Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing to request that you please extend the comment period FDA's Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule contains many questions/issues that I, as a consumer of these types of products, simply need more time to respond. The FDA had several years to construct this Proposed Rule and I believe the public should be allowed the courtesy of more time to break this down in order to answer after thorough thought and research.

E-cigarettes have made a huge difference in my life; from the leaving "combustion tobacco" behind to the wonderful community of vapers that I have met both online and in person.

I know you have the authority to do this extension, and it has been done before. Please consider this request to extend the comment period, as this is industry is in its infancy and we all want to see it done right the first time rather than going through the expense of having to do it again.

Thank you for your time and consideration.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11647-11648]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04802]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2016-0033]

Agency Request for Emergency Approval of an Information
Collection

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Department of Transportation (DOT) provides
notice that it will submit an information collection requests (ICR) to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for emergency approval of a
proposed information collection. Upon receiving the requested six-month
emergency approval by OMB, the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation (OST) will follow the normal PRA procedures to obtain
extended approval for this proposed information collection. The
collection of information is necessary in order to receive applications
for grant funds pursuant to Section 1105 of the Fixing America's
Surface Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015, which was signed into law on
December 4, 2015. Section 1105 establishes a new program for OST to
provide Supplemental Discretionary Grants for a Nationally Significant
Freight and Highway Projects (NSFHP) program. The Department will also
refer to NSFHP grants as Fostering Advancements in Shipping and
Transportation for the Long-term Achievement of National Efficiencies
(FASTLANE) grants. The FAST Act provides specific deadlines for this
program, including a statutory 60-day Congressional notification
requirement, which is no later than July 30, 2016. In order to ensure
that the NSFHP grants are awarded in an expeditious manner and in the
timeframes established by the FAST Act, the Department requests
approval of an information collection using OMB's emergency processing
system to meet Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requirements.
    Information related to this ICR, including applicable supporting
documentation may be obtained by contacting the NSFHP program manager
via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
DATES: Comments should be submitted as soon as possible upon
publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Comments and
questions should be directed to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Attn: OST OMB Desk Officer, 725 17th Street
NW., Washington, DC 20503. Comments and questions about the ICR
identified below may be transmitted electronically to OIRA at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2105-XXXX
    Title: Supplemental Discretionary Grants for a Nationally
Significant Freight and Highway Projects (NSFHP) program, or NSFHP
program.
    Type of Review: Emergency information collection request.
    Expected Number of Respondents: Approximately 200.
    Frequency: The Department expects that this information collection
will occur up to five times--once per fiscal year--from FY 2016 through
FY 2020.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 100 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 20,000.
    Abstract: On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed into law the
Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, or ``FAST Act.'' It is the
first law enacted in over ten years that provides long-term funding
certainty for surface transportation. The FAST Act authorized at $4.5
billion for fiscal years (FY) 2016 through 2020, including $800 million
for FY 2016 to be awarded by the Department of Transportation (the
``Department'') on a competitive basis to projects of national or
regional significance. The funds provided by NSFHP program will be
awarded on a competitive basis to projects that have a significant
impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. On or about the
date hereof, the Department published a solicitation for applications
for NSFHP grants. The solicitation announces the availability of
funding

for NSFHP grants, project selection criteria, application requirements
and the deadline for submitting applications.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1:48.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 26, 2016.
John Augustine,
Director, Office of Infrastructure and Innovative Finance.
[FR Doc. 2016-04802 Filed 3-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 166 (Monday, August 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52784-52786]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18516]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-D-1503]

Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures and Q14 Analytical
Procedure Development; International Council for Harmonisation; Draft
Guidances for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of two draft guidances for industry entitled ``Q2(R2)
Validation of Analytical Procedures'' and ``Q14 Analytical Procedure
Development.'' These draft guidances were prepared under the auspices
of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical
Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), formerly the
International Conference on Harmonisation. These draft guidances
harmonize scientific approaches for analytical procedure development
and include validation of a wider range of analytical techniques. The
draft guidances are intended to facilitate regulatory evaluations and
facilitate potential flexibility in postapproval change management of
analytical procedures. The draft Q2(R2) guidance revises the ICH
guidance for industry ``Q2(R1) Validation of Analytical Procedures:
Text and Methodology'' published in November 2005.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by September 28, 2022 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins 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-2022-D-1503 for ``Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures'' and
``Q14 Analytical Procedure Development.'' 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.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its 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 this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale
Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or the Office of
Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. The guidance may also be obtained by mail by calling
CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Regarding the guidance: David Keire, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 645 S Newstead Ave., Rm. 2008,
St. Louis, MO 63110-1116, [email protected].
    Regarding the ICH: Jill Adleberg, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6364, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of two draft guidances for
industry entitled ``Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures'' and
``Q14 Analytical Procedure Development.'' The draft guidances were
prepared under the auspices of ICH. ICH has the mission of achieving
greater regulatory harmonization worldwide to ensure that safe,
effective, high-quality medicines are developed, registered, and
maintained in the most resource-efficient manner.
    By harmonizing the regulatory requirements in regions around the
world, ICH guidelines have substantially reduced duplicative clinical
studies, prevented unnecessary animal studies, standardized the
reporting of important safety information, standardized marketing
application submissions, and made many other improvements in the
quality of global drug development and manufacturing and the products
available to patients.
    The six Founding Members of the ICH are the FDA; the Pharmaceutical
Research and Manufacturers of America; the European Commission; the
European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries Associations; the
Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare; and the Japanese
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association. The Standing Members of the
ICH Association include Health Canada and Swissmedic. Additionally, the
Membership of ICH has expanded to include other regulatory authorities
and industry associations from around the world (refer to https://www.ich.org/).
    ICH works by involving technical experts from both regulators and
industry parties in detailed technical harmonization work and the
application of a science-based approach to harmonization through a
consensus-driven process that results in the development of ICH
guidelines. The regulators around the world are committed to
consistently adopting these consensus-based guidelines, realizing the
benefits for patients and for industry.
    As a Founding Regulatory Member of ICH, FDA plays a major role in
the development of each of the ICH guidelines, which FDA then adopts
and issues as guidance for industry. FDA's guidance documents do not
establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, they describe
the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as
recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements
are cited.
    In March 2022, the ICH Assembly endorsed the draft guidelines
entitled ``Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures'' and ``Q14
Analytical Procedure Development'' and agreed that the guidelines
should be made available for public comment. The draft guidelines are
the product of the Quality Expert Working Group of the ICH. Comments
about these draft guidances will be considered by FDA and the Quality
Expert Working Group.
    The draft Q2(R2) guideline revises the Q2(R1) guideline published
in 2005 to cover a broader range of analytical

