............       1-30-2017  Myirl J. Landers.
    6. CP15-93-000.............        2-2-2017  Frederick P. Curran.
    7. CP15-93-000.............        2-3-2017  Mass Mailing.\1\
Exempt:
    1. CP15-558-000............       1-24-2017  U.S. House
                                                  Representative Brian
                                                  K. Fitzpatrick.
    2. CP15-558-000............       1-26-2017  U.S. House
                                                  Representative Matt
                                                  Cartwright.
    3. CP17-11-000.............       1-26-2017  FERC Staff.\2\
    4. ER17-284-000............        2-1-2017  U.S. Congress
                                                  Members.\3\
    5. CP16-9-000..............        2-1-2017  U.S. Senators.\4\
    6. CP15-554-000............        2-2-2017  Loudoun County Chamber
                                                  of Commerce.

    7. CP16-22-000.............        2-2-2017  U.S. Senator Gary C.
                                                  Peters.
    8. P-13102-000.............        2-3-2017  FERC Staff.\5\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Nine letters have been sent to FERC Commissioners and staff under
  this docket number.
\2\ Staff Memorandum dated January 26, 2017.
\3\ Congressmen Debbie Dingell, John Moolenaar, Justin Amash, Paul
  Mitchell, Dave Trott, Sander M. Levin, Tim Walberg, Bill Huizenga,
  Brenda Lawrence, Mike Bishop, Jack Bergman, and Daniel T. Kildee.
\4\ Senators Edward J. Markey and Elizabeth Warren.
\5\ Custom Soil Resource Report dated January 19, 2017, prepared by U.S.
  Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

    Dated: February 7, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03000 Filed 2-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


"richardastrust.com"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 11/21/2007 12:25 PMTo

Margaret Sheppard/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Darren Burks<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Dave Godwin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Julius Banks/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

bcc

Subject

Re: supplement to risk assessment for window unit

For Follow Up:

Normal Priority

 History:

This message has been replied to.

Margaret

Attached the window ac risk.

Any questions please feel free to ask.

Happy Thanksgiving to All

Richard

"richardastrust.com"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>wrote:

Darren

Please address the issues that the EPA has and get back to me.

Richard

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>wrote:

Richard,

For the window unit, we still need a document that traces from the

charge size, in g, to the exposure level and then compares this to the

LEL and the appropriate exposure limit. The September 25, 2007 letter

from Alaska Industrial Hygiene Services is based upon the original

charge size estimate and does not address toxicity as an issue.

I am expecting either a revised risk assessment or a supplemental,

stand-alone set of calculations that includes:

-The charge of HCR-188C in the window unit (g)

-Assumptions on room size, duration of exposure, molecular weight

(g/mole), temperature and pressure

-Calculation of exposure level, in ppm and in %

-Comparison of the exposure level to the LEL of 2%/20,000 ppm for both

consumers and workers

-Comparison to the AEGL of 10,000 ppm for consumer exposure

-Comparison to the TLV of 1000 ppm for worker exposure

Margaret Sheppard

USEPA/Stratospheric Protection Division

SNAP Program

Tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

email<EMAIL_ADDRESS> ----- Forwarded by Margaret Sheppard/DC/USEPA/US on 11/13/2007 11:43 AM

-----

Margaret

Sheppard/DC/USEP

A/US To

"richardastrust.com"

11/01/2007 05:06

PM cc

Dave Godwin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,

Julius Banks/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

Re: window ac test(Document link:

Margaret Sheppard)

Richard,

Thanks for informing me about the situation with the manufacturer and

the testers.

If this is the case, then the risk assessment for the window unit needs

to use the charge value based on 40% of nameplate, since that is the

charge supported by the testing. You may address this either by

revising and resubmitting the risk assessment from July 2007 for window

units and freezers, or by separately submitting revised risk assessment

calculations for the window unit.

Also, please identify the charge size in grams or ounces.

Margaret Sheppard

USEPA/Stratospheric Protection Division

SNAP Program

Tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

"richardastrust.

com"

.com> Margaret Sheppard/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

10/31/2007 03:03

PM Subject

window ac test

Margaret:

On the 5000 BTU unit, Intertek explains that at the low charge rates,

the room overwhelmed the unit and they could not get a steady reading.

