[Federal Register: July 13, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 133)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 39839-39842]
[DOCID:fr13jy10-12]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-1056]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Area; Hudson River and Port of NY/NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary interim rule with request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a regulated navigation area
(RNA) from Port Coeymans, New York on the Hudson River to Jersey City,
New Jersey on Upper New York Bay, and from Jersey City to the Willis
Avenue Bridge site on the Harlem River, New York, including all waters
of the East River between these two locations. This action is necessary
to provide for the safety of life on the navigable waters during the
load out and transit of the Willis Avenue Bridge replacement span.

DATES: This rule is effective from July 13, 2010 through October 31,
2010. The RNA will be enforced from 3 a.m. on Monday, July 12, 2000, to
11:30 p.m. on Saturday, August 7, 2010. Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before August 12, 2010. Requests for
public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on or before August
12, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-1056 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2009-1056 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2009-1056
using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this interim
rule, call or e-mail Mr. Jeff Yunker, Waterways Management Division at
Coast Guard Sector New York, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.
    As this temporary interim rule will be in effect before the end of
the comment period, the Coast Guard will evaluate and revise this rule
as necessary to address significant public comments.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2009-1056), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2009-1056'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. If you submit comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in
an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\; by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change this rule
based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-0176'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be
beneficial. If we determine that one would aid revising this rule, we
will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the
Federal Register.

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary interim rule without
prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under
section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without
prior notice when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures
are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.''
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect
to this rule. This rule establishes an RNA to provide for the safety of
life on the navigable waters during the load out and transit of the
Willis Avenue Bridge replacement span. It is impracticable to issue an
NPRM and take public comment before July 12, 2010, when the load out
and transit is scheduled to begin. Due to delays on other construction
projects in the Gulf of Mexico, the calendar dates for the load out and
transit were not confirmed until early May 2010. This delayed the
projected arrival of specialized self propelled transporters necessary
to move the Willis Avenue Bridge replacement span from its construction
site at Port Coeymans, New York onto the barges transporting the bridge
span to its installation site on the Harlem River in New York City.
This in turn delayed the dates for all of the subsequent restrictions.
Delaying either the bridge load out and transit, or creation of the
RNA, is contrary to the public interest because the bridge will be a
public convenience and because the RNA will provide for public safety
by safeguarding both mariners and construction workers during the
bridge's construction and transportation of the replacement bridge
span. We are requesting public comment on the RNA, and if we receive
public input that indicates a need to revise the RNA or the conditions
it imposes, or raises any other significant public concerns, we will
address those concerns prior to issuing any final rule. For the same
reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, the Coast Guard has the
authority to establish RNAs in defined water areas that are determined
to have hazardous conditions and in which vessel traffic can be
regulated in the interest of safety. See 33 U.S.C. 1231 and Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    The New York City Department of Transportation is replacing the
Willis Avenue Bridge over the Harlem River. The replacement bridge span
for this project is being constructed at Port Coeymans, NY on the
Hudson River, approximately 115 nautical miles north of The Battery,
Manhattan, NY. The transfer of the bridge span from the Port Coeymans
Terminal to two Weeks Marine barges and transit to the installation
site on the Harlem River is scheduled for the week of July 12, 2010.
The week of July 19, 2010 will be used as a contingency in case of
delays. The installation of the bridge span on the Harlem River is
scheduled for August 2, 2010.
    The load out of the new Willis Avenue Bridge span involves large
machinery and construction vessel operations above and upon the
navigable waters between Port Coeymans on the Hudson River, Upper New
York Bay, the East River, and the bridge installation site at mile 1.5
on the Harlem River. Heavy-lift operations are sensitive to water
movement, and wake from passing vessels could pose significant risk of
injury or death to construction workers. The ongoing operations are, by
their nature, hazardous and pose risks both to recreational and
commercial vessel traffic and the bridge construction crew. In order to
mitigate the inherent risks involved in the construction, it is
necessary to control vessel movement through the area. The Coast Guard
negotiated the terms of necessary navigation restrictions with the
Kiewit and Weeks Marine contractors, and with Hudson River and Sandy
Hook Pilots.

