[Federal Register: October 5, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 193)]
[Notices]
[Page 57078-57081]
[DOCID:fr05oc07-87]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56559; File No. SR-CBOE-2007-103]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval
of Proposed Rule Change To Trade Shares of the iShares FTSE/Xinhua
China 25 Index Fund Pursuant to Unlisted Trading Privileges

September 27, 2007.
    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 September 6, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. This order provides notice of the proposed rule change
and approves the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 trade on the CBOE Stock Exchange
(``CBSX'') shares of the iShares FTSE/Xinhua China 25 Index Fund
(``Fund'') pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (``UTP''). The text
of the proposed rule change is available at CBOE, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.cboe.org/legal.

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 III 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 Exchange proposes to trade shares of the Fund on CBSX pursuant
to UTP. The Fund seeks investment results that correspond generally to
the price and yield performance, before fees and expenses, of the FTSE/
Xinhua China 25 Index (``Index''). The Index consists of 25 of the
largest and most liquid companies in the Chinese equity market that are
available to international investors. The Commission previously
approved the original listing and trading of the Fund shares on the New
York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'').\3\ Subsequently, the Commission
approved the listing and trading of the Fund shares on the Pacific
Exchange, Inc.,\4\ which is now known as NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca''), and the trading of the Fund shares pursuant to UTP on the
American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50505 (October 8,
2004), 69 FR 61280 (October 15, 2004) (SR-NYSE-2004-55).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50799 (December 6,
2004), 69 FR 72242 (December 13, 2004) (SR-PCX-2004-99).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50800 (December 6,
2004), 69 FR 72228 (December 13, 2004) (SR-Amex-2004-85).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange deems the Fund shares to be equity securities, thus
rendering trading in the Fund shares subject to the Exchange's existing
rules governing the trading of equity securities. The trading hours for
the Fund shares on CBSX will be from 8:15 a.m. until 3:15 p.m. Central
Time or 9:15 a.m until 4:15 p.m. Eastern Time (``ET'').
    Quotations for and last-sale information regarding the Fund shares
are disseminated through the Consolidated Quotation System. The value
of the Index is updated intraday on a real-time basis as individual
component securities of the Index change in price. The intraday value
of the Index is disseminated at least every 60 seconds from 8:15 p.m.
until 3 a.m. ET.\6\ In addition, a value for the Index is disseminated
once each trading day, based on closing prices in the relevant exchange
market.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ E-mail from Angelo Evangelou, Assistant General Counsel,
CBOE, to Rebekah Goshorn, Division of Market Regulation, Commission,
dated September 19, 2007 (correcting the timing of the dissemination
of the intraday value of the Index).
    \7\ See supra note 4, 69 FR at 72245 (providing a more detailed
discussion of the calculation and dissemination of the Index value).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To provide updated information relating to the Fund for use by
investors, professionals, and persons wishing to create or redeem the
shares, NYSE disseminates through the facilities of the Consolidated
Tape Association the Intraday Indicative Value (``IIV'') for the Fund,
as calculated by a securities information provider. The IIV is
disseminated on a per-share basis every 15 seconds during regular NYSE
trading hours.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See supra note 4, 69 FR at 72246.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the trading of the Fund shares, the Exchange
will inform members and member organizations in an Information Circular
of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the
Fund shares, including how they are created and redeemed, the
prospectus or product description delivery requirements applicable to
the Fund, applicable Exchange rules, how information about the value of
the underlying Index is disseminated, and trading information. In
addition, before a member recommends a transaction in the Fund, the
member must determine that the Fund is suitable for the customer, as
required by CBOE Rule 53.6.
    The Exchange intends to utilize its existing surveillance
procedures applicable to exchange-traded funds to monitor trading in
the Fund shares. CBOE represents that these procedures are adequate to
monitor Exchange trading of the Fund shares.
    With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all
relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend
trading in the Fund shares. Trading may be halted because of market
conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make
trading in the Fund shares inadvisable. These may include: (1) The
extent to which trading is not occurring in the securities comprising
the Index and/or the financial instruments of the Fund; (2) whether
other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present; or (3) trading of
the Fund shares has been halted or suspended in the primary market.\9\
In addition, trading in the Fund shares will be subject to trading
halts caused by extraordinary market volatility pursuant to the
Exchange's ``circuit breaker'' rule.\10\ UTP trading in the Fund is
also governed by the trading halts provisions of CBOE Rule 52.3
relating to temporary interruptions in the calculation or wide
dissemination of the IIV or the value of the underlying Index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See CBOE Rule 6.3(a). E-mail from Angelo Evangelou,
Assistant General Counsel, CBOE, to Rebekah Goshorn, Division of
Market Regulation, Commission, dated September 27, 2007
(clarification on trading halts).
    \10\ See CBOE Rule 6.3B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    CBOE believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act, the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange, and, in particular, the requirements of Section
6(b) of the Act.\11\ Specifically, CBOE believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \12\ in that
it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and to protect investors and the
public interest. In addition, CBOE believes that the proposal is
consistent with Rule 12f-5 under the Act \13\ because it deems the Fund
shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Fund
shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading
of equity securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.12f-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

III. 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File

Number SR-CBOE-2007-103 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2007-103. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE. 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-CBOE-2007-103 and should be
submitted on or before October 26, 2007.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
the Proposed Rule Change

