[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41552-41553]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16570]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0396; FRL-9913-34]

Registration Review; Pesticide Dockets Opened for Review and
Comment; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of June 25, 2014,
concerning the opening for public comment period for several
registration reviews. This document corrects the docket identification
(ID) number for imazamethabenz to be EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0394, the docket
ID number for propargite to be EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0131, and an email
address error listed in the table of the document. It also corrects the
docket ID number for cresol to be EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0244 in a subsequent
paragraph.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaTanya Moody, Pesticide re-Evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the June 25, 2014 notice a list of those who
may be potentially affected by this action.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0396, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The 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 Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What does this correction do?

    FR Doc. 2014-14685 published in the Federal Register of June 25,
2014 (79 FR 36056) (FRL-9911-53) is corrected as follows:
    1. On page 36057, in Table 1, under the heading III. Registration
Reviews; A. What action is the Agency taking?, Table 1--Registration
Review Dockets Opening, column named ``Docket ID No.'', line 3,
Imazamethabenz (Case 7207), correct EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0395 to read EPA-
HQ-OPP-2014-0394.
    2. On page 36057, in Table 1, under the heading III. Registration
Reviews; A. What action is the Agency taking?, Table 1--Registration
Review Dockets Opening, column named ``Chemical review manager or
regulatory action leader, telephone no., email address'', line 3,
Imazamethabenz (Case 7207), correct<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to read
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. On page 36058, in the second column of Table 1, under the
heading III. Registration Reviews; A. What action is the Agency
taking?, Table 1--Registration Review Dockets Opening, column named
``Docket ID No.'', line 7, Propargite (Case 243), correct EPA-HQ-OPP-
2014-0051 to read EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0131.
    4. On page 36058, in the first column, paragraph 1, line 16,
correct EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0211 to read EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0244.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests, Benzisothiazolin-3-
one, Bispyribac-sodium, Etridiazole, Imazamethabenz, Imazamox,
Imazapyr, IR3535, Mecoprop, Mesotrione, Methylisothiazolinone,
Octhilinone, Propargite, Pyraclostrobin, Pyraflufen-ethyl, Zinc
pyrithione (formerly omadine salts), and Zoxamide.

    Dated: July 2, 2014.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-16570 Filed 7-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 17953]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06522]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0157]

Safety Zone; Recurring Events in Captain of the Port Duluth--
Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for the Bridgefest
Regatta Fireworks in Houghton, MI from 9:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.
This action is necessary to protect participants and spectators during
the Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks. During the enforcement period, entry
into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Duluth or their designated
on-scene representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.943 will be enforced for the
location identified in Item 1 of Table 1 to Sec.  165.943 from 9:30
p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on June 18, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email LTJG Joseph R. McGinnis, telephone
218-725-3818, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the regulations
in 33 CFR 165.943 for the Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks event identified
in Item 1 of Table 1 to Sec.  165.943 on all waters of the Keweenaw
Waterway bounded by the arc of a circle with a 100-yard radius from the
fireworks launch site with its center in approximate position
47[deg]07'28'' N, 088[deg]35'02'' W from 9:30 p.m. through 10:30 p.m.on
June 18, 2022. This action is necessary to protect participants and
spectators during the Bridgefest Regatta Fireworks.
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Duluth or their
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port's
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
    This document is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.943 and 5
U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this publication in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with
advance notification of the enforcement of this safety zone via
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: March 23, 2022.
F.M. Smith,
CDR, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Duluth.
[FR Doc. 2022-06522 Filed 3-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59441-59442]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23768]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67909; File No. SR-EDGA-2012-42]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
EDGA Rule 13.9

September 21, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on September 19, 2012, EDGA Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
to amend Rule 13.9, which provides a new market data product to Members
\3\ and non-Members of the Exchange. The text of the proposed rule
change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.directedge.com,
at the Exchange's principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of
the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Member is any registered broker or dealer that has been
admitted to membership in the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization 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, Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    In SR-EDGA-2012-38 (the ``Filing''),\4\ the Exchange introduced a
new market data product, Edge Routed Liquidity Report (``Edge Routed
Liquidity Report'' or the ``Service'') to Members and non-Members of
the Exchange (collectively referred to as ``Subscribers''). The Edge
Routed Liquidity Report is a data feed that contains historical order
information for orders routed to away destinations by the Exchange. The
Filing stated that Edge Routed Liquidity Report is offered as either a
standard report (the ``Standard Report'') or a premium report (the
``Premium Report'') (the Standard Report and the Premium Report shall
be collectively referred to as the ``Reports'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67765 (August 31, 2012),
77 FR 55248 (September 7, 2012) (SR-EDGA-2012-38).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend Rule 13.9 to
provide additional information regarding the features of the Standard
Report and the Premium Report. The Filing noted that both the Standard
Report and the Premium Report provide a view of all marketable orders
that are routed to away destinations by the Exchange. The Reports are
available to the Subscribers on the morning of the following trading
day (T + 1) and include limit price, routed quantity, symbol, side
(bid/offer), time of routing, and the National Best Bid and Offer
(NBBO) at the time of routing.
    However, [the] Premium Report also identifies various categories of
routing destinations. First, the Premium Report identifies whether the
routing destination is either directed to a destination that is not an
exchange (``Non-Exchange Destination'') or directed to another
exchange. If the order is routed to a Non-Exchange Destination, the
Premium Report will then also specify one of the following Non-Exchange
Destination categories: Regular, Fast, Superfast and Midpoint
(collectively, the ``Categories''). The Category is determined by the
applicable routing strategy associated with the relevant order, based
on responsiveness of the destination (i.e. latency), number of
destinations, and/or type of execution (i.e. midpoint). For example, a
routing strategy that leverages many dark pools for low-cost, low
impact executions, which takes a greater amount of time to fill an
order may be categorized as ``Regular'' in the Premium Report, whereas
a destination specific strategy that has fewer Non-Exchange
Destinations and responds more quickly may be categorized as
``Superfast'' in the Premium Report. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
Premium Report will not identify the specific destination.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\5\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \6\ in particular, which requires, among
other things, that the Exchange's rules are not designed to unfairly
discriminate between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers and are
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that this proposal is in
keeping with those principles by promoting increased transparency
through the dissemination of an additional market data feed, which will
provide market participants with the opportunity to obtain additional
data in furtherance of their investment decisions. The proposed rule
change will contribute to providing such additional information and
afford Subscribers transparency by categorizing routed liquidity to
various Non-Exchange Destinations.

