[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 17, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70126-70128]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28898]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0776]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays, Potomac River, National Harbor,
MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone upon specified
waters of the Potomac River. This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life on navigable waters during fireworks displays
launched from a discharge barge located at National Harbor, in Prince
Georges County, Maryland. This safety zone is intended to protect the
maritime public in a portion of the Potomac River.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6 p.m. on November 17, 2010 through
11 p.m. on November 18, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0776 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0776 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 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 e-mail Ronald L. Houck, Sector Baltimore Waterways Management
Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On September 1, 2010, we published a temporary interim rule with
request for comments entitled ``Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays,
Potomac River, National Harbor, MD'' in the Federal Register (75 FR
169). We received one comment on the interim rule. No public meeting
was requested, and none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Due to the need for immediate
action, the restriction of vessel traffic is necessary to protect life,
property and the environment; therefore, a 30-day notice is
impracticable. Delaying the effective date would be contrary to the
safety zone's intended objectives of protecting persons and vessels
involved in the event, and enhancing public and maritime safety.

Background and Purpose

    Fireworks displays are frequently held from locations on or near
the navigable waters of the United States. The potential hazards
associated with fireworks displays are a safety concern during such
events. The purpose of this rule is to promote public and maritime
safety during five fireworks displays, and to protect mariners
transiting the area from the potential hazards associated with a
fireworks display, such as the accidental discharge of fireworks,
dangerous projectiles, and falling hot embers or other debris. This
rule is needed to ensure safety on the waterway during the scheduled
events.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received a total of one piece of correspondence in
response to the temporary interim rule. No public meeting was requested
and none was held. What follows is a review of, and the Coast Guard's
response to, the issues and questions that were presented by the
commenter concerning the interim rule.
    The commenter, the sponsor's representative for the fireworks
displays, stated in an e-mail on September 2, 2010 that a date change
had occurred for the fireworks display scheduled on November 18, 2010.
The fireworks display will now be held on November 17, 2010.
    One change is being made to the temporary final rule to reflect the
change in date for the fireworks display. The temporary final rule will
now be enforced from 6 p.m. through 11 p.m. on November 17, 2010 and if
necessary due to inclement weather, from 6 p.m. through 11 p.m. on
November 18, 2010.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. Although this safety zone will restrict
some vessel traffic, there is little vessel traffic associated with
commercial fishing in the area, and recreational boating in the area
can transit waters outside the safety zone. In addition, the effect of
this rule will not be significant because the safety zone is of limited
duration and limited size. For the above reasons, the Coast Guard does
not anticipate any significant economic impact.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
operate, transit, or anchor in a portion of the Potomac River, located
at National Harbor, MD, from 6 p.m. through 11 p.m. on November 17,
2010, and if necessary due to inclement weather, from 6 p.m. through 11
p.m. on November 18, 2010.

This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. The
safety zone is of limited size and duration. In addition, before the
effective periods, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories
widely available to users of the waterway to allow mariners to make
alternative plans for transiting the affected area.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
    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.

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).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

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.

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.

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.

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 does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

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
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves establishing a temporary safety
zone.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0776 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0776  Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays, Potomac River,
National Harbor, MD.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a safety zone: All waters
in the Potomac River, within an area bounded by a line drawn from the
following points: latitude 38[deg]47'18'' N, longitude

077[deg]01'01'' W; thence to latitude 38[deg]47'11'' N, longitude
077[deg]01'26'' W; thence to latitude 38[deg]47'25'' N, longitude
077[deg]01'33'' W; thence to latitude 38[deg]47'32'' N, longitude
077[deg]01'08'' W; thence to the point of origin, located at National
Harbor, Maryland (NAD 1983).
    (b) Regulations. The general safety zone regulations found in 33
CFR 165.23 apply to the safety zone created by this temporary section,
Sec.  165.T05.0776.
    (1) All vessels and persons are prohibited from entering this zone,
except as authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore.
    (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage within the
zone must request authorization from the Captain of the Port Baltimore
or his designated representative by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on
VHF-FM marine band radio channel 16.
    (3) All Coast Guard assets enforcing this safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channels 13 and 16.
    (4) The operator of any vessel within or in the immediate vicinity
of this safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on board a vessel displaying a
Coast Guard Ensign, and
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign.
    (c) Definitions. Captain of the Port Baltimore means the Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Baltimore or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant
or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port to
act on his behalf.
    Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Baltimore to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal,
State and local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the zone.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6 p.m.
through 11 p.m. on November 17, 2010, and if necessary due to inclement
weather, from 6 p.m. through 11 p.m. on November 18, 2010.