Discussion of Rule

    This temporary interim rule establishes an RNA on designated waters
on the Hudson River and in the New York City area. It is intended to
ensure the safety of the public and vessels during the transfer and
transit of the 363 foot long bridge span from Port Coeymans, NY to the
Harlem River, NY via Upper New York Bay and Buttermilk Channel. The
enforcement times given in this discussion for the various restrictions
depend on transit conditions and may be changed due to inclement
weather or other circumstances. Changes will be provided to the public
by the on scene patrol vessels, Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service New
York, and/or Safety Voice Broadcasts. Except for persons or vessels
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port New York or the
designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in
the RNA during the enforcement period.
    No vessels will be authorized between Hudson River Light 191 LLNR
38865 and Hudson River Light 193 LLNR 38875 at Coeymans, NY from 3 a.m.
on Monday, July 12, 2010 until 8 a.m. on Tuesday, July 13, 2010. In
case of inclement weather or construction delays this restriction will
be established from 7 a.m. on Monday, July 19, 2010 until 7 a.m. on
Tuesday, July 20, 2010.
    No vessels will be authorized within 100 yards of the two Weeks
Marine barges once the bridge span has been loaded onto the barges at
Port Coeymans. Vessels will be required to transit at No Wake speed
when passing the two Weeks Marine barges.
    A No Meeting and No Overtaking zone will be established as the
barges and bridge span transit from Port Coeymans to just south of the
entrance to Rondout Creek. This zone will be established on Tuesday,
July 13, 2010 or Wednesday, July 14, 2010 for approximately 9 hours and
30 minutes based on the expected transit speed of 4 knots. In case of
inclement weather or construction delays this restriction will be
established from 5:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. on Tuesday, July 20, 2010.
    A No Meeting and No Overtaking zone will be established as the
barges and bridge span transit between the eastern and western sections
of Anchorage Ground No. 19 on the Hudson River. This zone will be
established for approximately 60 minutes on Tuesday, July 13, or
Wednesday, July 14, 2010, based on the expected transit speed of 4
knots. In case of inclement weather or construction delays this
restriction will be established from 7:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. on
Wednesday, July 21, 2010.
    A No Meeting and No Overtaking zone will be established as the
barges and bridge span transit Buttermilk Channel from its entrance at
Anchorage Channel until the barges pass the northwest corner of Pier 2,
Brooklyn. This zone will be established on Wednesday, July 14, 2010
from approximately 11 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. based on the expected transit
speed of 4 knots.
    The East River will be closed to all other vessel traffic between
the Con Ed East River Generating Station at East 14th Street,
Manhattan, and the Hell Gate Railroad Bridge at river mile 8.2. This
restriction will be established on Wednesday, July 14, 2010 from
approximately 12:20 p.m. to 1:45 p.m. based on the expected transit
speed of 4 knots.

    The Harlem River will be closed to all other vessel traffic between
the 125th Street/Triborough/RFK Bridge (mile 1.3) and 500 feet north of
the Willis Ave Bridge (mile 1.5). This restriction will be established
on Monday, August 2, 2010 from approximately 5 a.m. to 6 p.m. during
the installation of the bridge span.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule will not be significant
due to the limited duration that the regulated area would be in effect
and enforced. Also, the Hudson River closure during the transfer of the
bridge span from shore to the barges has been scheduled on a weekday
when it is expected to have minimal impact on recreational vessels. The
Harlem River closure will be coordinated with vessel operators that
regularly schedule Manhattan Island tours.
    In addition, advance notifications will be made to the maritime
community via the Local Notice to Mariners, marine information
broadcasts and online at http://homeport.uscg.mil/newyork.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in a portion of the Hudson, East and Harlem Rivers and Upper
New York Bay south of 42[deg]29'11.692'' N, 073[deg]47'14.142'' W
(Hudson River LIGHT 193 LLNR 38875) from 3 a.m. on July 12, 2010 to
11:30 p.m. on August 7, 2010.
    This RNA will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The RNA
will only stop vessels from transiting three specified locations on the
Hudson, Harlem, and East Rivers, the 24-hour closure of the Hudson
River at Port Coeymans has been scheduled on a weekday to reduce the
impact to recreational vessels that are more prevalent on weekends, the
East River closure between the Con Ed East River Generating Station and
the Hell Gate Railroad Bridge will only be in effect for approximately
85 minutes and vessels can adjust their schedules, the Harlem River
closure at the bridge installation site will be coordinated with vessel
operators that regularly schedule Manhattan Island tours; the No
Meeting and No Overtaking zones are established in areas identified by
Weeks Marine, Hudson River and Sandy Hook Pilots as requiring
additional safety measures due to the waterway characteristics and
characteristics of vessels using the waterways in those locations.
Before the effective period, we will issue maritime advisories widely
available to users of the waterway.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishing of a
RNA and therefore falls within the categorical exclusion noted above.
An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. Any comments received concerning environmental impacts will
be considered and changes made to the environmental analysis checklist
and categorical exclusion determination as appropriate.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.t01-1056 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.t01-1056  Regulated Navigation Area; Hudson River and Port of
New York and New Jersey.