procedures, including those used for process control and that apply to
multivariate methods. The draft Q14 guideline harmonizes scientific
approaches for analytical procedure development and describes
principles to facilitate more efficient and science-based and risk-
based postapproval change management. The two guidelines are intended
to facilitate regulatory evaluations and facilitate potential
flexibility in postapproval change management of analytical procedures
where scientifically justified.
    These draft guidances have been left in the original ICH format.
The final guidances will be reformatted and edited to conform with
FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115) and style
before publication. The draft guidances, when finalized, will represent
the current thinking of FDA on the topics they address. They do not
establish any rights for any person and are not binding on FDA or the
public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the
requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information for investigational new drug applications have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0014; the collections of
information for review of new drug applications have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0001; and the collections of information
for review of biologics license applications have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0338.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidances
at https://www.regulations.gov, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, or https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information-biologics/biologics-guidances.

    Dated: August 22, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-18516 Filed 8-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 1 (Friday, January 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2-5]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30779]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0983]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Thames River, New London, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating schedule that
governs the Amtrak Bridge across the Thames River at mile 3.0, at New
London, Connecticut. The bridge owner, National Passenger Railroad
Corporation (Amtrak), submitted a request to allow the Amtrak Bridge to
open to 75 feet above mean high water instead of the full bridge
opening at 135.3 feet above mean high water, unless a full bridge
opening is requested. It is expected that this change to the
regulations will create more efficiency in drawbridge operations while
continuing to meet the reasonable needs of navigation.

DATES: This rule is effective February 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
USCG-2013-0983. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type in the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District Bridge Branch,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Regulatory History and Information

    On September 11, 2014, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Thames River, New
London, CT'' in the Federal Register (79 FR 54244). We received two
comments regarding the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested,
and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The Amtrak Bridge across the Thames River, mile 3.0, at New London,
Connecticut, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 29.4
feet at mean high water and 31.8 feet at mean low water. The drawbridge
operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.224. The waterway users
are both recreational and commercial vessels.
    The owner of the bridge, National Passenger Railroad Corporation
(Amtrak), requested an exception to the

requirement to fully open the bridge to its full 135.3 foot height
above mean high water when not required for a vessel to pass under
safely. Amtrak submitted the request to the Coast Guard to change the
drawbridge operation regulations to allow the Amtrak Bridge to open to
75 feet above mean high water for smaller vessels which comprise the
majority of the requested openings. The Amtrak Bridge will perform a
full bridge opening of 135.3 feet above mean high water when requested
to do so.
    The existing regulations require the bridge to open immediately on
signal for public vessels of the United States and commercial vessels;
except that, when a train scheduled to cross the bridge without
stopping has passed the Midway, Groton, or New London stations and is
in motion toward the bridge, the bridge must not be opened for the
passage of any vessel until the train has crossed the bridge. The
bridge shall open as soon as practicable for all other vessels but no
later than 20 minutes after the signal to open is given.
    We analyzed the bridge opening data for the Amtrak Railroad Bridge
during calendar year 2013, comparing the number of bridge openings to
135.3 feet and the number of bridge openings to 75 feet for each month
of the year.
    The bridge opening breakdown for 2013 is as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Openings to   Openings to 75
                              Month                               Total openings     135 feet          feet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January.........................................................              98              17              81
February........................................................              58               8              50
March...........................................................              62               2              60
April...........................................................              83              12              71
May.............................................................             220              40             180
June............................................................             255              38             217
July............................................................             257              42             215
August..........................................................             243              34             209
September.......................................................             227              26             201
October.........................................................             216              25             191
November........................................................              84               8              76
December........................................................              97               6              91
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Totals......................................................           1,900             258           1,642
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Out of the total 1900 bridge openings, only 13.57% were to the
135.3 foot elevation and the remaining 86.43% were to the 75 foot
elevation.
    As a result, the Coast Guard believes that allowing the Amtrak
Railroad Bridge to open to 75 feet, except when a request to open to
135.3 feet is received, is reasonable based on the low number of
requests to open to 135 feet and to match actual operations.
    The Coast Guard will also alter the navigation lighting
requirements to better meet the needs of navigation at this drawbridge
as a result of this final rule.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 118.85, the center of the navigational
channel under the operable span will be marked by a range of two green
lights when the vertical span is open to navigation.
    The Coast Guard will allow one solid green light and one flashing
green light when the bridge is at the 75 foot mark and two solid green
lights when the bridge is fully opened to 135.3 feet.
    We believe this final rule will continue to meet the reasonable
needs of navigation while also improving drawbridge efficiency of
operation.
    Under this final rule, the draw will open on signal to 75 feet
above mean high water, except when a full opening to 135.3 feet above
mean high water is requested. The bridge tender is aware of the
vertical clearance from the low steel chord of the bridge to the water
level by a sensor displaying distance on the Operator Control Panel
housed in the Drawbridge Control Room at the bridge. A selector switch
is placed in the 75 foot position or full lift (135.3 feet) position by
the bridge tender prior to operations depending on the vessel
requirements.''

Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard received two comments in response to the notice of
proposed rulemaking. One of the two comment letters was submitted in
error for another bridge located in Florida. The second comment letter
questioned if the regulation change was considered not a ``significant
energy action'' because it saves time or saves energy by opening to 75
feet instead of 135.3 feet. Executive Order 13211 defines ``significant
energy action.'' One prong of the definition is that the regulatory
action needs to be significant per Executive Order 12866. This
regulation does not meet the threshold for a significant regulatory
action and therefore cannot be considered a ``significant energy
action.'' While the change in opening levels will save both time and
energy, the analysis for a ``significant energy action'' is based on
definition in E.O. 13211.
    The single comment letter pertinent to the Amtrak Bridge was not an
objection or in favor of the rule change, as a result, no changes have
been made to this final rule.

C. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. We believe that this
rule is not a significant regulatory action because the Amtrak Bridge
will continue to open fully for any vessel upon request.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.

The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This rule will have no effect on small entities for the following
reason: The Amtrak Bridge will open fully for all vessel traffic at all
times upon request.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerns Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. This rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Commandant Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Commandant Instruction,
an environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.224 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.224  Thames River.

    The draw of the Amtrak Bridge, mile 3.0, at New London, shall
operate as follows:

    (a) The draw shall open on signal to 75 feet above mean high water
for all vessel traffic unless a full bridge opening to 135.3 feet above
mean high water is requested.

    (b) The 75 foot opening will be signified by a range light display
with one solid green light and one flashing green light and the full
135.3 foot opening will be signified with two solid green range lights.

    (c) The draw shall open on signal for public vessels of the United
States and commercial vessels; except that, when a train scheduled to
cross the bridge without stopping has passed the Midway, Groton, or New
London stations and is in motion toward the bridge, the lift span shall
not be opened until the train has crossed the bridge.

    (d) The draw shall open on signal as soon as practicable for all
other vessel traffic but no later than 20 minutes after the signal to
open is given.

    Dated: December 8, 2014.
L.L. Fagan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 2014-30779 Filed 12-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 203 (Monday, October 23, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 72758]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23385]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-091]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed October 6, 2023 10 a.m. EST Through October 16, 2023 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20230138, Final, USACE, CO, Halligan Water Supply Project,
Review Period Ends: 11/22/2023, Contact: Cody S. Wheeler<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230139, Draft, BLM, OR, Hult Reservoir and Dam Safety,
Comment Period Ends: 12/7/2023, Contact: Dianne Olson<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230140, Final, USACE, MS, Memphis Metropolitan Stormwater
North DeSoto County Feasibility Study, DeSoto County, Mississippi,
Review Period Ends: 11/22/2023, Contact: Joshua Koontz<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230141, Draft, USACE, FL, North of Lake Okeechobee Storage
Reservoir Section 203 Study, Comment Period Ends: 12/7/2023, Contact:
Dr. Gretchen Ehlinger<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230142, Draft Supplement, BLM, AK, Ambler Road Draft
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Comment Period Ends: 12/
22/2023, Contact: Stacie McIntosh<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 16, 2023.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2023-23385 Filed 10-19-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 80 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 24426]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09744]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0293]

Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical
Devices Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of
the Medical Devices Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on July 24 and 25, 2013,
from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    Location: Hilton Washington DC North/Gaithersburg, Salons A, B, C,
and D, 620 Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD 20877. The hotel telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Person: Sara J. Anderson, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1611, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line,
1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC area). A notice in
the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a
previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be
published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you
should always check the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate
advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee
information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to
the meeting.
    Agenda: On July 24, 2013, the committee will discuss, make
recommendations, and vote on information related to the premarket
approval application for the Kineflex/C Cervical Artificial Disc
sponsored by SpinalMotion. The Kineflex/C is a metal-on-metal (cobalt
chrome molybdenum alloy) cervical total disc replacement device. The
Kineflex/C is indicated for reconstruction of the intervertebral disc
at one level from C3-C7 following single-level discectomy for
intractable radiculopathy or myelopathy due to a single-level
abnormality localized to the disc space.
    On July 25, 2013, the committee will discuss, make recommendations,
and vote on information related to the premarket approval application
for the Kineflex Lumbar Artificial Disc sponsored by SpinalMotion. The
Kineflex Lumbar Artificial Disc is a metal-on-metal (cobalt chrome
molybdenum alloy) lumbar total disc replacement device. The Kineflex
Lumbar Artificial Disc is indicated for reconstruction of the
intervertebral disc at one level (L4-L5 or L5-S1) following single-
level discectomy for lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD) where DDD
is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc as
confirmed by patient history, physical examination, and radiographic
studies.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before July
15, 2013. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled on July
24 and 25, 2013, between approximately 11:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. Those
individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should
notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general
nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and
addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the
approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before July
5, 2013. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the
number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be
reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing
session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the
scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify
interested persons regarding their request to speak by July 8, 2013.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact AnnMarie Williams at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER> at least 7 days in
advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: April 19, 2013.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-09744 Filed 4-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13910-13913]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05089]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80188; File No. SR-ISE-2017-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Schedule of Fees