    Dated: October 26, 2010.
Mark P. O'Malley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Baltimore.
[FR Doc. 2010-28898 Filed 11-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 136 (Monday, July 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42760-42767]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15219]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95259; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2022-037]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend BZX Rule 11.17, Clearly
Erroneous Executions

July 12, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 11, 2022, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to

solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or the ``Exchange'') is filing
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') a
proposed rule change to amend BZX Rule 11.17, Clearly Erroneous
Executions. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit
5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/bzx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, 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 BZX Rule 11.17,
Clearly Erroneous Executions. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to:
(1) make the current clearly erroneous pilot program permanent; and (2)
limit the circumstances where clearly erroneous review would continue
to be available during Regular Trading Hours,\3\ when the LULD Plan to
Address Extraordinary Market Volatility (the ``LULD Plan'') \4\ already
provides similar protections for trades occurring at prices that may be
deemed erroneous. The Exchange believes that these changes are
appropriate as the LULD Plan has been approved by the Commission on a
permanent basis,\5\ and in light of amendments to the LULD Plan,
including changes to the applicable Price Bands \6\ around the open and
close of trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Regular Trading Hours'' means the time between
9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. See BZX Rule 1.5(w).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84843 (December 18,
2018), 83 FR 66464 (December 26, 2018) (``Notice''); 85623 (April
11, 2019), 84 FR 16086 (April 17, 2019) (File No. 4-631)
(``Amendment Eighteen'').
    \6\ ``Price Bands'' refers to the term provided in Section V of
the LULD Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal To Make the Clearly Erroneous Pilot Permanent
    On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, on a pilot basis,
changes to BZX Rule 11.17 that, among other things: (i) provided for
uniform treatment of clearly erroneous execution reviews in multi-stock
events involving twenty or more securities; and (ii) reduced the
ability of the Exchange to deviate from the objective standards set
forth in the rule.\7\ In 2013, the Exchange adopted a provision
designed to address the operation of the LULD Plan.\8\ Finally, in
2014, the Exchange adopted two additional provisions providing that:
(i) a series of transactions in a particular security on one or more
trading days may be viewed as one event if all such transactions were
effected based on the same fundamentally incorrect or grossly
misinterpreted issuance information resulting in a severe valuation
error for all such transactions; and (ii) in the event of any
disruption or malfunction in the operation of the electronic
communications and trading facilities of an Exchange, another SRO, or
responsible single plan processor in connection with the transmittal or
receipt of a trading halt, an Officer, acting on his or her own motion,
shall nullify any transaction that occurs after a trading halt has been
declared by the primary listing market for a security and before such
trading halt has officially ended according to the primary listing
market.\9\ These changes are currently scheduled to operate for a pilot
period that would end at the close of business on July 20, 2022.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (Sept. 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (Sept. 16, 2010) (SR-BATS-2010-016).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68797 (Jan. 31,
2013), 78 FR 8635 (Feb. 6, 2013) (SR-BATS-2013-008).
    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72434 (June 19,
2014), 79 FR 36110 (June 25, 2014) (SR-BATS-2014-014).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94749 (April 19,
2022), 87 FR 24352 (April 25, 2022) (SR-CboeBZX-2022-028).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When it originally approved the clearly erroneous pilot, the
Commission explained that the changes were ``being implemented on a
pilot basis so that the Commission and the Exchanges can monitor the
effects of the pilot on the markets and investors, and consider
appropriate adjustments, as necessary.'' \11\ In the 12 years since
that time, the Exchange and other national securities exchanges have
gained considerable experience in the operation of the rule, as amended
on a pilot basis. Based on that experience, the Exchange believes that
the program should be allowed to continue on a permanent basis so that
equities market participants and investors can benefit from the
increased certainty provided by the amended rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (September
10, 2010), 75 FR 56613 (September 16, 2010) (SR-BATS-2010-016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The clearly erroneous pilot was implemented following a severe
disruption in the U.S. equities markets on May 6, 2010 (``Flash
Crash'') to ``provide greater transparency and certainty to the process
of breaking trades.'' \12\ Largely, the pilot reduced the discretion of
the Exchange, other national securities exchanges, and Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') to deviate from the objective
standards in their respective rules when dealing with potentially
erroneous transactions. The pilot has thus helped afford greater
certainty to Members and investors about when trades will be deemed
erroneous pursuant to self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') rules and
has provided a more transparent process for conducting such reviews.
The Exchange proposes to make the current pilot permanent so that
market participants can continue to benefit from the increased
certainty afforded by the current rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendments to the Clearly Erroneous Rules
    When the Participants to the LULD Plan filed to introduce the Limit
Up-Limit Down (``LULD'') mechanism, itself a response to the Flash
Crash, a handful of commenters noted the potential discordance between
the clearly erroneous rules and the Price Bands used to limit the price
at which trades would be permitted to be executed pursuant to the LULD
Plan. For example, two commenters requested that the clearly erroneous
rules be amended so the presumption would be that trades executed
within the Price Bands would not be not subject to review.\13\ While
the Participants acknowledged that the potential to prevent clearly
erroneous executions would be a ``key benefit'' of the LULD Plan, the
Participants decided not to amend the clearly erroneous rules at