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 purposes of the Act, as amended.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any

unsolicited written comments from its Members or other interested
parties.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \7\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not
become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing.\9\ However,
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \10\ permits the Commission to designate a
shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the
Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Exchange notes that
waiver of these requirements will allow the Exchange to offer the Edge
Routed Liquidity Report, with the revised and clarified distinction of
the features available in each of the Reports, on or about the Filing's
operative date. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest because such waiver would immediately provide
additional information necessary for the operation of the Exchange's
rules regarding the Edge Routed Liquidity Report. For this reason, the
Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon the
operative date of the Filing.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative
delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-EDGA-2012-42 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2012-42. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-EDGA-2012-42 and should be
submitted on or before October 18, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-23768 Filed 9-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 239 (Thursday, December 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64123-64124]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26948]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP19-1-000]

Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review of the Palmyra to
Ogden A-Line Project; Northern Natural Gas Company

    On October 3, 2018, Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern) filed
an application in Docket No. CP19-1-000 requesting a Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to section 7(b) of the
Natural Gas Act to abandon certain natural gas pipeline facilities. The
proposed project is known as the Palmyra to Ogden A-Line Project
(Project), and would allow Northern to abandon approximately 146.6
miles of 24-inch-diameter pipeline to provide for safer long-term
operation of the mainline.
    On October 17, 2018, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice
identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the
EA for the Project.

Schedule for Environmental Review

    Issuance of EA May 13, 2019
    90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline August 11, 2019
    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    Northern proposes to isolate and abandon by sale to DKM
Enterprises, LLC (DKM) approximately 146.6 miles of 24-inch-diameter
pipeline on Northern's M580A and M530A system (collectively referred to
as the A-line) in Otoe and Cass counties in Nebraska, and Mills,
Pottawattamie, Cass, Audubon, Guthrie, Greene, and Boone counties in
Iowa. Northern indicates that DKM intends to salvage the abandoned
pipeline.
    To abandon the pipeline, Northern would disconnect and cap the A-
line at five interconnections where it is linked to other system
facilities. Ground disturbances would be limited to one location in
Otoe County, Nebraska, and four locations in Mills, Guthrie, and Boone
(two locations) counties, Iowa, where the A-line would be disconnected
from Northern's existing pipeline system.

Background

    On November 14, 2018 the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Palmyra to Ogden
A-Line Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI).
The NOI was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local
government agencies; elected officials; Native American tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. Comments on the
NOI should be received by the Commission in Washington, DC on or

before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 14, 2018. All substantive
comments filed in the Commission's public record will be addressed in
the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the eLibrary link, select General
Search from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and Docket
Number excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP19-1), and follow the
instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can
be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The eLibrary link on the FERC website also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: December 7, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-26948 Filed 12-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 15 (Wednesday, January 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8445-8450]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01613]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79835; File No. SR-Phlx-2016-119]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ PHLX LLC; Order Granting
Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1 Thereto, To Amend the PIXL Price Improvement Auction in
Phlx Rule 1080(n) and To Make Pilot Program Permanent

January 18, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On December 6, 2016, NASDAQ PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend the eligibility requirements for its
Price Improvement XL mechanism (``PIXL'' or ``Auction'') and make
permanent those aspects of PIXL that are currently operating on a pilot
basis. On December 15, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change, which amended and replaced the proposed rule
change in its entirety. The proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, was published for comment in the Federal Register on
December 22, 2016.\3\ The Commission received no comments regarding the
proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79584 (December 16,
2016), 81 FR 93979 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange adopted PIXL in October 2010 as a price-improvement
mechanism on the Exchange.\4\ PIXL is a component of the Exchange's
fully automated options trading system, PHLX XL[supreg], that allows an
Exchange member (an ``Initiating Member'') to

electronically submit for execution a simple or complex order it
represents as agent on behalf of a public customer, broker dealer, or
any other entity (``PIXL Order'') against principal interest or against
any other order it represents as agent (an ``Initiating Order'')
provided it submits the PIXL Order for electronic execution into PIXL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63027 (October 1,
2010), 75 FR 62160 (October 7, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-108) (``PIXL
Approval Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certain aspects of PIXL are currently operating on a pilot basis
(``Pilot''),\5\ which is set to expire on January 18, 2017.\6\ In this
proposal, the Exchange proposes to make the Pilot permanent. In
addition, Phlx proposes to modify the requirements for PIXL auctions
involving less than 50 contracts (other than auctions involving Complex
Orders) where the National Best Bid and Offer (``NBBO'') is only $0.01
wide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Four components of the PIXL system are currently operating
on a pilot basis: (i) Auction eligibility for Complex Orders in a
PIXL Auction; (ii) the provision that an unrelated market or
marketable limit order (against the PBBO) on the opposite side of
the market from the PIXL Order received during the Auction will not
cause the Auction to end early and will execute against interest
outside of the Auction; (iii) the early conclusion of a PIXL
Auction; and (iv) no minimum size requirement of orders entered into
PIXL.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78301 (July 12,
2016), 81 FR 46731 (July 18, 2016) (SR-PHLX-2016-75).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. PIXL Auction Eligibility