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\14\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ which
requires that an exchange have rules designed, among other things, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest. The Commission believes that this proposal should benefit
investors by increasing competition among markets that trade shares of
the Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ In approving this rule change, the Commission notes that it
has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent
with Section 12(f) of the Act,\16\ which permits an exchange to trade,
pursuant to UTP, a security that is listed and registered on another
exchange.\17\ The Commission notes that it previously approved the
listing and trading of the shares on NYSE and NYSE Arca \18\ and
trading of the Fund shares pursuant to UTP on Amex.\19\ The Commission
also finds that the proposal is consistent with Rule 12f-5 under the
Act,\20\ which provides that an exchange shall not extend UTP to a
security unless the exchange has in effect a rule or rules providing
for transactions in the class or type of security to which the exchange
extends UTP. The Exchange has represented that it meets this
requirement because it deems the Fund shares to be equity securities,
thus rendering trading in such shares subject to the Exchange's
existing rules governing the trading of equity securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(f).
    \17\ Section 12(a) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78l(a), generally
prohibits a broker-dealer from trading a security on a national
securities exchange unless the security is registered on that
exchange pursuant to Section 12 of the Act. Section 12(f) of the Act
excludes from this restriction trading in any security to which an
exchange ``extends UTP.'' When an exchange extends UTP to a
security, it allows its members to trade the security as if it were
listed and registered on the exchange even though it is not so
listed and registered.
    \18\ See supra notes 3 and 4.
    \19\ See supra note 5.
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.12f-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further believes that the proposal is consistent
with Section 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act,\21\ which sets forth
Congress' finding that it is in the public interest and appropriate for
the protection of investors and the maintenance of fair and orderly
markets to assure the availability to brokers, dealers, and investors
of information with respect to quotations for and transactions in
securities. Quotations for and last-sale information regarding the Fund
shares are disseminated through the Consolidated Quotation System. The
value of the Index is disseminated every 60 seconds from 8:15 p.m.
until 3 a.m. ET. In addition, NYSE disseminates through the facilities
of the Consolidated Tape Association the IIV for the Fund on a per-
share basis every 15 seconds during regular NYSE trading hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the proposal appears reasonably designed to halt trading
in the Fund shares when transparency is impaired. UTP trading in the
Fund is also governed by the trading halts provisions of CBOE Rule 52.3
relating to temporary interruptions in the calculation or wide
dissemination of the IIV or the value of the underlying Index. If the
listing market halts trading in the shares, or the IIV or the Index
value is not being calculated or disseminated as required, the Exchange
would halt trading in the shares.
    The Commission notes that, if the Fund shares should be delisted by
the listing exchange, the Exchange would no longer have authority to
trade the shares pursuant to this order.
    In support of this proposal, the Exchange has made the following
representations:
    (1) The Exchange represents that its surveillance procedures are
adequate to monitor Exchange trading of the Fund shares.
    (2) The Exchange will inform its members in an Information Circular
of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the
Fund shares, including suitability recommendation requirements.
    (3) The Exchange will require its members to deliver a prospectus
or product description to investors purchasing shares of the Fund and
will note this prospectus delivery requirement in the Information
Circular.
    This approval order is based on the Exchange's representations.
    The Commission finds good cause for approving this proposal before
the thirtieth day after the publication of notice thereof in the
Federal Register. As noted above, the Commission previously found that
the listing and trading of the Fund shares on NYSE and NYSE Arca is
consistent with the Act.\22\ In addition, the Commission notes that it
previously approved the trading of the Fund shares on Amex pursuant to
UTP.\23\ The Commission presently is not aware of any regulatory issue
that should cause it to revisit these findings or would preclude the
trading of the Fund shares on the Exchange pursuant to UTP. Therefore,
accelerating approval of this proposal should benefit investors by
creating, without undue delay, additional competition in the market for
such shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See supra notes 3 and 4.
    \23\ See supra note 5.

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

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\24\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2007-103), be, and it
hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant
to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-19670 Filed 10-4-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


May 5, 2003 Wardner G. Penberthy Director, Chemical Control Division Office of Pollution, Prevention & Toxics U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building, 7405M 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, DC 20460 Dear Mr. Penberthy:

Re: Follow up Questions Regarding APFO Users' LOI Commitments This letter is in response to your e mail dated April 30, 2003, requesting more detail on certain aspects of the APFO Users' Letter of Intent ( LOI) dated March 13, 2003. Specifically, you requested detailed descriptions of the plant site environmental monitoring studies and Articles of Commerce Test Program described in the LOI, as well as clarification of plans for environmental monitoring at the site of APFO manufacture.

This letter will address the general questions concerning the environmental studies at fluoropolymer manufacturing sites and the questions concerning the Articles of Commerce Test Program. The questions will be answered in a point by point format.

Separate letters from the individual APFO Users whose plant sites are listed in our LOI will address the questions concerning specific details of the environmental studies at the fluoropolymer manufacturing facilities.

The current APFO manufacturer will address the questions concerning the plans for environmental monitoring at the site of APFO manufacture.

Follow up Questions Regarding APFO Users' LOI Commitments LOI page 7 item 2 3) " as necessary .... conduct ground and surface water analysis and assess results using the water screening levels..."