that time.\14\ In the years since, industry feedback has continued to
reflect a desire to eliminate the discordance between the LULD
mechanism and the clearly erroneous rules so that market participants
would have more certainty that trades executed with the Price Bands
would stand. For example, the Equity Market Structure Advisory
Committee (``EMSAC'') Market Quality Subcommittee included in its April
19, 2016 status report a preliminary recommendation that clearly
erroneous rules be amended to conform to the Price Bands--i.e., ``any
trade that takes place within the band would stand and not be broken
and trades outside the LU/LD bands would be eligible for the
consideration of the Clearly Erroneous rules.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012) (File No. 4-631) (n. 33505).
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ See EMSAC Market Quality Subcommittee, Recommendations for
Rulemaking on Issues of Market Quality (November 29, 2016),
available at https://www.sec.gov//emsac/recommendations-rulemaking-market-quality.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is important for there to be some
mechanism to ensure that investors' orders are either not executed at
clearly erroneous prices or are subsequently busted as needed to
maintain a fair and orderly market. At the same time, the Exchange
believes that the LULD Plan, as amended, would provide sufficient
protection for trades executed during Regular Trading Hours. Indeed,
the LULD mechanism could be considered to offer superior protection as
it prevents potentially erroneous trades from being executed in the
first instance. After gaining experience with the LULD Plan, the
Exchange now believes that it is appropriate to largely eliminate
clearly erroneous review during Regular Trading Hours when Price Bands
are in effect. Thus, as proposed, trades executed within the Price
Bands would stand, barring one of a handful of identified scenarios
where such review may still be necessary for the protection of
investors. The Exchange believes that this change would be beneficial
for the U.S. equities markets as it would ensure that trades executed
within the Price Bands are subject to clearly erroneous review in only
rare circumstances, resulting in greater certainty for Members and
investors.
    The current LULD mechanism for addressing extraordinary market
volatility is available solely during Regular Trading Hours. Thus,
trades during the Exchange's Early Trading,\16\ Pre-Opening,\17\ or
After Hours Sessions \18\ would not benefit from this protection and
could ultimately be executed at prices that may be considered
erroneous. For this reason, the Exchange proposes that transactions
executed during the Early Trading, Pre-Opening, or After Hours Sessions
would continue to be reviewable as clearly erroneous. Continued
availability of the clearly erroneous rule during pre- and post-market
trading sessions would therefore ensure that investors have appropriate
recourse when erroneous trades are executed outside of the hours where
similar protection can be provided by the LULD Plan. Further, the
proposal is designed to eliminate the potential discordance between
clearly erroneous review and LULD Price Bands, which does not exist
outside of Regular Trading Hours because the LULD Plan is not in
effect. Thus, the Exchange believes that it is appropriate to continue
to allow transactions to be eligible for clearly erroneous review if
executed outside of Regular Trading Hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The term ``Early Trading Session'' means the time between
7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time. See BZX Rule 1.5(ee).
    \17\ The term ``Pre-Opening Session'' means the time between
8:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time. See BZX Rule 1.5(r).
    \18\ The term ``After Hours Trading Session'' means the time
between 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time. See BZX Rule 1.5(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the other hand, there would be much more limited potential to
request that a transaction be reviewed as potentially erroneous during
Regular Trading Hours. With the introduction of the LULD mechanism in
2013, clearly erroneous trades are largely prevented by the requirement
that trades be executed within the Price Bands. In addition, in 2019,
Amendment Eighteen to the LULD Plan eliminated double-wide Price Bands:
(1) at the Open, and (2) at the Close for Tier 2 NMS Stocks 2 with a
Reference Price above $3.00.\19\ Due to these changes, the Exchange
believes that the Price Bands would provide sufficient protection to
investor orders such that clearly erroneous review would no longer be
necessary during Regular Trading Hours. As the Participants to the LULD
Plan explained in Amendment Eighteen: ``Broadly, the Limit Up-Limit
Down mechanism prevents trades from happening at prices where one party
to the trade would be considered `aggrieved,' and thus could be viewed
as an appropriate mechanism to supplant clearly erroneous rules.''
While the Participants also expressed concern that the Price Bands
might be too wide to afford meaningful protection around the open and
close of trading, amendments to the LULD Plan adopted in Amendment
Eighteen narrowed Price Bands at these times in a manner that the
Exchange believes is sufficient to ensure that investors' orders would
be appropriately protected in the absence of clearly erroneous review.
The Exchange therefore believes that it is appropriate to rely on the
LULD mechanism as the primary means of preventing clearly erroneous
trades during Regular Trading Hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Amendment Eighteen, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the same time, the Exchange is cognizant that there may be
limited circumstances where clearly erroneous review may continue to be
appropriate, even during Regular Trading Hours. Thus, the Exchange
proposes to amend its clearly erroneous rules to enumerate the specific
circumstances where such review would remain available during the
course of Regular Trading Hours, as follows. All transactions that fall
outside of these specific enumerated exceptions would be ineligible for
clearly erroneous review.
    First, pursuant to proposed paragraph (c)(1)(A), a transaction
executed during Regular Trading Hours would continue to be eligible for
clearly erroneous review if the transaction is not subject to the LULD
Plan. In such case, the Numerical Guidelines set forth in paragraph
(c)(2) of Rule 11.17 will be applicable to such NMS Stock. While the
majority of securities traded on the Exchange would be subject to the
LULD Plan, certain equity securities, such as rights and warrants, are
explicitly excluded from the provisions of the LULD Plan and would
therefore be eligible for clearly erroneous review instead.\20\
Similarly, there are instances, such as the opening auction on the
primary listing market,\21\ where transactions are not ordinarily
subject to the LULD Plan, or circumstances where a transaction that
ordinarily would have been subject to the LULD Plan is not--due, for
example, to some issue with processing the Price Bands. These
transactions would continue to be eligible for clearly erroneous
review, effectively ensuring that such review remains available as a
backstop when the LULD Plan would not prevent executions from occurring
at erroneous prices in the first instance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Appendix A of the LULD Plan.
    \21\ The initial Reference Price used to calculate Price Bands
is typically set by the Opening Price on the primary listing market.
See Section V(B) of the LULD Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, investors would also continue to be able to request review
of transactions that resulted from certain systems issues pursuant to
proposed paragraph (c)(1)(B). This limited exception would help to
ensure that