    Currently, a PIXL Auction may be initiated if all of the following
conditions are met. If the PIXL Order (except if it is a Complex Order)
is for the account of a public customer the Initiating Member must stop
the entire PIXL Order (except if it is a Complex Order) at a price that
is equal to or better than the NBBO and the internal market BBO (the
``Reference BBO'') on the opposite side of the market from the PIXL
Order, provided that such price must be at least one minimum price
improvement increment (as determined by the Exchange but not smaller
than one cent) better than any limit order on the limit order book on
the same side of the market as the PIXL Order.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Phlx Rule 1080(n)(i)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the PIXL Order (except if it is a Complex Order) is for the
account of a broker dealer or any other person or entity that is not a
public customer the Initiating Member must stop the entire PIXL Order
(except if it is a Complex Order) at a price that is the better of: (i)
The Reference BBO price improved by at least one minimum price
improvement increment on the same side of the market as the PIXL Order,
or (ii) the PIXL Order's limit price (if the order is a limit order),
provided in either case that such price is at or better than the NBBO
and the Reference BBO.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Phlx Rule 1080(n)(i)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHLX proposes to amend PIXL to require that, if the PIXL Order
(except if it is a Complex Order) is for less than 50 option contracts,
and if the difference between the NBBO is $0.01, the Initiating Member
must stop the entire PIXL Order at one minimum price improvement
increment better than the NBBO on the opposite side of the market from
the PIXL Order, and better than any limit order on the limit order book
on the same side of the market as the PIXL Order. This requirement
would apply regardless of whether the PIXL Order is for the account of
a public customer, or where the PIXL Order is for the account of a
broker dealer or any other person or entity that is not a Public
Customer. The Exchange would continue to require that the Initiating
Member stop the entire PIXL Order at a price that is better than any
limit order on the limit order book on the same side of the market as
the PIXL Order regardless of the size of the PIXL Order and the width
of the NBBO.
    The Exchange would retain the current requirements for Auction
eligibility in all other instances. Accordingly, if the PIXL Order
(except if it is a Complex Order) is for the account of a public
customer and such order is for 50 option contracts or more or if the
difference between the NBBO is greater than $0.01, the Initiating
Member must stop the entire PIXL Order at a price that is equal to or
better than the NBBO on the opposite side of the market from the PIXL
Order, provided that such price must be at least one minimum price
improvement increment (as determined by the Exchange but not smaller
than one cent) better than any limit order on the limit order book on
the same side of the market as the PIXL Order. If the PIXL Order
(except if it is a Complex Order) is for the account of a broker dealer
or any other person or entity that is not a public customer and such
order is for 50 option contracts or more, or if the difference between
the NBBO is greater than $0.01, the Initiating Member must stop the
entire PIXL Order (except if it is a Complex PIXL Order) at a price
that is the better of: (i) The Reference BBO price improved by at least
the Minimum Increment on the same side of the market as the PIXL Order,
or (ii) the PIXL Order's limit price (if the order is a limit order),
provided in either case that such price is at or better than the NBBO
and the Reference BBO.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange also proposes to add language to Rule
1080(n)(i) to clarify that, if any of the Auction eligibility
criteria are not met, the PIXL Order will be rejected. The Exchange
further proposes to add language to Rule 1080(n)(i) to clarify the
treatment of paired public customer-to-public customer orders
pursuant to Rule 1080(n)(vi) as a result of these proposed changes.
Specifically, Exchange would allow a PIXL Order to trade on either
the bid or offer, pursuant to Rule 1080(n)(vi), if the NBBO is $0.01
wide, provided (1) the execution price is equal to or within the
NBBO, (2) there is no resting customer at the execution price, and
(3) $0.01 is the Minimum Price Variation (MPV) of the option. The
Exchange also proposes to add language that it will continue to
reject a PIXL Order to buy (sell) if the NBBO is only $0.01 wide and
the Agency order is stopped on the bid (offer) if there is a resting
order on the bid (offer). The Exchange states that these
requirements are unchanged from the Exchange's current practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that these changes to PIXL may provide
additional opportunities for PIXL Orders, other than Complex Orders, of
under 50 option contracts to receive price improvement over the NBBO
where the difference in the NBBO is $0.01 and therefore encourage the
increased submission of orders of under 50 option contracts.\10\ Phlx
notes that the statistics for the current pilot, which include, among
other things, price improvement for orders of less than 50 option
contracts under the current Auction eligibility requirements, show
relatively small amounts of price improvement for such orders.\11\ Phlx
believes that the proposed requirements will therefore increase the
price improvement that orders of under 50 option contracts may receive
in PIXL.\12\ The Exchange also notes that the initial PIXL requirements
for Auction eligibility had differentiated between PIXL Orders for a
size of less than 50 option contracts and PIXL Orders for a size of 50
contracts or more (both for PIXL Orders for the account of a public
customer and for the account of a broker-dealer of any other person or
entity that is not a public customer), with more stringent requirements
for PIXL Orders for a size of less than 50 option contracts.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93981.
    \11\ See id.
    \12\ See id.
    \13\ See PIXL Approval Order, supra note 4 at 62161.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Pilot Program