Site specific studies will be developed to evaluate potential PFOA levels in water within the site boundaries. Each participant will use an air dispersion model, initial site water monitoring data and the screening levels established in the DuPont/ West Virginia consent order to determine any additional sampling locations outside the site boundaries. If the initial results indicate the need for expanded sampling, a phased sampling plan, based on distance from the source, will be developed. Each participant will independently submit site specific plans, including testing frequency.   What criteria will be used to determine if it is " necessary" to collect water samples? o Each participant will collect preliminary water samples to develop a sitespecific assessment of potential PFOA levels in water around each site.

  How many samples will be analyzed from each location and what is the sampling strategy? o Each participant will submit site specific plans that will include sampling of on site wells, discharge streams, outfalls and downstream/ upstream locations.

  What test method ( standard) will be used to analyze the samples ( e. g., ASTM, EPA, OECD, other specify)? o The validated Exygen Research analytical laboratory method ( 01M 008 046 revision 1) will be used. DuPont will submit a copy of the method by May 12, 2003.

  Will PFOA precursors and/ or other constituent components of the product mixtures be analyzed for in addition to APFO/ PFOA? If so which ones? o Each participant will analyze for PFOA anion species, all of which are detected by the validated method.

  What is the accuracy and precision of the test method? o The test method as submitted by DuPont describes the accuracy and precision.

  Has the test method been validated? o Yes.

  Do you have a consolidated written description of the procedures that will be followed with this testing? If so, please provide a copy. o Yes. DuPont will submit analytical methods and sample handling procedures. o Copies will be provided by May 12, 2003.   If these procedures have already been identified in a submission to the Agency ( i. e. to AR226 or 8( e)), please identify the submission. o Copies will be provided by May 12, 2003.

  What is the timing of this work? o Preliminary reports will be submitted by September 15, 2003, by each participant.

LOI page 10 item 4 1) and 2) " analyze representative articles of commerce containing or made with dry fluoropolymer resins for the presence of APFO" and " for products coated or manufactured with liquid dispersions, analyze representative articles of commerce for presence of APFO"

  How will representative products be selected? o The intent of this study is to document and confirm that fluoropolymer articles of commerce are not a likely source of PFOA. The articles of commerce are chosen using the following criteria:

Each representative article of commerce will contain a fluoropolymer made using PFOA.

Representative articles will be selected to represent a cross section of article manufacturing processes and end use markets.

Articles selected will encompass widely recognized consumer applications and high volume industrial applications.   What criteria will be used to determine which products are " representative"? o See above response.   How many samples of each representative product will be analyzed and what is the sampling strategy? o It is our intent, within the bounds of anti trust restraints, to sample approximately15 different application categories by the following:

Identify two customers for each application,

Obtain two article samples from each customer, for each application,

Conduct triplicate analyses per sample.   Will the number of articles analyzed be sufficient to make a judgment about the overall contribution of fluoropolymer treated articles to PFOA in the environment? o Yes. Based on our industry experience, the number of articles analyzed will be sufficient.   What test method ( standard) will be used to analyze the samples ( e. g., ASTM, EPA, OECD, other specify)? o A method that determines migration using the water based extraction protocol: FDA 21 CFR 175.300 ( d) Table 2 Condition of Use " B" o The validated Exygen Research analytical laboratory method ( 01M 008 046 revision 1) will be used. DuPont will submit a copy of the method by May 12, 2003.   Will PFOA precursors and/ or other constituent components of the product mixtures be analyzed for in addition to APFO/ PFOA? If so which ones? o The participants will analyze for PFOA anion species, all of which are detected by the validated method.   What is the accuracy and precision of the test method? o The test method as submitted by DuPont describes the accuracy and precision.   Has the test method been validated? o Yes.   What is the reporting criteria for the constituent components that will be reported? o Only PFOA will be reported   Do you have a consolidated written description of the procedures that will be followed with this testing? o The collection logistics and chain of custody procedure is being developed and documented. o The extraction and analytical procedures are already completed ( FDA 21 CFR 175.300 ( d) Table 2 Condition of Use " B" and Exygen Research analytical laboratory method [ 01M 008 046 revision 1]).   If so, please provide a copy. o Procedures under development will be submitted when available. DuPont will submit the extraction protocol and analytical procedure by May 12, 2003.   If these procedures have already been identified in a submission to the Agency ( i. e. to AR226 or 8( e)), please identify the submission. o Not as of this date.   What is the timing of this work? o A final report will be submitted by the end of 2003, per the LOI LOI Addendum III item 4) " monitor groundwater and surface water for APFO in the vicinity of the facility" The answers to these questions will be submitted by the APFO manufacturer under separate cover.

The APFO Users appreciate this opportunity to work with the EPA on this LOI and on our prior, ongoing and future product stewardship measures for PFOA used in the manufacture of fluoropolymers. We look forward to dialogue with the EPA regarding the content of this letter.