trades that should not have been executed would continue to be subject
to clearly erroneous review. Specifically, as proposed, transactions
executed during Regular Trading Hours would be eligible for clearly
erroneous review pursuant to proposed paragraph (c)(1)(B) if the
transaction is the result of an Exchange technology or systems issue
that results in the transaction occurring outside of the applicable
LULD Price Bands pursuant to BZX Rule 11.17(g). A transaction subject
to review pursuant to this paragraph shall be found to be clearly
erroneous if the price of the transaction to buy (sell) that is the
subject of the complaint is greater than (less than) the Reference
Price, described in paragraph (d) of this Rule, by an amount that
equals or exceeds the applicable Percentage Parameter defined in
Appendix A to the LULD Plan (``Percentage Parameters'').
    Third, the Exchange proposes to narrowly allow for the review of
transactions during Regular Trading Hours when the Reference Price,
described in proposed paragraph (d), is determined to be erroneous by
an Officer of the Exchange. Specifically, a transaction executed during
Regular Trading Hours would be eligible for clearly erroneous review
pursuant to proposed paragraph (c)(1)(C) if the transaction involved,
in the case of (1) a corporate action or new issue or (2) a security
that enters a Trading Pause pursuant to the LULD Plan and resumes
trading without an auction,\22\ a Reference Price that is determined to
be erroneous by an Officer of the Exchange because it clearly deviated
from the theoretical value of the security. In such circumstances, the
Exchange may use a different Reference Price pursuant to proposed
paragraph (d)(2) of this Rule. A transaction subject to review pursuant
to this paragraph shall be found to be clearly erroneous if the price
of the transaction to buy (sell) that is the subject of the complaint
is greater than (less than) the new Reference Price, described in
paragraph (d)(2) below, by an amount that equals or exceeds the
applicable Numerical Guidelines or Percentage Parameters, as applicable
depending on whether the security is subject to the LULD Plan.
Specifically, the Percentage Parameters would apply to all transactions
except those in an NMS Stock that is not subject to the LULD Plan, as
described in paragraph (c)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The Exchange notes that the ``resumption of trading without
an auction'' provision of the proposed rule text applies only to
securities that enter a Trading Pause pursuant to LULD and does not
apply to a corporate action or new issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the context of a corporate action or a new issue, there may be
instances where the security's Reference Price is later determined by
the Exchange to be erroneous (e.g., because of a bad first trade for a
new issue), and subsequent LULD Price Bands are calculated from that
incorrect Reference Price. In determining whether the Reference Price
is erroneous in such instances, the Exchange would generally look to
see if such Reference Price clearly deviated from the theoretical value
of the security. In such cases, the Exchange would consider a number of
factors to determine a new Reference Price that is based on the
theoretical value of the security, including but not limited to, the
offering price of the new issue, the ratio of the stock split applied
to the prior day's closing price, the theoretical price derived from
the numerical terms of the corporate action transaction such as the
exchange ratio and spin-off terms, and the prior day's closing price on
the OTC market for an OTC up-listing.\23\ In the foregoing instances,
the theoretical value of the security would be used as the new
Reference Price when applying the Percentage Parameters under the LULD
Plan (or Numerical Guidelines if the transaction is in an NMS Stock
that is not subject to the LULD Plan) to determine whether executions
would be cancelled as clearly erroneous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Using transaction data reported to the FINRA OTC Reporting
Facility, FINRA disseminates via the Trade Data Dissemination
Service a final closing report for OTC equity securities for each
business day that includes, among other things, each security's
closing last sale price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following illustrate the proposed application of the rule in
the context of a corporate action or new issue:
Example 1
1. ABCD is subject to a corporate action, 1 for 10 reverse split, and
the previous day close was $5, but the new theoretical price based on
the terms of the corporate action is $50
2. The security opens at $5, with LULD bands at $4.50 x $5.50
3. The bands will be calculated correctly but the security is trading
at an erroneous price based on the valuation of the remaining
outstanding shares
4. The theoretical price of $50 would be used as the new Reference
Price when applying LULD bands to determine if executions would be
cancelled as clearly erroneous
Example 2
1. ABCD is subject to a corporate action, the company is doing a spin
off where a new issue will be listed, BCDE. ABCD trades at $50, and the
spinoff company is worth \1/5\ of ABCD
2. BCDE opens at $50 in the belief it is the same company as ABCD
3. The theoretical values of the two companies are ABCD $40 and BCDE
$10
4. BCDE would be deemed to have had an incorrect Reference Price and
the theoretical value of $10 would be used as the new Reference Price
when applying the LULD Bands to determine if executions would be
cancelled as clearly erroneous
Example 3
1. ABCD is an uplift from the OTC market, the prior days close on the
OTC market was $20
2. ABCD opens trading on the new listing exchange at $0.20 due to an
erroneous order entry
3. The new Reference Price to determine clearly erroneous executions
would be $20, the theoretical value of the stock from where it was last
traded