    As described above, four components of the PIXL system are
currently operating on a pilot basis: (i) Auction eligibility for
Complex Orders in a PIXL Auction; (ii) no minimum size requirement of
orders entered into PIXL; (iii) the early conclusion of a PIXL Auction;
and (iv) the provision that an unrelated market or marketable limit
order (against the PBBO) on the opposite side of the market from the
PIXL Order received during the Auction will not cause the Auction to
end early and will execute against interest outside

of the Auction. The pilot has been extended until January 18, 2017.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the Pilot period, the Exchange submitted certain data
periodically as required by the Commission, to provide supporting
evidence that, among other things, there is meaningful competition for
all size orders, there is significant price improvement available
through PIXL, and that there is an active and liquid market functioning
on the Exchange both within PIXL and outside of the Auction
mechanism.\15\ The Exchange has requested that the Commission approve
the Pilot on a permanent basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Phlx Rule 1080(n)(vii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Complex Orders
    Rule 1080(n) sets forth Auction eligibility requirements for
Complex Orders. If the PIXL Order is a Complex Order and of a
conforming ratio, as defined in Rule 1098(a)(i) and (a)(ix), the
Initiating Member must stop the entire PIXL Order at a price that is
better than the best net price (debit or credit) (i) available on the
Complex Order book regardless of the Complex Order book size; and (ii)
achievable from the best Phlx bids and offers for the individual
options (an ``improved net price''), provided in either case that such
price is equal to or better than the PIXL Order's limit price. Complex
Orders consisting of a ratio other than a conforming ratio will not be
accepted.\16\ This provision applies to all Complex Orders submitted
into PIXL and, where applied to Complex Orders where the smallest leg
is less than 50 contracts in size, is part of the current Pilot.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Phlx Rule 1080(n)(i)(C).
    \17\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not propose to modify the Auction eligibility
requirements for Complex Orders to require increased price improvement.
The Exchange states that Rule 1080(n)(i)(C) already requires that the
Initiating Member must stop the entire PIXL Order at a price that is
better than the best net price (debit or credit) that is available on
the Complex Order book regardless of the Complex Order book size; and
that is achievable from the best Phlx bids and offers for the
individual options, provided in either case that such price is equal to
or better than the PIXL Order's limit price.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93982.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes, however, to make permanent the sub-paragraph
concerning Auction eligibility for Complex Orders in PIXL. Rule
1080(n)(i)(C) states that the Auction eligibility requirements for a
PIXL Order that is a Complex Order, where applied to Complex Orders
where the smallest leg is less than 50 contracts in size, is part of
the current Pilot.\19\ The Exchange states that the initial proposed
Auction eligibility requirements for simple PIXL Orders of less than 50
contracts were more stringent than the Auction eligibility requirements
for simple PIXL Orders of 50 contracts or more.\20\ In approving
different Auction eligibility requirements for simple PIXL Orders of
less than 50 contracts, the Commission noted that it was approving this
provision on a pilot basis so that it could ascertain the level of
price improvement attained for smaller-sized orders during the pilot
period.\21\ The Exchanges subsequently proposed implementing size-based
Auction eligibility requirements for Complex Orders in PIXL on a pilot
basis.\22\ The Commission subsequently approved the elimination of the
size-based distinction for Auction eligibility for simple PIXL Orders,
and permitted Phlx to adopt the Auction eligibility standard that
previously applied to orders of 50 contracts or greater.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The Commission approved expanding PIXL to include Complex
Orders in 2013, and approved this provision on a pilot basis. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69845 (June 25, 2013), 78 FR
39429 (July 1, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-46) (``Complex PIXL Approval
Order'').
    \20\ See PIXL Approval Order, supra note 4 at 62161.
    \21\ See PIXL Approval Order, supra note 4 at 62161-62.
    \22\ See Complex PIXL Approval Order, supra note 19.
    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70654 (October 10,
2013), 78 FR 62891 (October 22, 2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-76).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Phlx believes it is appropriate to approve this aspect of the Pilot
on a permanent basis for two reasons.\24\ First, Phlx notes that the
Auction eligibility requirements for simple PIXL Orders are currently
operating on a permanent basis.\25\ Although the Auction eligibility
requirements for Complex PIXL Orders distinguish between Complex PIXL
Orders where the smallest leg is less than 50 contracts and Complex
PIXL Orders where the smallest leg is 50 contracts or greater, the
substantive Auction eligibility requirements for all Complex PIXL
Orders are currently the same. The Exchange believes that to the extent
that the SEC approved the simple PIXL Order Auction eligibility
requirements on a pilot basis, it was to determine if the different
Auction eligibility requirements for simple PIXL Orders of less than 50
contracts resulted in different levels of price improvement for those
orders in comparison to simple PIXL Orders of 50 contracts or
greater.\26\ Since no comparable distinction exists here, and since the
Auction eligibility requirements for Complex PIXL Orders where the
smallest leg is 50 contracts or greater is already operating on a
permanent basis, Phlx believes it is appropriate to approve, on a
permanent basis, the same Auction eligibility requirements for Complex
PIXL Orders where the smallest leg is less than 50 contracts.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93982.
    \25\ See PIXL Approval Order, supra note 4.
    \26\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93982.
    \27\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange also believes that it is appropriate to
approve this aspect of the Pilot on a permanent basis for Complex
Orders where the smallest leg is less than 50 contracts in size because
this will continue to provide such Orders with the opportunity to
receive price improvement.\28\ Specifically, the Exchange believes that
the Auction eligibility requirements, which require a Complex Order to
be stopped at a net debit/credit price that improves upon the stated
markets present for the individual components of the Complex Order,
ensure that at least one option leg will be executed at a better price
than the established bid or offer for such leg.\29\ Phlx asserts that
it has gathered data throughout the Pilot that indicates that there is
a robust market for simple orders, including small customer orders,
both within and outside of PIXL, and significant opportunities for
price improvement for small customer orders that are entered into
PIXL.\30\ Phlx believes that the market for Complex Orders, including
small customer orders, both within and outside of PIXL is similarly
robust, and therefore has requested that the Commission approve this
aspect of the Pilot on a permanent basis.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See id.
    \29\ See id.
    \30\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93983.
    \31\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. No Minimum Size Requirement
    Rule 1080(n)(vii) provides that, as part of the current Pilot,
there will be no minimum size requirement for orders to be eligible for
the Auction.\32\ The Exchange believes that the data gathered since the
approval of the Pilot, which it discussed in the Notice, establishes
that there is liquidity and competition both within PIXL and outside of
PIXL, and