On the 10000 BTU unit, the charge at 40% started to stabilize at the

best EER. The attached report explains this. In order for me to get the

unit to perform at the lower charge rates, I would need to work with the

cap tubes. An adjustment of these tubes, would then bring the BTU up

with the EER at around 30% charge. I don't want to attempt this at this

point for it would create ill feeling between the manufacturer (who had

an engineer there) and myself.

As per our conversation, the manufacturer would be willing to work with

me if, and only, HCR-188C is passed. This is the one benefit I would

have to deal with other air conditioners at a lower charge rate and a

better EER.

Richard

Richard Maruya

phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

cell<PHONE_NUMBER>

e mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS> web site HCR188C www.hcr188c.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail may contain confidential or

privileged information, if you are not the intended recipient, or the

person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient,

then please notify us by return e-mail immediately. Should you have

received this e-mail in error then you should not copy this for any

purpose nor disclose its contents to any other person.(See attached

file: window ac test intertek.pdf)

Richard Maruya

phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

cell<PHONE_NUMBER>

e mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS> web site HCR188C         www.hcr188c.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information, if you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, then please notify us by return e-mail immediately. Should you have received this e-mail in error then you should not copy this for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other person.

Richard Maruya

phone<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

cell<PHONE_NUMBER>

e mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS> web site HCR188C         www.hcr188c.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information, if you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, then please notify us by return e-mail immediately. Should you have received this e-mail in error then you should not copy this for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other person.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6646-6648]
[FR Doc No: 2011-2616]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63815; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2011-012]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Modify NASDAQ Options
Market Rules Chapter VII, Various Sections, Dealing With Market Maker
Obligations

February 1, 2011.
    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 January 19, 2011, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by NASDAQ. 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

    NASDAQ proposes to amend Chapter VII, Section 3, Continuing Market
Maker Registration, Section 5, Obligations of Market Makers, and
Section 6, Market Maker Quotations, of the NASDAQ rulebook for the
NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'') to: (a) Permit Market Maker assignment
by option rather than by series; (b) adopt a $5 quotation