    In the context of the rare situation in which a security that
enters a LULD Trading Pause and resumes trading without an auction
(i.e., reopens with quotations), the LULD Plan requires that the new
Reference Price in this instance be established by using the mid-point
of the best bid and offer (``BBO'') on the primary listing exchange at
the reopening time.\24\ This can result in a Reference Price and
subsequent LULD Price Band calculation that is significantly away from
the security's last traded or more relevant price, especially in less
liquid names. In such rare instances, the Exchange is proposing to use
a different Reference Price that is based on the prior LULD Band that
triggered the Trading Pause, rather than the midpoint of the BBO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See LULD Plan, Section I(U) and V(C)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following example illustrates the proposed application of the
rule in the context of a security that reopens without an auction:
Example 4
1. ABCD stock is trading at $20, with LULD Bands at $18 x $22
2. An incoming buy order causes the stock to enter a Limit State
Trading Pause and then a Trading Pause at $22
3. During the Trading Pause, the buy order causing the Trading Pause is
cancelled
4. At the end of the 5-minute halt, there is no crossed interest for an
auction to occur, thus trading would resume on a quote
5. Upon resumption, a quote that was available prior to the Trading
Pause (e.g. a quote was resting on the book

prior to the Trading Pause), is widely set at $10 x $90
6. The Reference Price upon resumption is $50 (mid-point of BBO)
7. The SIP will use this Reference Price and publish LULD Bands of $45
x $55 (i.e., far away from BBO prior to the halt)
8. The bands will be calculated correctly, but the $50 Reference Price
is subsequently determined to be incorrect as the price clearly
deviated from where it previously traded prior to the Trading Pause
9. The new Reference Price would be $22 (i.e., the last effective Price
Band that was in a limit state before the Trading Pause), and the LULD
Bands would be applied to determine if the executions should be
cancelled as clearly erroneous