that there are opportunities for significant price improvement within
PIXL.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Rule also requires the Exchange to submit certain data,
periodically as required by the Commission, to provide supporting
evidence that, among other things, there is meaningful competition
for all size orders and that there is an active and liquid market
functioning on the Exchange outside of the Auction mechanism. Any
raw data which is submitted to the Commission will be provided on a
confidential basis.
    \33\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93983. See also Exhibit 3 to
SR-Phlx-2016-119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also has gathered information about activity in orders
for less than 50 contracts and 50 contracts or greater for simple PIXL
Auctions between January and June 2015. For Auctions occurring during
that period, 93% of Auctions were for orders for less than 50
contracts, a percentage that increased slightly over that time period.
Auctions for orders of less than 50 contracts accounted for 45.5% of
the contract volume traded in PIXL. Auctions of 50 contracts or more
made up 7.0% of all PIXL Auctions and accounted for 54.5% of contracts
traded in PIXL.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93983.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to price improvement, 68.6% of PIXL Auctions for
simple PIXL Orders executed at a price that was better than the NBBO at
the time the Auction began. 69.2% of Auctions for less than 50
contracts received price improvement. 56.3% of Auctions for 50
contracts or more received price improvement. 66.5% of contracts in
Auctions for less than 50 contracts received price improvement. 55.7%
of Auctions for 50 contracts or more received price improvement.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Phlx has also gathered data relating to the number of Complex
Orders entered into PIXL. For November 2016, a total of 18,016 orders
were entered into PIXL where the smallest leg was less than 50
contracts, representing 99,941 contracts. For November 2016, a total of
641 orders were entered into PIXL where the smallest leg was 50
contracts or greater, representing 52,686 contracts.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the data gathered during the Pilot
period indicates that there is meaningful competition in PIXL Auctions
for all size orders, there is an active and liquid market functioning
on the Exchange outside of the auction mechanism, and that there are
opportunities for significant price improvement for orders executed
through PIXL.\37\ With respect to Complex Orders, the Exchange believes
that this data establishes that there is liquidity and competition both
within PIXL for Complex Orders and outside of PIXL for Complex
Orders.\38\ The Exchange therefore has requested that the Commission
approve the no minimum size requirement on a permanent basis for both
simple and Complex PIXL Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See id.
    \38\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Early Conclusion of the PIXL Auction
    Rule 1080(n)(ii)(B) provides that the PIXL Auction shall conclude
at the earlier of (i) the end of the Auction period; (ii) for a PIXL
Auction (except if it is a Complex Order), any time the Reference BBO
crosses the PIXL Order stop price on the same side of the market as the
PIXL Order; (iii) for a Complex Order PIXL Auction, any time the cPBBO
\39\ or the Complex Order book crosses the Complex PIXL Order stop
price on the same side of the market as the Complex PIXL Order; or (iv)
any time there is a trading halt on the Exchange in the affected
series.\40\ The last three conditions are operating as part of the
current Pilot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Rule 1098(a) defines the cPBBO as ``the best net debit or
credit price for a Complex Order Strategy based on the PBBO for the
individual options components of such Complex Order Strategy, and,
where the underlying security is a component of the Complex Order,
the National Best Bid and/or Offer for the underlying security.''
See Rule 1098(a)(iv).
    \40\ If the situations described in either of the final three
conditions occur, the entire PIXL Order will be executed at: (1) in
the case of the Reference BBO crossing the PIXL Order stop price,
the best response price(s) or, if the stop price is the best price
in the Auction, at the stop price, unless the best response price is
equal to or better than the price of a limit order resting on the
PHLX book on the same side of the market as the PIXL Order, in which
case the PIXL Order will be executed against that response, but at a
price that is at least one minimum price improvement increment
better than the price of such limit order at the time of the
conclusion of the Auction; (2) in the case of the cPBBO or the
Complex Order book crossing the Complex PIXL Order stop price on the
same side of the market as the Complex PIXL Order, the stop price
against executable PAN responses and executable Complex Orders using
the allocation algorithm in sub-paragraph (E)(2)(d)(i) through (iv);
or (3) in the case of a trading halt on the Exchange in the affected
series, the stop price, in which case the PIXL Order will be
executed solely against the Initiating Order. Any unexecuted PAN
responses will be cancelled. See Rule 1080(n)(ii)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As with the no minimum size requirement, the Exchange has gathered
data on these three conditions to assess the effect of early PIXL
Auction conclusions on the Pilot.\41\ Between January and June 2015,
320 Auctions for simple PIXL Orders terminated early because the Phlx
BBO crossed the PIXL Order stop price on the same side of the market.
No Auctions terminated early because of halts. The number of Auctions
that terminated early was 1/100th of 1% of all PIXL Auctions over the
period. The Auctions that terminated early included 1/100th of 1% of
contracts traded in PIXL Auctions. The share of Auctions that
terminated early was stable between January and June 2015.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Exhibit 3 to SR-Phlx-2016-119.
    \42\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93984.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Between January and June 2015, 76.3% of PIXL Auctions for simple
PIXL Orders that terminated early executed at a price that was better
than the NBBO at the time the Auction began. 71.9% of contracts in
Auctions that terminated early received price improvement. The average
amount of price improvement per contract for PIXL Auctions that
terminated early was 4.1%.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the data gathered during the pilot, the Exchange does not
anticipate that any of these conditions will occur with significant
frequency, or will otherwise significantly affect the functioning of
PIXL Auctions.\44\ The Exchange also notes that over 75% of PIXL
Auctions for simple PIXL Orders that terminated early executed at a
price that was better than the NBBO at the time the Auction began, and
over 70% of contracts in Auctions that terminated early received price
improvement.\45\ With respect to Complex PIXL Orders, the Exchange
similarly does not anticipate, based on the data gathered on this
aspect of the Pilot for simple PIXL Orders, that either Rule
1080(n)(ii)(B)(3) or (4) will occur with significant frequency, or will
otherwise significantly affect the functioning of Complex PIXL Order
Auctions.\46\ The Exchange therefore has requested that the Commission
approve this aspect of the Pilot on a permanent basis for both simple
and Complex PIXL Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See id.
    \45\ See id.
    \46\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Unrelated Market or Marketable Limit Order
    Rule 1080(n)(ii)(D) provides that an unrelated market or marketable
limit order (against the PBBO) on the opposite side of the market from
the PIXL Order received during the Auction will not cause the Auction
to end early and will execute against interest outside of the Auction.
In the case of a Complex PIXL Auction, an unrelated market or
marketable limit Complex Order on the opposite side of the market from
the Complex PIXL Order as well as orders for the individual components
of the Complex Order received during the Auction will not cause the
Auction to end early and will execute against interest outside of the
Auction. If contracts remain from such unrelated order at the time the
Auction ends, they will be considered for participation in the order
allocation process described elsewhere in the Rule. This section is
operating as part of the current Pilot.
    In approving this feature on a pilot basis, the Commission found
that