March 9, 2017.
    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 February 24, 2017, the International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``ISE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I and II, below, which Items have been prepared by
the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Schedule of Fees, as
described in further detail below.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.ise.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Exchange's
Schedule of Fees to make changes to (1) the Market Maker Plus \3\
program, (2) Priority Customer \4\ regular order taker fees in Select
Symbols,\5\ (3) Priority Customer complex order rebates in Select
Symbols and Non-Select Symbols,\6\ and (4) the threshold of net zero
complex contracts. Each of these changes is described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Market Maker Plus'' is a Market Maker who is on the
National Best Bid or National Best Offer a specified percentage of
the time for series trading between $0.03 and $3.00 (for options
whose underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was
less than or equal to $100) and between $0.10 and $3.00 (for options
whose underlying stock's previous trading day's last sale price was
greater than $100) in premium in each of the front two expiration
months. The specified percentage is at least 80% but lower than 85%
of the time for Tier 1, at least 85% but lower than 95% of the time
for Tier 2, and at least 95% of the time for Tier 3. A Market
Maker's single best and single worst quoting days each month based
on the front two expiration months, on a per symbol basis, will be
excluded in calculating whether a Market Maker qualifies for this
rebate, if doing so will qualify a Market Maker for the rebate.
    \4\ A ``Priority Customer'' is a person or entity that is not a
broker/dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s), as defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(37A).
    \5\ ``Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols listed
on the ISE that are in the Penny Pilot Program.
    \6\ ``Non-Select Symbols'' are options overlying all symbols,
excluding Select Symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Maker Plus
    In order to promote and encourage liquidity in Select Symbols, the
Exchange offers Market Makers \7\ that meet the quoting requirements
for Market Maker Plus enhanced rebates for adding liquidity in those
symbols. These Market Maker Plus rebates are provided on a per symbol
basis in three tiers based on the time the Market Maker is quoting at
the national best bid or offer (``NBBO'').\8\ Currently, the rebate is
$0.10 per contract for Tier 1, $0.18 per contract for Tier 2, and $0.22
per contract for Tier 3.\9\ The Exchange now proposes to increase the
rebate for Tier 1 to $0.15 per contract. The rebates for Tier 2 and
Tier 3, including the special rebates for Market Makers that achieve
Market Maker Plus in SPY or QQQ, will remain at the same amounts as
described herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``Market Makers'' refers to ``Competitive Market
Makers'' and ``Primary Market Makers'' collectively. See ISE Rule
100(a)(25).
    \8\ For all Market Maker Plus tiers, a $0.30 per contract fee
applies when trading against Priority Customer complex orders that
leg into the regular order book. No fee is charged or rebate
provided when trading against non[hyphen]Priority Customer complex
orders that leg into the regular order book).
    \9\ In addition, the Exchange also offers lower rebates for
Market Makers that achieve Market Maker Plus in SPY or QQQ.
Specifically, Market Makers that achieve Tier 2 or Tier 3 of Market
Maker Plus in either SPY or QQQ will receive the SPY or QQQ rebate
based on the highest Market Maker tier achieved in either product.
For example, a Market Maker that achieves Tier 1 Market Maker Plus
in QQQ but Tier 3 Market Maker Plus in SPY will receive a Tier 3
rebate in both SPY and QQQ. Instead of the Tier 2 and Tier 3 rebates
described above, however, Market Maker Plus orders in SPY or QQQ are
entitled to a rebate of $0.16 per contract for Tier 2, and $0.20 per
contract for Tier 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Priority Customer Taker Fees
    The Exchange charges a taker fee for regular orders in Select
Symbols. This fee is $0.44 per contract for Market Maker orders, and
$0.45 per contract for Non-ISE Market Maker,\10\ Firm Proprietary \11\/
Broker-Dealer,\12\ and Professional Customer \13\ orders. For Priority
Customer orders this fee is $0.31 per contract, or $0.26 per contract
for members with a total affiliated Priority Customer average daily
volume (``ADV'') that equals or exceeds 200,000 contracts.\14\ The
Exchange now