    In all of the foregoing situations, investors would be left with no
remedy to request clearly erroneous review without the proposed
carveouts in paragraph (c)(1)(C) because the trades occurred within the
LULD Price Bands (albeit LULD Price Bands that were calculated from an
erroneous Reference Price). The Exchange believes that removing the
current ability for the Exchange to review in these narrow
circumstances would lessen investor protections.
Numerical Guidelines
    Today, paragraph (c)(1) defines the Numerical Guidelines that are
used to determine if a transaction is deemed clearly erroneous during
Regular Trading Hours, or during the Early Trading, Pre-Opening and
After Hours Sessions. With respect to Regular Trading Hours, trades are
generally deemed clearly erroneous if the execution price differs from
the Reference Price (i.e., last sale) by 10% if the Reference Price is
greater than $0.00 up to and including $25.00; 5% if the Reference
Price is greater than $25.00 up to and including $50.00; and 3% if the
Reference Price is greater than $50.00. Wider parameters are also used
for reviews for Multi-Stock Events, as described in paragraph (c)(2).
With respect to transactions in Leveraged ETF/ETN securities executed
during Regular Trading Hours, Early Trading, Pre-Opening and After-
Hours Trading Session, trades are deemed clearly erroneous if the
execution price exceeds the Regular Trading Hours Numerical Guidelines
multiplied by the leverage multiplier.
    Given the changes described in this proposed rule change, the
Exchange proposes to amend the way that the Numerical Guidelines are
calculated during Regular Trading Hours in the handful of instances
where clearly erroneous review would continue to be available.
Specifically, the Exchange would base these Numerical Guidelines, as
applied to the circumstances described in paragraph (c)(1)(A), on the
Percentage Parameters used to calculate Price Bands, as set forth in
Appendix A to the LULD Plan. Without this change, a transaction that
would otherwise stand if Price Bands were properly applied to the
transaction may end up being subject to review and deemed clearly
erroneous solely due to the fact that the Price Bands were not
available due to a systems or other issue. The Exchange believes that
it makes more sense to instead base the Price Bands on the same
parameters as would otherwise determine whether the trade would have
been allowed to execute within the Price Bands. The Exchange also
proposes to modify the Numerical Guidelines applicable to leveraged
ETF/ETN securities during Regular Trading Hours. As noted above, the
Numerical Guidelines will only be applicable to transactions eligible
for review pursuant paragraph (c)(1)(A) (i.e., to NMS Stocks that are
not subject to the LULD Plan). As leveraged ETF/ETN securities are
subject to LULD and thus the Percentage Parameters will be applicable
during Regular Trading Hours, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the
Numerical Guidelines for leveraged ETF/ETN securities traded during
Regular Trading Hours. However, as no Price Bands are available outside
of Regular Trading Hours, the Exchange proposes to keep the existing
Numerical Guidelines in place for transactions in leveraged ETF/ETN
securities that occur during Early Trading, Pre-Opening and After-Hours
Trading.
    The Exchange also proposes to move existing paragraphs (c)(2),
(c)(3), and (d) to proposed paragraph (c)(2)(B), (c)(2)(C), and
(C)(2)(D), respectively, as Multi-Stock Events, Additional Factors, and
Outlier Transactions will only be subject to review if those NMS Stocks
are not subject to the LULD Plan or occur during the Early Trading,
Pre-Opening and After Hours Sessions. Proposed paragraph (c)(2)(B) is
substantially similar to existing paragraph (c)(2) except for a change
in rule reference to paragraph (c)(1) has been updated to paragraph
(c)(1)(A). Further, given the proposal to move existing paragraph
(c)(2) to paragraph (c)(2)(B), the Exchange also proposes to amend
applicable rule references throughout paragraph (c)(2)(A). Finally, the
Exchange proposes to update applicable rule references in paragraph
(c)(2)(D) based on the above-described structural changes to the Rule.
Reference Price
    As proposed, the Reference Price used would continue to be based on
last sale and would be memorialized in proposed paragraph (d).
Continuing to use the last sale as the Reference Price is necessary for
operational efficiency as it may not be possible to perform a timely
clearly erroneous review if doing so required computing the arithmetic
mean price of eligible reported transactions over the past five
minutes, as contemplated by the LULD Plan. While this means that there
would still be some differences between the Price Bands and the clearly
erroneous parameters, the Exchange believes that this difference is
reasonable in light of the need to ensure timely review if clearly
erroneous rules are invoked. The Exchange also proposes to allow for an
alternate Reference Price to be used as prescribed in proposed
paragraphs (d)(1), (2), and (3). Specifically, the Reference Price may
be a value other than the consolidated last sale immediately prior to
the execution(s) under review (1) in the case of Multi-Stock Events
involving twenty or more securities, as described in paragraph
(c)(2)(B) above, (2) in the case of an erroneous Reference Price, as
described in paragraph (c)(1)(C) above,\25\ or (3) in other
circumstances, such as, for example, relevant news impacting a security
or securities, periods of extreme market volatility, sustained
illiquidity, or widespread system issues, where use of a different
Reference Price is necessary for the maintenance of a fair and orderly
market and the protection of investors and the public interest,
provided that such circumstances occurred during Early Trading, Pre-
Opening or After-Hours Session or are eligible for review pursuant to
paragraph (c)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ As discussed above, in the case of (c)(1)(C)(1), the
Exchange would consider a number of factors to determine a new
Reference Price that is based on the theoretical value of the
security, including but not limited to, the offering price of the
new issue, the ratio of the stock split applied to the prior day's
closing price, the theoretical price derived from the numerical
terms of the corporate action transaction such as the exchange ratio
and spin-off terms, and the prior day's closing price on the OTC
market for an OTC up-listing. In the case of (c)(1)(C)(2), the
Reference Price will be the last effective Price Band that was in a
limit state before the Trading Pause.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appeals
    As described more fully below, the Exchange proposes to eliminate
paragraph (f), System Disruption or Malfunction. Accordingly, the
Exchange proposes to remove from paragraph (e)(2), Appeals, each
reference to