``allowing the PIXL auction to continue for the full auction period
despite receipt of unrelated orders outside the Auction would allow the
auction to run its full course and, in so doing, will provide a full
opportunity for price improvement to the PIXL Order. Further, the
unrelated order would be available to participate in the PIXL order
allocation.'' \47\ The Exchange does not believe that this provision
has had a significant impact on either the unrelated order or the PIXL
Auction process, either for simple or Complex PIXL Orders.\48\ The
Exchange therefore has requested that the Commission approve this
aspect of the Pilot on a permanent basis for both simple and Complex
PIXL Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See PIXL Approval Order, supra note 4.
    \48\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93984.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    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
and, in particular, with Section 6(b) of the Act.\49\ In particular,
the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\50\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposed rule change,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \50\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of its proposal, the Exchange provided summary data on
Exhibit 3 of its filing for the period January through June 2015, which
the Exchange and Commission both publicly posted on their respective
Web sites. Among other things, this data is useful in assessing the
level of price improvement in the Auction, in particular for orders for
fewer than 50 contracts; the degree of competition for order flow in
such Auctions; and a comparison of liquidity in the Auctions with
liquidity on the Exchange generally.\51\ Based on the data provided by
the Exchange, the Commission believes that the Exchange's price
improvement auction generally delivers a meaningful opportunity for
price improvement to orders, including orders for fewer than 50
contracts, when the spread in the option is $0.02 or more. At the same
time, as the Exchange has recognized, the data do not demonstrate that
such orders have realized significant price improvement when the NBBO
has a bid/ask differential of $0.01.\52\ Recognizing this, the Exchange
has proposed to amend the Auction eligibility requirements to require
price improvement of at least one minimum price improvement increment
over the NBBO for PIXL Orders of less than 50 option contracts where
the difference in the NBBO is $0.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See Exhibit 3 to SR-Phlx-2016-119.
    \52\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 93985.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to modify the Auction eligibility
requirements for orders of fewer than 50 contracts and seek permanent
approval of the Pilot, as amended with the new provision, will, in the
Commission's view, promote opportunities for price improvement for such
orders when the NBBO is $0.01 wide, while continuing to provide
opportunities for price improvement when spreads are wider than $0.01.
    In addition, the Commission has carefully evaluated the PIXL Pilot
data and has determined that it would be beneficial to customers and to
the options market as a whole to approve on a permanent basis the
provisions concerning early conclusion of the PIXL Auction, and the
receipt of an unrelated market or marketable limit order (against the
Phlx BBO) on the opposite side of the market from the PIXL Order during
the Auction. The Commission notes that there have been few instances of
early termination of PIXL. The Commission further notes that permitting
the PIXL Auction to continue despite receipt of unrelated orders
outside the Auction would allow the Auction to run its full course and
provide a full opportunity for price improvement to the PIXL Order
while allowing the unrelated order to seek an execution, including in
the Auction's order allocation.
    The Commission believes that, particularly for Auctions for fewer
than 50 contracts when the bid/ask differential is wider than $0.01,
the data provided by the Exchange support its proposal to make the
Pilot permanent. The data demonstrate that the Auction generally
provides price improvement opportunities to simple and complex orders,
including orders of retail customers and particularly when the bid/ask
differential is wider than $0.01, that there is meaningful competition
for orders on the Exchange; and that there exists an active and liquid
market functioning on the Exchange outside of the Auction.\53\ The
Commission further believes that the proposed revisions to the
eligibility requirements for simple PIXL Orders of fewer than 50
contracts with respect to circumstances when the NBBO is $0.01 wide
should help to enhance the operation of the Auction by providing
meaningful opportunities for price improvement in such circumstances,
and should benefit investors and others in a manner that is consistent
with the Act. Thus, the Commission has determined to approve the
Exchange's proposed revisions to Rule 1080(n) and to approve the Pilot,
as proposed to be modified, on a permanent basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See Exhibit 3 to SR-Phlx-2016-119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the 30th day after
publication of the notice thereof in the Federal Register. In
particular, accelerated approval of the proposal would allow the
applicable rules, as amended, to remain in effect following the
expiration of the Pilot on January 18, 2017, which would avoid any
potential investor confusion that could result from a suspension or
temporary interruption in the Pilot. The Commission further notes that
the original proposal, as modified by Amendment No. 1, was subject to a
21 day comment period and no comments were received on the proposal.
Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause, pursuant to Section
19(b)(2) of the Act,\54\ to approve the proposed rule change prior to
the 30th day after the date of publication of the notice of filing
thereof in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\55\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2016-119), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, be and hereby is approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-01613 Filed 1-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 129 (Friday, July 9, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36282-36283]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14650]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-2347]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Food and Cosmetic
Export Certificates