proposes to increase the taker fee for Priority Customer orders in
Select Symbols to $0.40 per contract for all such orders regardless of
volume. As such, the Exchange also proposes to delete the volume-based
incentive for Priority Customer orders in Select Symbols, specifically
the taker fee of $0.26 per contract for members that achieve the higher
Priority Customer ADV tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A ``Non[hyphen]ISE Market Maker'' is a market maker as
defined in Section 3(a)(38) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, registered in the same options class on another options
exchange.
    \11\ A ``Firm Proprietary'' order is an order submitted by a
member for its own proprietary account.
    \12\ A ``Broker[hyphen]Dealer'' order is an order submitted by a
member for a broker[hyphen]dealer account that is not its own
proprietary account.
    \13\ A ``Professional Customer'' is a person or entity that is
not a broker/dealer and is not a Priority Customer.
    \14\ Priority Customer ADV includes all volume in all symbols
and order types. All eligible volume from affiliated members will be
aggregated in determining total affiliated Priority Customer ADV,
provided there is at least 75% common ownership between the members
as reflected on each member's Form BD, Schedule A. For purposes of
determining Priority Customer ADV, any day that the regular order
book is not open for the entire trading day or the Exchange
instructs members in writing to route their orders to other markets
may be excluded from such calculation; provided that the Exchange
will only remove the day for members that would have a lower ADV
with the day included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Priority Customer Complex Order Rebates
    Currently, the Exchange provides rebates to Priority Customer
complex orders that trade with non-Priority Customer complex orders in
the complex order book or trade with quotes and orders on the regular
order book. Rebates are tiered based on a member's ADV executed during
a given month as follows: 0 to 29,999 contracts (``Tier 1''), 30,000 to
59,999 contracts (``Tier 2''), 60,000 to 99,999 contracts (``Tier 3''),
100,000 to 149,999 (``Tier 4''), 150,000 to 199,999 contracts (``Tier
5''), and 200,000 or more contracts (``Tier 6''). In Select Symbols the
rebate is $0.30 per contract for Tier 1, $0.35 per contract for Tier 2,
$0.41 per contract for Tier 3, $0.44 per contract for Tier 4, $0.46 per
contract for Tier 5, and $0.47 per contract for Tier 6. In Non-Select
Symbols the rebate is $0.63 per contract for Tier 1, $0.71 per contract
for Tier 2, $0.79 per contract for Tier 3, $0.81 per contract for Tier
4, $0.83 per contract for Tier 5, and $0.84 per contract for Tier
6.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For both Select Symbols and Non-Select Symbols, these
rebates are provided per contract per leg if the order trades with
non-Priority Customer orders in the complex order book, or trades
with quotes and orders on the regular order book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to (i) introduce two additional volume-
based tiers of Priority Customer complex order rebates and (ii) in the
existing tiers, amend the volume requirements necessary for achieving
higher Priority Customer complex order rebates. As proposed, the ADV
thresholds will be as follows: 0 to 14,999 contracts (``Tier 1''),
15,000 to 44,999 contracts (``Tier 2''), 45,000 to 59,999 contracts
(``Tier 3''), 60,000 to 74,999 contracts (``Tier 4''), 75,000 to 99,999
contracts (``Tier 5''), 100,000 to 124,999 contracts (``Tier 6''),
125,000 to 224,999 contracts (``Tier 7''), and 225,000 or more
contracts (``Tier 8'').
    Under the proposal, the rebate amounts provided for Priority
Customer complex orders in both Select Symbols and Non-Select Symbols
will be amended to reflect the tier changes described above. In Select
Symbols, the proposed rebate will be $0.26 per contract for Tier 1,
$0.30 per contract for Tier 2, $0.36 per contract for Tier 3, $0.41 per
contract for Tier 4, $0.42 per contract for Tier 5, $0.44 per contract
for Tier 6, $0.46 per contract for Tier 7, and $0.49 per contract for
Tier 8. In Non-Select Symbols, the proposed rebate will be $0.40 per
contract for Tier 1, $0.60 per contract for Tier 2, $0.70 per contract
for Tier 3, $0.75 per contract for Tier 4, $0.75 per contract for Tier
5, $0.80 per contract for Tier 6, $0.81 per contract for Tier 7, and
$0.85 per contract for Tier 8. Other rebate amounts--specifically, the
Price Improvement Mechanism (``PIM'') Break-up Rebates for both Select
and Non-Select Symbols and the Facilitation and Solicitation Break-up
Rebate for Select Symbols--will remain unchanged from their current
levels, including the rebate amounts for the two proposed additional
tiers.
Net Zero Complex Orders
    Today, the Exchange does not provide rebates for Priority Customer
complex orders that trade at a net price at or near $0.00 (i.e., net
zero complex orders) that are entered on behalf of originating market
participants that execute an ADV of at least 10,000 net zero complex
orders in a given month. For purposes of determining which complex
orders qualify as ``net zero,'' the Exchange counts all complex orders
that leg in to the regular order book and are executed at a net price
that is within a range of $0.01 credit and $0.01 debit.\16\ While these
complex orders would generally not find a counterparty in the complex
order book, they may leg in to the regular market where they are
executed by Market Makers or other market participants on the
individual legs who pay a fee to trade with this order flow. The fee
Market Makers pay when a complex order legs into their quote is
substantially higher than their fee or rebate for non-complex orders
that trade against their quotes. The 10,000 contract threshold exists
to differentiate market participants that are entering legitimate
complex orders from those that are entering net zero complex orders
solely to earn a rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For example, a market participant could enter a net zero
complex order that buys 500 contracts of the $193 March 6, 2016 SPY
Put at a price of $0.03 and sells 500 contracts of the $193.50 March
6, 2016 SPY Put at a price of $0.03 for a net price of $0.00.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to lower the threshold of net zero
complex contracts from 10,000 to 2,000 contracts. As such, net zero
priced complex orders that leg into the regular order book and are
entered by firms with an ADV in this type of activity of 2,000
contracts or more in a given month will not earn the Priority Customer
complex order rebate.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\17\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\18\ in particular, in that it
provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any
facility, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Maker Plus Program
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to
increase the Tier 1 Market Maker Plus rebate because it will encourage
Market Makers to post tighter markets in Select Symbols and thereby
maintain liquidity and attract additional order flow to the ISE, which
will ultimately benefit all market participants that trade on the
Exchange. The Tier 1 Market Maker Plus rebate has proven to be an
effective incentive for Market Makers to provide liquidity in Select
Symbols. The Exchange believes that the proposed Tier 1 Market Maker
Plus rebate is reasonable and equitably allocated to those members that
direct orders to the Exchange rather than to a competing exchange. The
Exchange also believes that the proposed Tier 1 Market Maker Plus
rebate is not unfairly discriminatory because all Market Makers can
achieve the higher rebate by satisfying the applicable Market Maker
Plus requirements.
Priority Customer Taker Fees
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to increase the
Priority Customer taker fee and eliminate the Priority Customer taker
fee discount program for members with a total affiliated Priority
Customer ADV of more than 200,000 contracts are reasonable and
equitable because the proposed fees remain lower than the fees charged
to other market participants that remove liquidity on the Exchange. In
addition, the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to continue to provide lower fees for Priority Customer
orders. A Priority Customer is by definition not a broker or dealer in
securities, and does not place more than