    (a) Description of the regulated navigation area (RNA). The
regulated area includes all waters of the Hudson River south of
42[deg]29'11.692'' N, 073[deg]47'14.142'' W (Hudson River LIGHT 193
LLNR 38875), all waters of Upper New York Bay north of a line drawn
from the northeast corner of the Global Container and Northeast Auto
Terminal to the northwest corner of Pier 41, Red Hook Brooklyn, all
waters of the East River from The Battery to the Hell Gate Railroad
Bridge at river mile 8.2, and all waters of the Harlem River from the
Harlem River Foot Bridge at river mile 0.0 to 500 feet north of the
Willis Avenue Bridge at river mile 1.5.
    (b) Definitions: (1) Designated representative means a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has
been designated by the Captain of the Port New York (COTP).
    (2) Weeks Marine barges means a barge operated by the Weeks Marine
Company.
    (c) Regulations. In addition to 33 CFR 165.10, 165.11, and 165.13,
the following restrictions or conditions apply within this RNA:
    (1) No person or vessel may enter, transit, or remain in the RNA on
the Hudson River between 42[deg]28'42.100'' N, 073[deg]47'19.100'' W
(Hudson River LIGHT 191 LLNR 38865) and 42[deg]29'11.692'' N,
073[deg]47'14.142'' W (Hudson River LIGHT 193 LLNR 38875); on the East
River between 40[deg]43'36.210'' N, 073[deg]58'17.750'' W, at the Con
Ed East River Generating Station at East 14th Street Manhattan and the
Hell Gate Railroad Bridge at river mile 8.2; on the Harlem River
between the 125th Street/Triborough/RFK Bridge (mile 1.3) and 500 feet
north of the Willis Ave Bridge (mile 1.5).
    (2) No commercial vessel may meet, or overtake, the Weeks Marine
barges when they are transiting the following waters:
    (i) The Hudson River from Port Coeymans, NY to 41[deg]54'59.712''
N, 073[deg]57'36.126'' W (Hudson River Lighted Buoy 73 LLNR 38183) 500
yards south of the entrance to Rondout Creek. (ii) The Hudson River
between the eastern and western sections of Anchorage Ground No. 19.
    (iii) Buttermilk Channel from its entrance at Anchorage Channel,
about 175 yards north of 40[deg]40'18.971'' N, 074[deg]02'24.006'' W
(Gowanus Flats Lighted Bell Buoy 32 LLNR 34990) until the barges pass
the northwest corner of Pier 2 Brooklyn.
    (iv) The Harlem River from the 103rd Street Foot Bridge (mile 0.0)
to the Willis Ave Bridge at mile 1.5.
    (2) No vessels are authorized within 100 yards of the two Weeks
Marine barges while carrying the bridge span.
    (3) All vessels must transit at reduced speed to minimize wake and
surge when transiting past the Weeks Marine barges carrying the bridge
span.
    (4) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the COTP or the designated representative. Upon being hailed by a U.S.
Coast Guard or other law enforcement vessel by siren, radio, flashing
light, or other means the operator of a vessel shall proceed as
directed.
    (5) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the RNA
shall request permission to do so by contacting the COTP at 203-354-
4195, or VTS NY via VHF Channel 13 or 16.
    (d) Enforcement Period: The RNA will be enforced from 3 a.m. on
Monday, July 12, 2010, to 11:30 p.m. on Saturday, August 7, 2010.

    Dated: June 4, 2010.
D.A. Neptun,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2010-16371 Filed 7-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 69646-69647]
[DOCID:fr19no08-84]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0416; FRL-8388[dash]4]