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

DATES: Submit written comments (including recommendations) on the
collection of information by August 9, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by using the search function. The OMB control number for
this information collection is 0910-0793. Also include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Food and Cosmetic Export Certificates

OMB Control Number 0910-0793--Extension

    Some countries may require manufacturers of FDA-regulated products
to provide certificates for products they wish to export to that
country. Accordingly, firms exporting products from the United States
often ask FDA to provide such a ``certificate.'' In many cases, foreign
governments are seeking official assurance that products exported to
their countries can be marketed in the United States, or that they meet
specific U.S. requirements. In some cases, review of an FDA export
certificate may be required as part of the process to register or
import a product into another country. An export certificate generally
indicates that the particular product is marketed in the United States
or otherwise eligible for export and that the particular manufacturer
has no unresolved enforcement actions pending before, or taken by, FDA.
    FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) issues
export certificates for human food and cosmetic products. Interested
persons may request a certificate electronically via the CFSAN Export
Certification Application and Tracking System (CFSAN eCATS) or
Certificate Application Process (CAP), components of the FDA Industry
Systems, or by contacting CFSAN for assistance. Health certificates are
the exception and are requested via email. To facilitate the
application process, we have eliminated paper-based forms. For food
products, respondents are able to identify facilities using their Food
Facility Registration, an FDA Establishment Identifier number, or a
Data Universal Numbering System number. The system uses these
identifiers to locate and auto-populate name and address information,
eliminating the need for users to manually enter this information and
reducing the time to complete the application. For some applications,
respondents can also upload product information via a spreadsheet,
which reduces the time needed to enter

product information, particularly for applications that include
multiple products.
    All information is entered using electronic Forms FDA 3613d, 3613e,
and 3613k and used to evaluate certificate requests. The eCATS Module
is Form FDA 3613k, where Form FDA 3613e is the Certificate of Free Sale
(https://www.fda.gov/food/food-export-certificates/online-applications-export-certificates-food). All ``forms'' are electronic and part of the
eCATS or CAP portal accessed via https://www.access.fda.gov. To view
representations of the forms, you have to download the instructions,
which are accessible from the following links: https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-exporters/online-applications-export-certificates-cosmetics and https://www.fda.gov/food/food-export-certificates/online-applications-export-certificates-food.
    While burden associated with information collection activities for
export certificates issued for other FDA-regulated products is approved
under OMB control number 0910-0498, this collection specifically
supports export certificates issued by CFSAN. Also, because we have
eliminated paper-based forms, respondents who require assistance with
completing export certificate applications online may contact CFSAN
directly by email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone
(240-402-2307). Instructions for requesting export certificates for
cosmetics (Form FDA 3613d) are available online at https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-exporters/online-applications-export-certificates-cosmetics and instructions for requesting export certificates for food
(Forms FDA 3613e and 3613k) are available online at https://www.fda.gov/food/food-export-certificates/online-applications-export-certificates-food.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents to this collection of
information are firms interested in exporting U.S.-manufactured human
food and cosmetic products to foreign countries that require export
certificates.
    In the Federal Register of March 16, 2021 (86 FR 14452), we
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. We received one comment offering general
support for our cosmetic export certificate program. The comment also
recommended FDA consider providing certificates that allow exporters to
use an exemption from requirements in China for animal testing for
certain imported cosmetic products. We appreciate the comment and
continue to seek ways to increase the utility of the information
collection as our limited resources permit. At the same time, the
comment did not suggest we revise the burden we attribute to the
associated information collection activity.
    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                      Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
          Type of respondent                 Form No. \2\           Number of     responses per   Total annual      Average burden per      Total hours
                                                                   respondents     respondent       responses      response (in hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cosmetics............................  FDA 3613d...............             113               3             339  0.5 (30 minutes).......             170
Food.................................  FDA 3613e, 3613k........             468               9           4,212  0.5 (30 minutes).......           2,106
                                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total............................  ........................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .......................           2,276
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
\2\ All forms are submitted electronically via FDA Industry Systems.

    Based on a review of the information collection since our last OMB
approval, we have reduced our burden estimate. The burden estimate has
been lowered due to a reduced number of respondents. We base our
estimates on our experience with certificate applications received in
the past 3 fiscal years.

    Dated: July 2, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-14650 Filed 7-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: March 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 60)]
[Notices]
[Page 16295-16296]
[DOCID:fr27mr08-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-91-000]

Columbia Gulf Transmission Company; Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company; Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC; Notice of
Application