spread parameter; and (c) amend the quoting requirement for Market
Makers as explained further below. These changes are scheduled to be
implemented on NOM on or about May 1, 2011; the Exchange will announce
the implementation schedule by Options Trader Alert, once the rollout
schedule, which will be based in part on NOM participants' readiness,
is finalized.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at NASDAQ'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, NASDAQ 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. NASDAQ 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 strengthen Market
Maker obligations. The NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM''), the options
trading facility of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, has been fully
operational for over two years. During this time, NASDAQ has carefully
considered the role of Market Makers in the NOM marketplace and their
concomitant obligations.
    An Options Market Maker is a Participant \3\ registered with NASDAQ
as a Market Maker.\4\ Market Makers on NOM have certain obligations
such as maintaining two-sided markets and participating in transactions
that are ``reasonably calculated to contribute to the maintenance of a
fair and orderly market.'' \5\ To register as a Market Maker, a
Participant must file a written application with Nasdaq Regulation,
which will consider an applicant's market making ability and other
factors it deems appropriate in determining whether to approve an
applicant's registration.\6\ All Market Makers are designated as
specialists on NOM for all purposes under the Act or rules
thereunder.\7\ The NOM Rules place no limit on the number of qualifying
entities that may become Market Makers.\8\ The good standing of a
Market Maker may be suspended, terminated, or withdrawn if the
conditions for approval cease to be maintained or the Market Maker
violates any of its agreements with NASDAQ or any provisions of the NOM
Rules.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Options Participant'' or ``Participant'' means a
firm or organization that is registered with the Exchange pursuant
to Chapter II of the NOM Rules for purposes of participating in
options trading on NOM as a ``Nasdaq Options Order Entry Firm'' or
``Nasdaq Options Market Maker.''
    \4\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 2.
    \5\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 5(a).
    \6\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 2(a).
    \7\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 2.
    \8\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Rule 2(c).
    \9\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 4(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, a Participant that has qualified as a Market Maker may
register to make markets in individual series of options.\10\ Instead,
NASDAQ proposes to require that Market Makers register by option. Thus,
once so registered, a NOM Market Maker is subject to the market making
obligations in all series of that option, except Quarterly Options
Series, adjusted option series and any options series until the time to
expiration for such series is less than nine months.\11\ In order to
effect this change, NASDAQ proposes to amend various provisions in
Sections 3, 5 and 6 of Chapter VII that currently refer to ``series.''
NASDAQ believes that registration by option rather than series should
spread the benefits of Market Maker quoting across all series of an
option, which should, in turn, result in higher quality markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 3(a).
    \11\ See proposed NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 6(d)(i)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ also proposes to adopt quotation spread parameters, also
known as bid/ask differentials, which establish the maximum permissible
width between a Market Maker's bid and an offer in a particular series.
Specifically, NASDAQ proposes to adopt a $5 wide quote spread parameter
for all options.\12\ Currently, NOM Market Makers are not subject to
quote spread parameters, such that the requirement for a two-sided
market can be met with a quotation that is very wide. NASDAQ believes
that a $5 quote spread parameter for NOM Market Makers should result in
narrower markets, and thereby, improve the quality of NOM's markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See proposed NOM Rules, Chapter VII, Section 6(d)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, NASDAQ proposes to amend its quotation requirement for
Market Makers. Today, NOM Market Makers are required to make markets on
a continuous basis in at least 75% of the options series in which the
Market Maker is registered. NASDAQ proposes to change this requirement
to 60% of the series; in those series, to satisfy this requirement with
respect to quoting a series, a Market Maker must quote such series 90%
of the trading day (as a percentage of the total number of minutes in
such trading day) \13\ or such higher percentage as the Exchange may
announce in advance.\14\ Nasdaq Regulation may consider exceptions to
the requirement to quote 90% (or higher) of the trading day based on
demonstrated legal or regulatory requirements or other mitigating
circumstances. Although the proposed 60% requirement is lower than the
current 75%, the Exchange is also proposing herein to adopt, for the
first time, a quote spread requirement and a requirement to register by
option rather than by series, which are considerable changes for Market
Makers. NASDAQ believes that this new 60% quoting requirement is needed
to balance the proposed, new quotation spread parameters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For example, on a normal trading day, which lasts 390
minutes (from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.), quoting in a series would need
to be maintained for the total of at least 351 minutes in order to
meet the 90%-of-the-trading-day threshold. In a shortened trading
session, the total number of minutes the quote must be maintained
would be lowered proportionately (and the same percentage threshold
would apply).
    \14\ Any such higher percentage would involve an appropriate
advance announcement, which would then be available on the
Exchange's Web site. In the illustration above, if the Exchange set
the threshold, for example, at 99% (rather than 90%), then on a
normal trading day, quoting would need to be maintained for 386
(rather than 351) minutes out of the total of 390 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this proposal, NASDAQ recognizes that certain options series
present special challenges for Market Makers, due to nontraditional
terms. Accordingly, NASDAQ proposes that Quarterly Option Series,
adjusted option series, and any option series until the time to
expiration for such series is less than nine months be treated
differently. Specifically, under this proposal, Market Makers shall not
be subject to the continuous quoting obligation in Section 6(d)(1)
[sic] of NOM rules in any Quarterly Option Series, any adjusted option
series,\15\ and any option series until the time to expiration for such
series is less than nine months. Accordingly, the requirement to make
two-sided markets set forth in 5(a)(i) of NOM Rules shall not apply to
Market Makers respecting Quarterly Option Series, adjusted option
series, and series

with an expiration of nine months or greater.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For these purposes, an adjusted option series is an option
series wherein one option contract in the series represents the
delivery of other than 100 shares of underlying stock or Exchange-
Traded Fund Shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, if a technical failure or limitation of a system of
the Exchange prevents a Market Maker from maintaining, or prevents a
Market Maker from communicating to NOM, timely and accurate quotes, the
duration of such failure or limitation shall not be included in any of
the calculations under this subparagraph (i) with respect to the
affected quotes.
    As a whole, the proposed amendments are intended to improve the
quality of NOM markets, while carefully considering the important role
of Market Makers in the NOM marketplace. Adopting quotation spread
parameters and requiring registration across the series of an option
are intended to encourage market making in more series; at the same
time, NASDAQ recognizes the need to balance these new, more burdensome
obligations with a lower series quoting percentage requirement. This
balance of obligations should help to make the market better for all
participants. NASDAQ believes that it has crafted a reasonable balance
in this proposal.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \16\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \17\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of
a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes
that the proposal is appropriate and reasonable for Market Makers,
similar to the rules of other options exchanges (as specified below)
and should, at the same time, enhance the quality of the Exchange's
options markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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 Exchange 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-012 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-012. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2011-012 and should be submitted on or before February 28, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-2616 Filed 2-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P