Please contact me if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Don Duncan, President The Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65186-65187]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20401]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0587]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0018

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0018,
Official Logbook; without change. Our ICR describes the information we
seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA,
the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before November 20,
2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2023-0587] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available
from: Commandant (CG-6P), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S.
Coast Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7710,
Washington, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.L. Craig, Office of Privacy
Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for questions
on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995;

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an
application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a
Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains
information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's
likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity
of the Collection, and other important information describing the
Collection. There is one ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) the practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    In response to your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not
to seek an extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider
all comments and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2023-0587], and
must be received by November 20, 2023.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and
submissions in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking System
of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Official Logbook.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0018.
    Summary: The Official Logbook contains information about the
voyage, the vessel's crew, drills, watches, and operations conducted
during the voyage. Official Logbook entries identify particulars of the
voyage, including the name of the ship, official number, port of
registry, tonnage, names and merchant mariner credential numbers of the
master and crew, the nature of the voyage, and class of ship. In
addition, it also contains entries for the vessel's drafts, maintenance
of watertight integrity of the ship, drills and inspections, crew list
and report of character, a summary of laws applicable to Official
Logbooks, and miscellaneous entries.
    Need: 46 U.S.C. 11301, 11302, 11303, and 11304 require applicable
merchant vessels to maintain an Official Logbook. The Official Logbook
contains information about the vessel, voyage, crew, and watch. Lack of
these particulars would make it difficult for a seaman to verify vessel
employment and wages, and for the Coast Guard to verify compliance with
laws and regulations concerning vessel operations and safety
procedures. The Official Logbook serves as an official record of
recordable events transpiring at sea such as births, deaths, marriages,
disciplinary actions, etc. Absent the Official Logbook, there would be
no official civil record of these events. The courts accept log entries
as proof that the logged event occurred. If this information was not
collected, the Coast Guard's commercial vessel safety program would be
negatively impacted, as there would be no official record of U.S.
merchant vessel voyages. Similarly, those seeking to prove that an
event required to be logged occurred would not have an official record
available.
    Forms: CG-706B Official Logbook.
    Respondents: Shipping companies.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden remains at 1,750 hours a
year.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended.

    Dated: September 7, 2023.
Kathleen Claffie,
Chief, Office of Privacy Management, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2023-20401 Filed 9-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Phone Log

Contact:	Matt Schaeffer, National Association of Home Builders Research Center, 1-800-638-8556

ICF Employee:  	Chelsea Landon

Date:			July 17, 2007

Summary:

Mr. Schaeffer was contacted on 7/17/07 for advice regarding average number of windows and standard window size for U.S. homes built in 1971.  During this conversation, he provided the following recommendations.

Data Type	NAHB Recommendation

	Value	Units

Standard window size	3 x 5	feet

Window sill depth	2 - 3	inches

Glazing area:  floor	12 - 15	percent floor area

Glazing area:  wall	15 - 20	percent wall area


MEMORANDUM

From: 		Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 		U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

To:	Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0603:  Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Modified and Reconstructed Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

Date: 		August 3, 2015

Subject: 	Incorporation by Reference of Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495  -  Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units

This docket contains information that is relevant to Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0603 entitled, "Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Modified Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units."  Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495 is incorporated by reference into Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0603.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 109 (Thursday, June 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26491-26492]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11839]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85978; File No. 013-00140]

Initial Form ATS-N Filing; Notice of Extension of Commission
Review Period

May 31, 2019.
    On February 13, 2019, Virtu MatchIt ATS filed an initial Form ATS-N
(``Form ATS-N'') with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''). Pursuant to Rule 304 under the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''), the Commission may, after notice and an
opportunity for hearing, declare an initial Form ATS-N ineffective no
later than 120 days from the date of filing with the Commission, or, if
applicable, the extended review period. June 13, 2019 is 120 calendar
days from the date of filing. Pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), the
Commission may extend the initial Form ATS-N review period for up to an
additional 120 calendar days if the initial Form ATS-N is unusually
lengthy or raises novel or complex issues that require additional time
for review.
    Virtu MatchIt ATS was operating pursuant to an initial operation
report on Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7,
2019.\1\ Virtu MatchIt ATS filed an initial Form ATS-N on February 13,
2019. During the initial 120 calendar day review period, the Commission
staff has been reviewing the disclosures on Virtu MatchIt ATS's initial
Form ATS-N. In addition, the staff has been engaged in ongoing
discussions with Virtu MatchIt ATS about its disclosures and manner of
operations, as well as the requirements of Form ATS-N, to facilitate
complete and comprehensible disclosures that reflect the complexities
of those operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ An NMS Stock ATS (as defined in Rule 300(k) of Regulation
ATS) that was operating pursuant to an initial operation report on
Form ATS on file with the Commission as of January 7, 2019 is a
``Legacy NMS Stock ATS.'' 17 CFR 242.301(b)(2)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form ATS-N requires NMS Stock ATSs to file with the Commission, and
disclose to the public for the first time, certain information,
including descriptions by the NMS Stock ATSs of their fees, the trading
activities by their broker-dealer operators and their affiliates in the
NMS Stock ATSs, their use of market data, their written standards for
granting access to trading on the NMS Stock ATSs, and their written
safeguards and procedures for protecting their subscribers'
confidential trading information required by revised Rule 301(b)(10) of
Regulation ATS. The