paragraph (f), and include language referencing proposed paragraph (g),
Transactions Occurring Outside of the LULD Bands.
System Disruption or Malfunction
    To conform with the structural changes descried above, the Exchange
proposes to remove paragraph 11.17(f), System Disruption or
Malfunction, combine paragraph (c)(1)(C) with paragraph (c)(1)(B), and
remove the reference to a trading halt in paragraph (c)(1)(C) to make
clear that Trading Halts are subject to proposed paragraph (j).
Specifically, as described in proposed paragraph (c)(1)(B) above,
transactions occurring during Regular Trading Hours that are executed
outside of the LULD Price Bands due to an Exchange technology or system
issue, may be subject to clearly erroneous review pursuant to proposed
paragraphs 11.17(g). Proposed paragraph 11.17 (c)(1)(B) further
provides that a transaction subject to review pursuant to this
paragraph shall be found to be clearly erroneous if the price of the
transaction to buy (sell) that is the subject of the complaint is
greater than (less than) the Reference Price, described in paragraph
(d), by an amount that equals or exceeds the applicable Percentage
Parameter defined in Appendix A to the LULD Plan.
Trade Nullification for UTP Securities That Are the Subject of Initial
Public Offerings
    Current paragraph (h) of BZX Rule 11.17 provides different
procedures for conducting clearly erroneous review in initial public
offering (``IPO'') securities that are traded pursuant to unlisted
trading privileges (``UTP'') after the initial opening of such IPO
securities on the listing market. Specifically, this paragraph provides
that a clearly erroneous error may be deemed to have occurred in the
opening transaction of the subject security if the execution price of
the opening transaction on the Exchange is the lesser of $1.00 or 10%
away from the opening price on the listing exchange or association. The
Exchange no longer believes that this provision is necessary as opening
transactions on the Exchange following an IPO are subject to Price
Bands pursuant to the LULD Plan. The Exchange therefore proposes to
eliminate this provision in connection with the broader changes to
clearly erroneous review during Regular Trading Hours.
Securities Subject To Limit Up-Limit Down Plan
    The Exchange proposes to renumber paragraph (i) to paragraph (h)
based on the proposal to eliminate existing paragraph (h), and to
rename the paragraph to provide for transactions occurring outside of
LULD Price Bands. Given that proposed paragraph (c)(1) defines the LULD
Plan, the Exchange also proposes to eliminate redundant language from
proposed paragraph (h). Finally, the Exchange also proposes to update
references to the LULD Plan and Price Bands so that they are uniform
throughout the Rule and to update rule references throughout the
paragraph to conform to the structural changes to the Rule described
above.
Multi-Day Event and Trading Halts
    The Exchange proposes to renumber paragraphs (j) and (k) to
paragraphs (h) and (i), respectively, based on the proposal to
eliminate existing paragraph (h). Additionally, the Exchange proposes
to modify the text of both paragraphs to reference the Percentage
Parameters as well as the Numerical Guidelines. Specifically, the
existing text of proposed paragraphs (h) and (i) provides that any
action taken in connection with this paragraph will be taken without
regard to the Numerical Guidelines set forth in this Rule. The Exchange
proposes to amend the rule text to provide that any action taken in
connection with this paragraph will be taken without regard to the
Percentage Parameters or Numerical Guidelines set forth in this Rule,
with the Percentage Parameters being applicable to an NMS Stock subject
to the LULD Plan and the Numerical Guidelines being applicable to an
NMS Stock not subject to the LULD Plan.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\26\ in general, and
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\27\ in particular, in that it is designed
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest and not to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the purpose section of this proposed rule change,
the current pilot was implemented following the Flash Crash to bring
greater transparency to the process for conducting clearly erroneous
reviews, and to help assure that the review process is based on clear,
objective, and consistent rules across the U.S. equities markets. The
Exchange believes that the amended clearly erroneous rules have been
successful in that regard and have thus furthered fair and orderly
markets. Specifically, the Exchange believes that the pilot has
successfully ensured that such reviews are conducted based on objective
and consistent standards across SROs and has therefore afforded greater
certainty to Members and investors. The Exchange therefore believes
that making the current pilot a permanent program is appropriate so
that equities market participants can continue to reap the benefits of
a clear, objective, and transparent process for conducting clearly
erroneous reviews. In addition, the Exchange understands that the other
U.S. equities exchanges and FINRA will also file largely identical
proposals to make their respective clearly erroneous pilots permanent.
The Exchange therefore believes that the proposed rule change would
promote transparency and uniformity across markets concerning review of
transactions as clearly erroneous and would also help assure consistent
results in handling erroneous trades across the U.S. equities markets,
thus furthering fair and orderly markets, the protection of investors,
and the public interest.
    Similarly, the Exchange believes that it is consistent with just
and equitable principles of trade to limit the availability of clearly
erroneous review during Regular Trading Hours. The Plan was approved by
the Commission to operate on a permanent rather than pilot basis. As a
number of market participants have noted, the LULD Plan provides
protections that ensure that investors' orders are not executed at
prices that may be considered clearly erroneous. Further, amendments to
the LULD Plan approved in Amendment Eighteen serve to ensure that the
Price Bands established by the LULD Plan are ``appropriately tailored
to prevent trades that are so far from current market prices that they
would be viewed as having been executed in error.'' \28\ Thus, the
Exchange believes that clearly erroneous review should only be
necessary in very limited circumstances during Regular Trading Hours.
Specifically, such review would only be necessary in instances where a
transaction was not subject to the LULD Plan, or was the result of some
form of systems issue, as detailed in the purpose