390 orders in listed options per day on average during a calendar month
for its own beneficial account(s). This limitation does not apply to
participants whose behavior is substantially similar to that of market
professionals, including Professional Customers, who will generally
submit a higher number of orders than Priority Customers.
Priority Customer Complex Order Rebates
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and equitable to make
the proposed changes, both to the volume requirements necessary to
achieve the Priority Customer complex order rebates and to the rebate
amounts, as the proposals are designed to attract additional Priority
Customer complex order volume to the Exchange. Although the Exchange is
lowering the rebates for Priority Customer complex orders, it is also
generally lowering the associated volume thresholds to make it easier
for members to achieve the higher tiers. While the proposed rebate
amounts are lower in some categories, the Exchange believes that the
proposed changes are reasonable and equitable when looking at the
overall program for both Non-Select Symbol and Select Symbol rebates.
For example, a member who received a $0.71 Non-Select Symbol rebate for
executing an ADV of 45,000 Non-Select Symbol contracts in a given month
under the existing program would receive a $0.70 Non-Select Symbol
rebate under the proposed program. However, a member who would have
received a $0.35 Select Symbol rebate under the existing program for
executing the same ADV for Select Symbol contracts in a given month
would receive a $0.36 Select Symbol rebate under the proposed program.
Therefore, the Exchange believes that the overall amendments to its
rebate program for Priority Customer complex orders is reasonable and
equitable as proposed. In addition, the Exchange believes that
introducing an additional volume-based tier with higher rebate amounts
will incentivize members to send additional order flow to the Exchange
in order to achieve these rebates for their Priority Customer complex
order volume, creating additional liquidity to the benefit of all
members that trade complex orders on the Exchange.
    The Exchange further believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to continue to provide a rebate only for Priority
Customer complex orders. A Priority Customer is by definition not a
broker or dealer in securities, and does not place more than 390 orders
in listed options per day on average during a calendar month for its
own beneficial account(s). This limitation does not apply to
participants whose behavior is substantially similar to that of market
professionals, including Professional Customers, who will generally
submit a higher number of orders (many of which do not result in
executions) than Priority Customers.
Net Zero Complex Orders
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to lower the
threshold of net zero complex contracts is reasonable, equitable, and
not unfairly discriminatory as it is designed to remove financial
incentives for market participants to engage in rebate arbitrage by
entering valueless complex orders on the Exchange that do not have any
economic purpose. The Exchange has determined that the current
threshold is still too high to effectively discourage market
participants from engaging in rebate arbitrage, and believes that the
lower threshold proposed in this filing more accurately reflects the
Exchange's original intent. No market participants meet the current ADV
threshold, as firms have modified their activity to ensure that their
complex ADV in the net zero range is lower than the 10,000 ADV
threshold set in the original net zero filing. In January 2017, for
example, the market participant with the largest ADV in net zero
contracts executed an ADV of 1,250 net zero contracts. By comparison
the average net zero ADV of market participants that traded complex
orders in January 2017 was only 12 contracts, with the vast majority of
these market participants executing no net zero contracts. The
continued submission of a high volume of net zero complex orders that
leg into the regular order book by these firms has generated complaints
from the Market Makers that trade against these orders in the regular
order book, as firms recognize these net zero complex orders as
essentially non-economic.
    The Exchange believes that lowering the threshold will make it more
difficult for firms to continue to enter net zero complex orders purely
to earn a rebate. In particular, the Exchange notes that any firm that
engages in this activity will be prevented from doing so with an ADV of
more than 2,000 net zero complex orders. This will reduce the cost of
these trades to the Exchange and its members as firms are limited in
the amount of this net zero complex order activity that they can
conduct on the Exchange. While the proposed threshold is still higher
than current activity seen in January 2017, the Exchange believes that
it is important to lower the ADV threshold to ensure that market
participants do not further increase this activity. The Exchange
believes that market participants will stop entering net zero complex
orders when they reach the proposed ADV threshold as these firms are
entering these orders solely for the purpose of earning a rebate.
Indeed, this is consistent with the Exchange's experience with this
rule to date, as firms that were previously entering a high volume of
net zero complex orders have reduced their volume in activity covered
by this rule.
    To the extent that market participants enter legitimate complex
orders, however, they will continue to receive the same rebates that
they do today. In addition, market participants that enter an
insubstantial volume of net zero complex orders will also continue to
receive rebates. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory to continue to provide
rebates where appropriate based on the market participant executing
only a low ADV of net zero complex orders. While the Exchange could
prohibit rebates for any net zero complex orders without an ADV
threshold, doing so would disadvantage innocent market participants
that are not engaged in rebate arbitrage. The Exchange believes that
the decision to allow rebates for firms with a limited ADV in net zero
complex orders properly balances the need to encourage market
participants to send order flow to the Exchange, and the need to
prevent activity that is harmful to the market. Moreover, all market
participants will be treated the same based on their net zero ADV.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\19\ the Exchange
does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden
on intermarket or intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
believes that the proposed fees and rebates remain competitive with
those on other options markets, and will continue to attract order flow
to the Exchange. The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily direct their order flow to
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain
competitive with other exchanges. For the reasons described above, the
Exchange believes that the proposed fee

changes reflect this competitive environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \21\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is: (i) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the protection of
investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ISE-2017-16 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-ISE-2017-16. 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 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
10:00 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; 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-ISE-2017-16 and should be
submitted on or before April 5, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05089 Filed 3-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10702-10703]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04510]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Fifth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (233) Addressing Human
Factors/Pilot Interface Issues for Avionics

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Fifth RTCA Special Committee 233 meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Fifth RTCA Special Committee 233 meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held March 8-10, 2016 from 8:30 a.m.-4:30
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA Inc. Conference Room, 1150
18th Street NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at (202)

833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or Jennifer Iversen,
Program Director, RTCA, Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 330-0662.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 233. The agenda
will include the following:

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

1. Introduction, Upcoming PMC Dates and Deliverable
2. Review Summary from Last Meeting Working Group; current status of
document
3. Review of TOR
4. March meeting objectives for subcommittees
5. Detailed Outline Discussion and feedback

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

1. Working Groups Break Out Sessions
2. End of the Day Working Group Status Report Outs

Thursday, March 10, 2016

1. Morning
    a. Working Groups Break Out Session
    b. Leadership Team Wrap-up
2. Afternoon
    a. Discussion on Outline Content
    b. Subcommittee Assignment Status
    c. Subcommittee leader reports
    d. Follow-on actions identified for each subcommittee
    e. Meeting Recap, Action Items, Key Dates

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Plenary information will be
provided upon request. Persons who wish to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a
written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 24, 2016.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, NextGen, Enterprise Support Services
Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-04510 Filed 2-26-16; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31050-31053]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12618]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67020; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2012-41]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the NYSE
Arca Options Fee Schedule Relating to Electronic Executions of Posted
Customer Liquidity in Penny Pilot Issues

May 18, 2012.
    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 May 8, 2012, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE Arca'')
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 the self-regulatory organization. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Options Fee Schedule
(``Fee Schedule'') to restructure the threshold qualifications and
corresponding rates applicable to Option Trading Permit (``OTP'')
Holder and OTP Firm electronic executions of posted Customer liquidity
in Penny Pilot issues. The text of the proposed rule change is
available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and
www.nyse.com.