initial Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with Commission staff
have revealed complexities about the operations of Legacy NMS Stock
ATSs including, among other things, matching functionalities, means of
order entry, order interaction and execution procedures, conditional
order processes, segmentation of orders, and counterparty selection
protocols. The Commission staff needs additional time to review novel
and complex issues such as these, which Commission staff has discussed
with Virtu MatchIt ATS. Extending the initial Form ATS-N Commission
review period for an additional 120 calendar days will provide
Commission staff an opportunity to continue its review of the initial
Form ATS-N disclosures and discussions with Virtu MatchIt ATS.
    In the conversations between Virtu MatchIt ATS and Commission staff
about the initial Form ATS-N disclosures and the ATS operations,
Commission staff and Virtu MatchIt ATS have discussed a potential
amendment to update Virtu MatchIt ATS's disclosures regarding the
complexities of its operations. Extending the review period will enable
the NMS Stock ATS to amend its disclosures, if appropriate, and allow
Commission staff to conduct a thorough review of amendments to the
initial disclosures provided on the initial Form ATS-N.
    For the reasons given above, the Commission is extending the review
period of the initial Form ATS-N submitted by Virtu MatchIt ATS.
Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 304(a)(1)(iv)(B), October 11, 2019 is the
date by which the Commission may declare the initial Form ATS-N
submitted by Virtu MatchIt ATS ineffective.

    By the Commission.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-11839 Filed 6-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: January 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 13)]
[Notices]
[Page 3281-3282]
[DOCID:fr20ja06-39]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP03-36-015]

Dauphin Island Gathering Partners; Notice of Negotiated Rate

January 13, 2006.
    Take notice that on January 9, 2006, Dauphin Island Gathering
Partners (Dauphin Island) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the revised tariff sheets listed
below to become effective February 9, 2006.

Twenty-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 9.
Nineteenth Revised Sheet No. 10.
Seventh Revised Sheet No. 359.
Third Revised Sheet No. 427.

    Dauphin Island states that these tariff sheets reflect changes to
its statement of negotiated rates and nonconforming transportation and
reserve commitment agreement tariff sheets.

    Dauphin Island further states that copies of the filing are being
served on its customers and other interested parties.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-602 Filed 1-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74001-74002]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29948]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0535; FRL-9524-9]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Secondary Lead Smelters
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 11,
2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0535, to: (1) EPA online, using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On August 9, 2012 (77 FR 47631), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to both EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0535, which is available for either public
viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at
the Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC.
The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202)
566-1752.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to either submit or view public comments, access
the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI), or
other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NSPS for Secondary Lead Smelters (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1128.10, OMB Control Number 2060-0080.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2013.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to either conduct or
sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending
at OMB.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NSPS at 40 CFR part 60, subpart A and any changes, or
additions to the General Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 60,
subpart L.
    Owners or operators of the affected facilities must make an initial
notification report, performance tests, periodic reports, and maintain
records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or
malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period
during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Reports are also
required semiannually.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1
hour per response. ``Burden'' means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously-applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: Secondary lead smelting facilities.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 25.
    Frequency of Response: Initially and occasionally.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 37.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $3,631, which includes $3,631 in labor
costs, no capital/startup costs, and no operation and maintenance (O&M)
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment decrease of one
burden hour for the respondents due to differences in mathematical
rounding. Additionally, there is an increase in burden costs from the
most recently approved ICR is due to an adjustment in the labor rates.
This ICR uses updated labor rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
to calculate burden costs.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-29948 Filed 12-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43825-43826]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18586]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 417

[Docket No.: FAA-2011-0181; Amendment No. 417-2]
RIN 2120-AJ84

Launch Safety: Lightning Criteria for Expendable Launch Vehicles

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; Confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: This action confirms the effective date of July 25, 2011, for
the direct final rule issued June 8, 2011. No comments were received on
this final rule.
    This action amends flight criteria for mitigating against naturally
occurring lightning and lightning triggered by the flight of an
expendable launch vehicle through or near an electrified environment in
or near a cloud. These changes also increase launch availability and
implement changes already adopted by the United States Air Force.

DATES: The direct final rule published June 8, 2011 (76 FR 33139) is
effective on July 25, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The complete docket for the direct final rule, Docket No.
FAA-2011-0181, may be examined at http://www.regulations.gov at any
time or go to Docket operations in Room W12-140 West Building, Ground
Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this rule contact Karen Shelton-Mur, Office of Commercial Space
Transportation, AST-300, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-
7985; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For legal questions concerning this rule contact Laura Montgomery,
Senior Attorney for Commercial Space Transportation, Office of the
Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile
(202) 267-7971, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Direct Final Rule Procedure

    The FAA anticipated that this regulation would not result in
adverse or negative comment and therefore is issued as a direct final
rulemaking. Because the changes to the lightning commit criteria will
increase launch availability and are already for U.S. Government
launchs at Air Force launch ranges, the public interest is well served
by this rulemaking.
    The comment period closed July 8, 2011, and the FAA received no
comments.

Conclusion

    In light of the fact that no comments were submitted in response to
the direct final rule, the FAA has determined that no further
rulemaking action is necessary. Therefore, Amendment No. 417-2 takes
effect as of July 25, 2011.