section of this proposed rule change. Additionally, in narrow
circumstances where the transaction was subject to the LULD Plan, a
clearly erroneous review would be available in the case of (1) a
corporate action or new issue or (2) a security that enters a Trading
Pause pursuant to LULD and resumes trading without an auction, where
the Reference Price is determined to be erroneous by an Officer of the
Exchange because it clearly deviated from the theoretical value of the
security. Thus, eliminating clearly erroneous review in all other
instances will serve to increase certainty for Members and investors
that trades executed during Regular Trading Hours would typically stand
and would not be subject to review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Amendment Eighteen, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the fact that clearly erroneous review would largely be
limited to transactions that were not subject to the LULD Plan, the
Exchange also believes that it is necessary to change the parameters
used to determine whether a trade is clearly erroneous. Specifically,
due to the different parameters currently used for clearly erroneous
review and for determining Price Bands, it is possible that a trade
that would have been permitted to execute within the Price Bands would
later be deemed clearly erroneous, if, for example, a systems issue
prevented the dissemination of the Price Bands. The Exchange believes
that this result is contrary to the principle that trades within the
Price Bands should stand, and has the potential to cause investor
confusion if trades that are properly executed within the applicable
parameters described in the LULD Plan are later deemed erroneous. By
using consistent parameters for clearly erroneous reviews conducted
during Regular Trading Hours and the calculation of the Price Bands,
the Exchange believes that this change would also serve to promote
greater certainty with regards to when trades may be deemed erroneous.
    The Exchange believes that it is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest to remove the current provision of
the clearly erroneous rule dealing with UTP securities that are the
subject of IPOs. This provision applies specifically to opening
transactions on a non-listing market following an IPO on the listing
market. As such, review under this paragraph is limited to trades
conducted during Regular Trading Hours. As previously addressed, trades
executed during Regular Trading Hours would generally not be subject to
clearly erroneous review but would instead be protected by the Price
Bands. The Exchange therefore no longer believes that this paragraph is
necessary, as all trades subject to this provision today would either
be subject to the LULD Plan, or, in the event of some systems or other
issue, would be subject to the provisions that apply to transactions
that are not adequately protected by the LULD Plan.
    Finally, the proposed rule changes make organizational updates to
the Exchange's Clearly Erroneous Execution Rule as well as minor
updates and corrections to the Rule to improve readability and clarity.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposal would ensure
the continued, uninterrupted operation of harmonized clearly erroneous
execution rules across the U.S. equities markets while also amending
those rules to provide greater certainty to Members and investors that
trades will stand if executed during Regular Trading Hours where the
LULD Plan provides adequate protection against trading at erroneous
prices. The Exchange understands that the other national securities
exchanges and FINRA will also file similar proposals, the substance of
which are identical to this proposal. Thus, the proposed rule change
will help to ensure consistency across SROs without implicating any
competitive issues.

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

    No comments were solicited or received on the proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    A. by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2022-037 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-CboeBZX-2022-037. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions.
    You should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2022-
037 and should be submitted on or before August 8, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-15219 Filed 7-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 195 (Friday, October 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62398-62399]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25964]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2567-041]

Northern States Power Company; Notice of Application To Amend
License and Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Amendment to License.
    b. Project No: 2567-041.
    c. Date Filed: August 23, 2011.
    d. Applicant: Northern States Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Wissota Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Chippewa River, near the
towns of Lafayette and Anson, in Chippewa County, Wisconsin.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: William P. Zawacki, Director of Hydro Plants,
Xcel Energy, 1414 W. Hamilton Ave., P.O. Box 8, Eau Claire, WI 54702-
0008; and Matthew J. Miller, Hydro Licensing Specialist, Xcel Energy,
1414 W. Hamilton Ave., P.O. Box 8, Eau Claire, WI 54702-0008.
    i. FERC Contact: Christopher Chaney;<PHONE_NUMBER>;
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice. All
documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be filed
electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters,
without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-2567-041) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee is seeking to amend the
license for the Wissota Hydroelectric Project to authorize the proposed
rehabilitation of two of the project's six units. The project's total
authorized installed capacity would increase by 1,400 kW [from 36,000
kW to 39,000 kW] and the maximum hydraulic capacity would increase by
720 cubic feet per second (cfs) [from 9,600 cfs to 10,320 cfs].
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
call 1-866-208- 3676 or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item (h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the license surrender.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: September 30, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-25964 Filed 10-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 169 (Friday, August 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45756-45757]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18731]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0358; FRL-9994-91-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Responsible Appliance Disposal Program
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Responsible Appliance Disposal
Program (EPA ICR Number 2254.03, OMB Control Number 2060-0703) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through August 31,
2019. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register on February 8, 2019 during a 60-day comment period. This
notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 30,
2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0358, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats,

information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally Hamlin, Stratospheric protection
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (mail code 6205T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Responsible Appliance Disposal Program (RAD) is a
voluntary partnership program sponsored by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) that reduces emissions of ozone depleting substances (ODS)
that can be attributed to improper disposal of appliances. Appliances
can contain ozone depleting refrigerants and foams as well as universal
wastes such as mercury, used oil, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB).
Federal law requires refrigerant recovery and proper management of
universal waste but does not require the recovery of appliance foam. In
addition to being ODS, foam blowing agents and refrigerants in
appliances may also have high global warming potentials (GWPs). The RAD
program works with utilities, retailers, manufacturers, state agencies,
affiliates, and others to dispose of appliances using best
environmental practices.
    Form Numbers: 5900-32.
    Respondents/affected entities: The following is a list of North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes for organizations
potentially affected by the information requirements covered under this
ICR are Utilities (2211), Manufacturers (3352), Retailers (443141),
Universities (611310), and States/Municipalities (999300).
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 48 (over three years).
    Frequency of response: Annual, and when desired.
    Total estimated burden: 292 hours (per year). Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $36,753 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: There is a decrease of 33 hours in the total
estimated respondent burden compared with the 325 hours for the ICR
currently approved by OMB. This decrease is due to a decrease in the
number of respondents due to recycling industry changes, as well as a
reduction in the number of partners participating in the program each
year.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-18731 Filed 8-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P