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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to restructure the
threshold qualifications and corresponding rates applicable to OTP
Holder and OTP Firm electronic executions of posted Customer liquidity
in Penny Pilot issues. The Exchange proposes to make the changes
operative on May 8, 2012.
    OTP Holders and OTP Firms are currently provided with a credit of
$0.25 per contract for electronic executions of posted Customer
liquidity in Penny Pilot issues.\3\ However, the amount of this credit
increases as an OTP Holder or OTP Firm electronically executes a
certain monthly total number

of contracts of posted Customer liquidity in Penny Pilot issues. These
current thresholds and rates are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As provided under NYSE Arca Options Rule 6.72, options on
certain issues have been approved to trade with a minimum price
variation of $0.01 as part of a pilot program that is currently
scheduled to expire on June 30, 2012.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Monthly total       Per contract rate
                                 contracts executed      on all posted
                               from posted liquidity       liquidity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Threshold 1..................  More than 350,000....              -$0.28
Threshold 2..................  More than 800,000....               -0.36
Threshold 3..................  More than 1,200,000..               -0.42
Threshold 4..................  More than 3,500,000..               -0.43
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The volume thresholds and corresponding credits are intended to
incent OTP Holders and OTP Firms to route additional Customer orders in
Penny Pilot issues to the Exchange. In this regard, once a particular
threshold is met, the per contract credit rate applies to all of the
OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's electronic executions of posted Customer
liquidity in Penny Pilot issues for the month.
    The Exchange proposes to restructure the threshold qualifications
as follows: \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The current threshold qualifications and corresponding
credit rates would apply to executions prior to May 8, 2012. In this
regard, if an OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's electronic executions of
posted customer liquidity in May 2012 satisfy one of the current
thresholds, the current per contract credit rate would apply to all
of the OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's electronic executions of posted
Customer liquidity in Penny Pilot issues from May 1, 2012 through
May 7, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     First, the current thresholds are based on the total
number of contracts of posted Customer liquidity in Penny Pilot issues
that an OTP Holder or OTP Firm executes electronically during the
course of a month. The Exchange will now calculate the qualification
based on average daily volume (``ADV'') in various categories instead
of total monthly volume. For purposes of this calculation, days when
the market closes early are not included in the ADV.\5\ The credit
applied to posted electronic customer orders in Penny Pilot issues will
continue to be a base rate of $0.25 per executed contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For the month of May 2012, ADV would be calculated from May
8, 2012, the effective and operative date of this proposed change,
through the end of the month. In this regard, if an OTP Holder or
OTP Firm qualifies for a particular proposed new tier during May
2012, the proposed corresponding per contract credit rate would
apply to all of the OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's electronic executions
of posted Customer liquidity in Penny Pilot issues from May 8, 2012
through the end of May 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     OTP Holders and OTP Firms who have an ADV of 15,000
executed electronic posted Customer contracts in Penny Pilot issues
will have a credit of $0.38 (``Tier 1'') applied to posted electronic
Customer contracts executed in Penny Pilot issues.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Qualified Contingent Cross (``QCC'') Orders are neither
posted nor taken; thus QCC transactions are not included in any of
the options volume calculations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     OTP Holders and OTP Firms will have two alternative
methods to qualify for a credit of $0.40 (``Tier 2'') applied to posted
electronic Customer contracts executed in Penny Pilot issues. An OTP
Holder or OTP Firm may qualify for Tier 2 by:
    [cir] Having an ADV of 25,000 executed electronic posted Customer
contracts in Penny Pilot issues, or
    [cir] Having an ADV of 75,000 executed electronic posted contracts
in Penny Pilot issues, regardless of Clearing Account type, from all
affiliated OTP Holders and OTP Firms.
     OTP Holders and OTP Firms who have an ADV of 50,000
executed electronic posted Customer contracts in Penny Pilot issues
will have a credit of $0.43 (``Tier 3'') applied to posted electronic
Customer contracts executed in Penny Pilot issues.
     OTP Holders and OTP Firms will have three alternative
methods to qualify for a credit of $0.44 (``Tier 4'') applied to posted
electronic Customer contracts executed in Penny Pilot issues. An OTP
Holder or OTP Firm may qualify by:
    [cir] Having a combination of an ADV of 65,000 executed electronic
posted Customer contracts in Penny Pilot issues AND an average daily
posted share volume on NYSE Arca Equities, executed electronically by
an affiliated Equity Trading Permit (``ETP'') Holder, of 0.30% or more
of U.S. Consolidated ADV for transactions reported to the Consolidated
Tape, excluding volume on days when the market closes early, or
    [cir] Having an ADV of 100,000 executed electronic posted contracts
in Penny Pilot issues, regardless of Clearing Account type, from all
affiliated OTP Holders and OTP Firms, or
    [cir] Having an ADV of 100,000 executed electronic Customer
contracts, either posted or removing, in Penny Pilot issues.
    Collectively, the proposed new tiers and corresponding rates would
be as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier                             Qualification basis (average electronic executions per        Credit applied to
                                                         day) **                               posted electronic
                                                                                customer
                                                                                executions in penny
                                                                                pilot issues
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base..........................  .................  .................  .................                  ($0.25)
Tier 1........................  15,000 Customer    .................  .................                  ($0.38)
                                 Posted Contracts
                                 in Penny Pilot
                                 Issues.
Tier 2........................  25,000 Customer    75,000 Posted      .................                  ($0.40)
                                 Posted Contracts   Contracts in
                                 in Penny Pilot     Penny Pilot
                                 Issues, or.        Issues, any
                                                    Account Type *.
Tier 3........................  50,000 Customer    .................  .................                  ($0.43)
                                 Posted Contracts
                                 in Penny Pilot
                                 Issues.