    Issued in Washington, DC on July 18, 2011.
Dennis R. Pratte,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-18586 Filed 7-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 59 (Monday, March 28, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17109-17111]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06279]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-4878; Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-001-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Aircraft Equipped With BRP-
Powertrain GmbH & Co KG 912 A Series Engine

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
various aircraft equipped with a BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG (formerly
Rotax Aircraft Engines) 912 A series engine. This proposed AD results
from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated
by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an
unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as a design change of the engine cylinder head temperature
sensor without a concurrent revision of the engine model designation,
the engine part number, or the cockpit indication to the pilot. We are
issuing this proposed AD to require actions to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co. KG, Welser Strasse 32, A-4623 Gunskirchen,
Austria; phone: +43 7246 601 0; fax: +43 7246 601 9130; Internet:
www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com. You may review this referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
4878; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-4878;
Directorate Identifier 2016-CE-001-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No.: 2015-0240, dated December 18, 2015, to correct an unsafe condition
for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    A design change of the engine cylinder heads was introduced by
BRP-Powertrain in March 2013 which modifies the engine/aircraft
interfaces by substituting the

previous cylinder head temperature (CHT) measurement (limit
temperature 135 [deg]C/150 [deg]C) with a coolant temperature (CT)
measurement (limit temperature 120 [deg]C). The design change was
communicated on 15 May 2013 by BRP-Powertrain Service Instruction
(SI) 912-020R7/914-022R7 (single document) but was not identified by
a change of the engine model designation or of the engine P/N, but
only through the cylinder head P/N and the position of the
temperature sensor.
    Consequently, engines with the new cylinder heads (installed
during production or replaced in-service during maintenance) may be
installed on an aircraft without concurrent modification of that
aircraft, instructions for which should be provided by the Type
Certificate (TC) holder or Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
holder, as applicable. In this case, the coolant temperature with a
maximum engine operating limit of 120 [deg]C (valid for engines
operated with water diluted glycol coolant) is displayed on a CHT
indicator with a typical limit marking (red radial/range) of more
than 120 [deg]C.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, will prevent the
pilot to identify coolant limit exceedances, with subsequent loss of
coolant (120 [deg]C is the boiling temperature of the coolant),
which could lead to engine in-flight shut-down, possibly resulting
in a forced landing, with consequent damage to the aircraft and
injury to occupants.
    BRP-Powertrain published revised SI-912-020R8/914-022R8 to
clarify that, on the new cylinder heads, the coolant temperature,
instead of the cylinder head temperature in the aluminium, is
measured. EASA issued SIB 2014-34 to raise awareness that
installation of affected engines and spare parts, without concurrent
incorporation of aircraft TC/STC holder approved modifications, and
even if unintended and unnoticed by production or maintenance,
constitutes an unapproved aircraft modification.
    Since EASA published the SIB, further investigation has finally
determined that sufficient reason exists to warrant AD action.
    For the reason stated above, this AD requires a one-time
inspection to determine the actual engine configuration and,
depending on findings, engine reidentification and (depending on TC
or STC holder installation) modification of the affected aircraft.
This also affects engines that are operated with waterless coolant.

You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-4878.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    BRP-Powertrain GmbH & CO KG has issued Rotax Aircraft Engines BRP
Service Bulletin SB-912-068 and SB-914-049 (co-published as one
document), dated April 16, 2015. The service information describes
procedures for re-identifying the engine that has new cylinder heads,
part numbers 413235 and 413236 installed. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 65 products of U.S.
registry.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the engine re-identification requirement of this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this portion of
this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $5,525, or $85 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the engine installation modification to indicate a
Maximum Coolant Temperature requirement of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this portion of
this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $5,525, or $85 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1.5 work-hours per
product to comply with the cylinder head replacement option of this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required
parts would cost about $2,500 to replace a single engine cylinder head.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this portion of
this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $2,627.50 per engine cylinder
head.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Various Aircraft: Docket No. FAA-2016-4878; Directorate Identifier
2016-CE-001-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by May 12, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all serial numbers of the airplanes listed in
table 1 of paragraph (c) of this AD, that are:
    (1) Equipped with a BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG (formerly Rotax
Aircraft Engines) 912 A series engine with a part number (P/N)
413235 or 413236 cylinder head installed in position 2 or 3; and
    (2) certificated in any category.