March 20, 2008.
    Take notice that on March 12, 2008, Columbia Gulf Transmission
Company (Columbia Gulf), 5151 San Felipe, Suite 2500, Houston, Texas
77056, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee), 1001 Louisiana
Street, Houston, Texas 77002, and Natural Gas Pipeline Company of
America LLC (Natural) 500 Dallas Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in
Docket No. CP08-91-000, an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations, for
authorization to abandon certain facilities located in Eugene Island,
Offshore Louisiana, all as more fully set forth in the application
which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
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>.
    Specifically, Columbia Gulf, Tennessee, and Natural propose to
abandon in place the following facilities: (i) The segment of 20-inch
diameter pipeline owned by Natural, Segment 3991, comprised of
approximately 1.58 miles, from Eugene Island Block 331 to Block 314;
(ii) the segment of 20-inch diameter pipeline owned by Columbia Gulf,
Segment 496, comprised of approximately 3.1 miles, from Eugene Island
Block 314 to Block 309; (iii) the segment of 20-inch diameter pipeline
jointly owned by Columbia Gulf, Tennessee, and Natural, Segment 5235,
comprised of approximately 16.1 miles, from Eugene Island Block 309 to
Eugene Island 250B; and (iv) side taps, measurement facilities, and
other various appurtenances attached to these facilities and certain
non-jurisdictional facilities, located in the Eugene Island Areas 250,
264, 271, 286, 287, 292, 309, 314, and 331, all Offshore Louisiana.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Fredric J. George, Lead Counsel, Columbia Gulf Transmission Company, P.
O. Box 1273, Charleston, West Virginia 25325-1273, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of

comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission
will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the
filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that
persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of
their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the
protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
    Comment Date: April 10, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-6213 Filed 3-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6846-6847]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02467]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CD16-7-000]

James W. Park; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a
Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and
Motions To Intervene

    On January 27, 2016, James W. Park filed a notice of intent to
construct a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, pursuant to section
30 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended by section 4 of the
Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 (HREA). The proposed Park
Farm Hydro Project would have an installed capacity of 15 kilowatts
(kW), and would be located along the Lower Latham Ditch at an existing
400-foot-long concrete drop structure. The project would be located
near the Town of Kersey, in Weld County, Colorado.
    Applicant Contact: Tim Olsen, PE, Advanced Energy Systems, LLC,
1428 South Humboldt Street, Denver, CO 80210, Phone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Christopher Chaney, Phone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Description: The proposed
project would consist of: (1) A new powerhouse, approximately 8 feet by
16 feet, at the downstream end of an existing 4-foot-wide by 400-foot-
long concrete drop structure; (2) a new 400-foot-long, 24-inch-diameter
PVC penstock, with a Coanda screen intake, paralleling the concrete
drop structure; (3) 10 cross flow turbine/generating units with an
installed capacity of 15 kW; and (4) appurtenant facilities.
    The proposed project would have a total installed capacity of 15
kW.
    A qualifying conduit hydropower facility is one that is determined
or deemed to meet all of the criteria shown in the table below.

      Table 1--Criteria for Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Statutory provision              Description       Satisfies (Y/N)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FPA 30(a)(3)(A), as amended by   The conduit the                      Y
 HREA.                            facility uses is a
                                  tunnel, canal,
                                  pipeline, aqueduct,
                                  flume, ditch, or
                                  similar manmade water
                                  conveyance that is
                                  operated for the
                                  distribution of water
                                  for agricultural,
                                  municipal, or
                                  industrial
                                  consumption and not
                                  primarily for the
                                  generation of
                                  electricity.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(i), as amended   The facility is                      Y
 by HREA.                         constructed,
                                  operated, or
                                  maintained for the
                                  generation of
                                  electric power and
                                  uses for such
                                  generation only the
                                  hydroelectric
                                  potential of a non-
                                  federally owned
                                  conduit.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(ii), as amended  The facility has an                  Y
 by HREA.                         installed capacity
                                  that does not exceed
                                  5 megawatts.

FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(iii), as         On or before August 9,               Y
 amended by HREA.                 2013, the facility is
                                  not licensed, or
                                  exempted from the
                                  licensing
                                  requirements of Part
                                  I of the FPA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Preliminary Determination: The proposed addition of the
hydroelectric project at an existing drop structure on the Lower Latham
Ditch will not alter its primary purpose of distributing water for
irrigation. Therefore, based upon the above criteria, Commission staff
preliminarily determines that the proposal satisfies the requirements
for a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, which is not required to
be licensed or exempted from licensing.
    Comments and Motions to Intervene: Deadline for filing comments
contesting whether the facility meets the qualifying criteria is 45
days from the issuance date of this notice.
    Deadline for filing motions to intervene is 30 days from the
issuance date of this notice.
    Anyone may submit comments or a motion to intervene in accordance
with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.210 and 385.214. Any motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified deadline date for the particular proceeding.
    Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the ``COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR
A CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' as
applicable; (2) state in the heading the name of the applicant and the
project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3)
state the name, address, and telephone number of the person filing; and
(4) otherwise comply with the requirements of sections 385.2001 through
385.2005 of the Commission's regulations.\1\ All comments contesting
Commission staff's preliminary determination that the facility meets
the qualifying criteria must set forth their evidentiary basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.2001-2005 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and comments using the Commission's eFiling system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of all other filings in
reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service
on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in
this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    Locations of Notice of Intent: Copies of the notice of intent can
be obtained directly from the applicant or such copies can be viewed
and reproduced at the Commission in its Public Reference Room, Room 2A,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be
viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number (i.e., CD16-7) in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-
free 1-866-208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call
(202) 502-8659.

    Dated: February 2, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-02467 Filed 2-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50912-50913]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21893]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. OR18-39-000]

Andeavor Field Services LLC; Notice of Request for Temporary
Waiver

    Take notice that on September 28, 2018, pursuant to Rules 202 and
203 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.202 and 203, Andeavor Field Services
LLC (Andeavor) filed a petition seeking a temporary waiver of the
tariff filing and reporting requirements applicable to

interstate oil pipelines under sections 6 and 20 of the Interstate
Commerce Act and parts 341 and 357 of the Commission's regulations.
This request pertains to certain natural gas liquids pipeline
facilities that will be owned and operated by Andeavor within the State
of North Dakota, all as more fully explained in the petition.
    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 on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the website that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
[email protected], or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern time on October 29, 2018.

    Dated: October 2, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21893 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P