Tier 4........................  65,000 Customer    100,000 Posted     100,000 Customer                   ($0.44)
                                 Posted Contracts   Contracts in       Posted and
                                 in Penny Pilot     Penny Pilot        Removing
                                 Issues, Plus       Issues, any        Contracts in
                                 0.3% of U.S.       Account type,*     Penny Pilot
                                 Equity Market      or.                Issues.
                                 Share Posted and
                                 Executed on NYSE
                                 Arca Equity
                                 Market,* or.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes transaction volume from the OTP Holder's or OTP Firm's affiliates.
** For the month of May 2012, calculation of average electronic executions per day shall begin on May 8, 2012.

    The Exchange proposes to retain the current table in the Fee
Schedule for the remainder of May 2012, but thereafter to remove it
completely, along with any other text within the current and proposed
new tables that has been included to differentiate between the current
thresholds and rates and newly proposed tiers and rates.\7\ The
proposed new table would represent the restructuring of the
qualifications, with new rows and headers. The Exchange also proposes
to streamline the introductory language for the proposed new tier and
rate table in the Fee Schedule, as compared to the current table, by
specifying that, as is the case today, OTP Holders and OTP Firms that
satisfy the applicable tiers will receive the corresponding posting
credits on all posted Customer electronic executions in Penny Pilot
issues. This would include language specifying that, as is the case
today, the credit rate applies to all posted Customer electronic
executions by the OTP Holder or OTP Firm in Penny Pilot issues for the
month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange would submit a proposed rule change with the
Commission to effect the removal of this language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange will add explanatory endnote 8 noting that
executions of QCC orders and routed orders are not included in the
volume calculation, that the definition of ``Affiliate'' is provided in
NYSE Arca Rule 1.1(a),\8\ and that only electronic executions are
included in the volume calculation. The insertion of a new endnote will
result in the renumbering of all subsequent existing endnotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Affiliated firms are those that control, or are controlled
by, or are under common control with an OTP Holder or OTP Firm. OTP
Holders and OTP Firms must report their Affiliates, including ETP
Holders, to the Exchange's Client Relations Services (``CRS'')
Department. CRS will inform the Exchange's billing department of
changes in affiliate status that would affect the qualification of
trading volumes with respect to these fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4)
of the Act,\10\ in particular, because it provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members, issuers and other persons using its facilities and does not
unfairly discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed restructuring of the
current thresholds and credits is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the resulting tiers and credits would
preserve an existing program on the Exchange that encourages OTP
Holders and OTP Firms to send additional Customer orders to the
Exchange. In this regard, the Exchange believes that the proposed tiers
and corresponding credits would continue to incentivize OTP Holders and
OTP Firms to increase the level of Customer order flow sent to, and
liquidity added on, the Exchange, thereby potentially improving the
quality and efficiency of order interaction and executions on the
Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed increase in the applicable
credits would further incentivize OTP Holders and OTP Firms to send
Customer orders to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that this aspect
of the proposed change is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the higher credits would create an incrementally
higher incentive for OTP Holders and OTP Firms to bring additional
liquidity to the Exchange, which may contribute to price discovery and
may benefit investors, generally. The Exchange notes that it has
proposed these higher credits without proposing any increase in the
fees charged to OTP Holders and OTP Firms for executions of Customer
orders that remove liquidity from the Exchange. Accordingly, the
proposed change may have the effect of reducing overall Customer
execution costs, to the extent that OTP Holders and OTP Firms pass this
savings on to Customers.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed tiers are
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because they are
set at levels that would be more achievable for OTP Holders and OTP
Firms. In this regard, the Exchange has proposed that the volume levels
for the tiers be decreased as compared to the current thresholds.
Additionally, the Exchange has proposed more than one method of
qualifying for certain of the tiers. Overall, the Exchange believes
that this will result in more OTP Holders and OTP Firms qualifying for
the tiers, receiving the increased credits, and therefore reducing
their overall transaction costs on the Exchange. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed change is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because the rates for the proposed credits are
set at levels that are directly related to the level of liquidity
required under the proposed corresponding tiers.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed change is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
tiers, and the corresponding credits, will apply uniformly to all OTP
Holders and OTP Firms. Additionally, the Exchange believes that the
aspect of the proposed change related to the activity of an affiliated
ETP Holder on NYSE Arca Equities is reasonable, equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because it would encourage increased trading
activity on both the NYSE Arca equity and option markets. In this
regard, the proposal is designed to bring additional posted order flow
to NYSE Arca Equities, so as to provide additional opportunities for
all ETP Holders to trade on NYSE Arca Equities.
    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must

continually review, and consider adjusting, its fees and credits to
remain competitive with other exchanges. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment because it
would broaden the conditions under which OTP Holders and OTP Firms may
qualify for the tiers and because it would result in an increase in the
corresponding credit rates.

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.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \11\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \12\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the NYSE Arca.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such 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.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2012-41 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-NYSEArca-2012-41. 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 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
10:00 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; 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-NYSEArca-2012-41 and should
be submitted on or before June 14, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-12618 Filed 5-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P