              Table 1 of Paragraph (c)--Affected Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Type certificate holder         Aircraft model        Engine model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aeromot-Ind[uacute]stria       AMT-200..............              912 A2
 Mec[acirc]nico-
 Metal[uacute]rgica Ltda.
Diamond Aircraft Industries..  HK 36 R ``SUPER                     912 A
                                DIMONA''.
DIAMOND AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIES    HK 36 TS and HK 36 TC              912 A3
 GmbH.
Diamond Aircraft Industries    DA20-A1..............              912 A3
 Inc.
HOAC-Austria.................  DV 20 KATANA.........              912 A3
Iniziative Industriali         Sky Arrow 650 TC.....              912 A2
 Italiane S.p.A.
SCHEIBE-Flugzeugbau GmbH.....  SF 25C...............      912 A2, 912 A3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 72: Engine--
Reciprocating.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by design change of the engine cylinder
head temperature sensor without a concurrent revision of the engine
model designation, the engine part number, or the cockpit indication
to the pilot. The sensor now measures the coolant temperature rather
than the cylinder head temperature. If the engine coolant
temperature with a maximum engine operating limit of 120 [deg]C is
displayed on a Cylinder Head Temperature indicator with a typical
limit marking greater than 120 [deg]C, the pilot will be unable to
identify coolant temperature limit exceedances. This could result in
loss of coolant, which could cause an inflight engine shutdown and
forced landing.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, for
engines with cylinder heads listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD
installed on both position 2 and position 3, change the engine model
designation on the engine type data plate to include a ``-01''
suffix following paragraph 3.1.1) of the Accomplishment/Instructions
in Rotax Aircraft Engines BRP Service Bulletin SB-912-068 and SB-
914-049 (co-published as one document), dated April 16, 2015.
    (2) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, for
engines with only one cylinder head listed paragraph (c)(1) of this
AD installed in a position 2 or 3, in order to keep such cylinder
installed, you must replace the cylinder head installed on the
unchanged position (2 or 3, as applicable) with a cylinder head
having a P/N listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD, and change the
engine model designation on the engine type data plate to include a
``-01'' suffix following paragraph 3.1.1) of the Accomplishment/
Instructions in Rotax Aircraft Engines BRP Service Bulletin SB-912-
068 and SB-914-049 (co-published as one document), dated April 16,
2015.
    (3) Before further flight after doing the required actions in
paragraphs (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD as applicable, modify the
aircraft and related documentation to indicate a Maximum Coolant
Temperature limit of 120 [deg]C using FAA-approved procedures.
    (i) Such procedures can be found by contacting your aircraft
type certificate holder or the FAA contact specified in paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD. The service documents referenced in paragraph (h)
of this AD are examples of FAA-approved procedures for the
applicable aircraft.
    (ii) These re-identified engines remain eligible for
installation on approved aircraft-engine combinations.
    (4) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install any
other P/N cylinder head unless that installation is done following
approved instructions provided by BRP-Powertrain at the address
provided in paragraph (h) of this AD.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.:
2015-0240, dated December 18, 2015; Rotax Aircraft Engines BRP
Service Bulletin SB-912-066 R1/SB-914-047 R1 (published as one
document), Revision 1, dated April 23, 2015; Diamond Aircraft
Industries GmbH Optional Service Bulletin OSB 36-111, dated
September 17, 2015; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work
Instruction WI-OSB 36-111, dated September 17, 2015; Diamond
Aircraft Service Bulletin No.: DA20-72-04, dated January 22, 2015;
Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Optional Service Bulletin OSB 20-
066, dated September 17, 2015; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work
Instruction WI-OSB 20-066, dated September 17, 2015; and Scheibe
Aircraft GmbH Service Information 02/14-1, dated December 15, 2014,
for related information. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2016-4878. For service information related to this AD, contact
BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co. KG, Welser Strasse 32, A-4623 Gunskirchen,
Austria; phone: +43 7246 601 0; fax: +43 7246 601 9130; Internet:
http://www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com. You may review this
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 10, 2016.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-06279 Filed 3-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 2353]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00070]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-681-000]

Enel Trading North America, Inc.; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Enel Trading North America, Inc.'s application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is January 17, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 28, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-00070 Filed 1-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8982-8985]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03094]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-88165; File No. SR-NYSE-2020-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Its Price List

February 11, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on January 31, 2020, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''
or the ``Exchange'') 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 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 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 its Price List to eliminate the Step
Up Tier 2 Adding Credit. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee
changes effective February 3, 2020. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.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 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List to eliminate the Step
Up Tier 2 Adding Credit.
    The proposed change responds to the current competitive environment
where order flow providers have a choice of where to direct liquidity-
providing orders by offering further incentives for member
organizations to send additional displayed liquidity to the Exchange.
    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective
February 3, 2020.
Competitive Environment
    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37495, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule)
(``Regulation NMS'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the Commission itself recognized, the market for trading
services in NMS stocks has become ``more fragmented and competitive.''
\5\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed across 13
exchanges,\6\ 31 alternative trading

systems,\7\ and numerous broker-dealer internalizers and wholesalers,
all competing for order flow. Based on publicly-available information,
no single exchange has more than 18% market share (whether including or
excluding auction volume).\8\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of equity order flow. More
specifically, the Exchange's market share of trading in Tapes A, B and
C securities combined is less than 15%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 84 FR 5202,
5253 (February 20, 2019) (File No. S7-05-18) (Transaction Fee Pilot
for NMS Stocks Final Rule) (``Transaction Fee Pilot'').
    \6\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume
Summary, available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/. See generally https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/divisionsmarketregmrexchangesshtml.html.
    \7\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
    \8\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market Volume Summary,
available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. With respect to non-marketable
order flow that would provide displayed liquidity on an Exchange,
member organizations can choose from any one of the 13 currently
operating registered exchanges to route such order flow. Accordingly,
competitive forces constrain exchange transaction fees that relate to
orders that would provide liquidity on an exchange.
    In response to this competitive environment, the Exchange has
established incentives for its member organizations who submit orders
that provide liquidity on the Exchange. The proposed fee change is
designed to eliminate a pricing tier intended to incentivize member
organizations to step up their liquidity-providing orders on the
Exchange on all tapes that has not encouraged member organizations to
increase their activity on the Exchange.
Proposed Rule Change
    Under the current Step Up Tier 2 Adding Credit, a member
organization that sends orders, except Mid-Point Liquidity Orders
(``MPL'') and Non-Displayed Limit Orders, that add liquidity (``Adding
ADV'') in Tape A securities would receive a credit of $0.0029 if:
     The member organization quotes at least 15% of the
National Best Bid or Offer (``NBBO'') in 300 or more Tape A securities
on a monthly basis, and
     the member organization's Adding ADV as a percentage of
NYSE consolidated average daily volume (``CADV''), excluding any orders
by a Designated Market Maker (``DMM''), that is at least two times more
than the member organization's July 2019 Adding ADV as a percentage of
NYSE CADV, and
     the member organization's Adding ADV as a percentage of
NYSE CADV, excluding any liquidity added by a DMM, exceeds that member
organization's Adding ADV in July 2019 taken as a percentage of NYSE
CADV by at least 1.05% of NYSE CADV over that Member Organization's
July 2019 Adding ADV as a percentage of NYSE CADV.
    In addition, a member organization that meets these requirements,
and thus qualifies for the $0.0029 credit in Tape A securities, would
be eligible to receive an additional $0.00005 per share if trades in
Tapes B and C securities against the member organization's orders that
add liquidity, excluding orders as a Supplemental Liquidity Provider
(``SLP''), equal to at least 0.20% of Tape B and Tape C CADV combined.
    The Exchange proposes to eliminate this tier in its entirety.
Current Step Up Tier 3 Adding Credit would become the new Step Up Tier
2 Adding Credit. The requirements for qualifying for the current Step
Up Tier 3 Adding Credit would remain unchanged.
    The Exchange proposes eliminating the tier because it has not
encouraged member organizations to increase their activity in order to
qualify for the tier as significantly as the Exchange had anticipated.
The Exchange does not know how much order flow member organizations
choose to route to other exchanges or to off-exchange venues. The
Exchange has nonetheless observed that, historically, few members have
received this credit, with little associated volume, and it has not
served to meaningfully increase activity on the Exchange or improve
market quality. Indeed, no member organization currently qualifies for
the credit. The Exchange therefore proposes to eliminate it.
    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address other
issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problems that
market participants would have in complying with the proposed changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) 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) & (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Change is Reasonable
    As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented
and competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Regulation NMS, 70 FR at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. With respect to non-marketable
orders which provide liquidity on an Exchange, member organizations can
choose from any one of the 13 currently operating registered exchanges
to route such order flow. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain
exchange transaction fees that relate to orders that would provide
displayed liquidity on an exchange. Stated otherwise, changes to
exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of an
exchange to compete for order flow.
    Given the competitive environment, the proposal to eliminate the
Step Up Tier 2 Adding Credit is reasonable. Currently, no member
organization qualifies for the credit. Member organizations have not
increased their activity significantly as the Exchange anticipated they
would in order to qualify for the credit, related volume is low, and it
has not served to meaningfully increase volume or market quality.
The Proposal is an Equitable Allocation of Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposal equitably allocates its fees
among its market participants by fostering

liquidity provision and stability in the marketplace.
    The Exchange believes that eliminating the step up tier constitutes
an equitable allocation of fees because it would apply equally to all
similarly situated member organizations that submit orders to the NYSE,
and that all such member organizations would continue to be subject to
the same fee structure, and access to the Exchange's market would
continue to be offered on fair and nondiscriminatory terms. As noted,
the credit has not prompted a meaningful increase in volume or market
quality. No member organization currently qualifies for the credit, and
no member organization would accordingly be affected by its
elimination.
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly
discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, member
organizations are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they
believe that alternatives offer them better value.
    The proposal is not unfairly discriminatory because it neither
targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category
of market participant. The proposal does not permit unfair
discrimination because elimination of the tier would apply to all
similarly situated member organizations and other market participants,
who would all be eligible for the remaining step up credits on an equal
basis. As noted, no member organization currently qualifies for the
credit and thus no member organizations operating on the Exchange would
be disadvantaged by its elimination. In addition, elimination of the
credit would allow the Exchange to consider new, more effective
incentives to attract order flow to the Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\12\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for member organizations. As a result, the Exchange believes that the
proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation
NMS of fostering integrated competition among orders, which promotes
``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders,
large and small.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \13\ Regulation NMS, 70 FR at 37498-99.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The Exchange believes that the proposed
elimination of the step up credit will not place any undue burden on
competition. The credit has not served its intended purpose of
incentivizing a broader population of member organizations to increase
their participation on the Exchange. Elimination of the credit would
impact no member organizations because no member organization currently
qualifies for it. Moreover, member organizations may seek to mitigate
the effects of the loss of the credit by qualifying for the remaining
step up credits the Exchange offers that would remain available to all
market participants. Accordingly, the proposed change would not impose
a disparate burden on competition among market participants on the
Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily choose to
send their orders to other exchange and off-exchange venues if they
deem fee levels at those other venues to be more favorable. As
previously noted, the Exchange's market share of trading in Tapes A, B
and C securities combined is under 15%. In such an environment, the
Exchange must continually adjust its fees and rebates to remain
competitive with other exchanges and with off-exchange venues. Because
competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in response,
and because market participants may readily adjust their order routing
practices, the Exchange does not believe its proposed fee change can
impose any burden on intermarket competition. The Exchange's proposal
to eliminate the step up tier credit will not meaningfully impact
intermarket competition. As discussed above, no member organization
currently qualifies for the credit. The Exchange also believes that the
proposed change is designed to provide the public and investors with a
Price List that is clear and consistent, thereby reducing burdens on
the marketplace and facilitating investor protection.

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) \14\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \15\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \16\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSE-2020-08 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-NYSE-2020-08. 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-NYSE-2020-08 and should be submitted on
or before March 10, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-03094 Filed 2-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P