Chromated Arsenicals, Pentachlorophenol, Creosote Reregistration
Eligibility Decisions; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (REDs) for the pesticides chromated arsenicals
(e.g., CCA), pentachlorophenol, and creosote, collectively referred to
as ``heavy duty wood preservatives.'' The Agency's risk assessments and
other related documents also are available in the chromated arsenicals,
pentachlorophenol, and creosote Dockets. The term heavy duty wood
preservative is used to differentiate wood preservatives applied using
specialized high pressure treatment cylinders (also called ``retorts'')
from those applied using non-specialized methods (e.g., brush, dip).
The three wood preservatives are used primarily for industrial purposes
such as utility poles, pilings, and railroad ties. EPA has reviewed the
heavy duty wood preservatives through the public participation process
that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing pesticide
reregistration and tolerance reassessment decisions. Through these
programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and
safety standards.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For pesticide-specific information
contact the Chemical Review Manger identified in the Table in Unit II.
for the pesticide of interest.
    For general information contact: Lance Wormell, Antimicrobials
Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0416. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal
Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    Under section 4 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is reevaluating existing pesticides to
ensure that they meet current scientific and regulatory standards. EPA
has completed REDs for the pesticides, chromated arsenicals,
pentachlorophenol, and creosote under section 4(g)(2)(A) of FIFRA.
These heavy duty wood preservatives are applied using specialized high
pressure treatment cylinders (also called ``retorts'') and treated
products are used primarily for industrial purposes such as utility
poles, pilings, and railroad ties. EPA has determined that the data
base to support reregistration is substantially complete and that
products containing chromated arsenicals, pentachlorophenol, and
creosote are eligible for reregistration, provided the risks are
mitigated either in the manner described in the REDs or by other means
that achieve equivalent risk reduction. Upon submission of any required
product specific data under section 4(g)(2)(B) of FIFRA and any
necessary changes to the registration and labeling (either to address
concerns identified in the REDs or as a result of product specific
data), EPA will make final reregistration decisions under section
4(g)(2)(C) of FIFRA for products containing chromated arsenicals,
pentachlorophenol, and creosote.

      Table 1.--Reregistration Eligibility Decision Dockets Opening
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Chemical Review
   Registration Case Name and                         Manager, Telephone
             Number                Docket ID Number   Number, and E-mail
                                                            Address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chromated arsenicals, 0132        EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-02  Lance Wormell,
                                   50<PHONE_NUMBER>,
                                                      wormell.lance@epa.
                                                       gov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pentachlorophenol, 2505           EPA-HQ-OPP -2004-   Diane Isbell,
                                   0402<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                                       ov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Creosote, 0139                    EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-02  Jacqueline
                                   48                  Campbell-
                                                       McFarlane, (703)
                                                       308-6416,
                                                      campbell-
                                                       mcfarlane.jacquel
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the chromated arsenicals, pentachlorophenol, and creosote
REDs were signed on September 25, 2008, certain components of the
document, which did not affect the final regulatory decision, were
undergoing final editing at that time. These components, including the
list of additional generic and product-specific data requirements,
appendices, minor typographical edits, and other relevant information,
have been added to the chromated arsenicals, pentachlorophenol, and
creosote RED documents.
    EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004, (69 FR 26819) (FRL-7357-9) explains that in conducting these
programs, EPA is tailoring its public participation process to be
commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide.
Due to its uses, risks, and other factors, chromated arsenicals,
pentachlorophenol, and creosote were reviewed through the full 6-Phase
process. Through this process, EPA worked extensively with stakeholders
and the public to reach the regulatory decisions for chromated
arsenicals, pentachlorophenol, and creosote.
    The reregistration program is being conducted under congressionally
mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both to make timely
decisions and to involve the public. The Agency is not issuing the
chromated arsenicals, pentachlorophenol, and creosote REDs for public
comment because they were reviewed through the full 6-phase process
which included two 60-day comment periods.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA, as amended, directs that, after
submission of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, the
Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration, before calling in product
specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering
products or taking other ``appropriate regulatory action.''

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests, antimicrobials,
heavy duty wood preservatives.

    Dated: November 12, 2008.
 Joan Harrigan Farrelly,
Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-27307 Filed 11-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 118 (Thursday, June 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36907-36910]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89062; File No. SR-CBOE-2020-050]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rules 5.37 and 5.73

June 12, 2020.
    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 June 3, 2020, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe Options'') proposes
to amend Rules 5.37 and 5.73. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided below.
(additions are italicized; deletions are [bracketed])
* * * * *

Rules of Cboe Exchange, Inc.

* * * * *
Rule 5.37. Automated Improvement Mechanism (``AIM'' or ``AIM Auction'')
    A Trading Permit Holder (the ``Initiating TPH'') may electronically
submit for execution an order it represents as agent (``Agency Order'')
against principal interest or a solicited order(s) [(except for an
order for the account of any Market-Maker with an appointment in the
applicable class on the Exchange)] (an ``Initiating Order'') provided
it submits the Agency Order for electronic execution into an AIM
Auction pursuant to this Rule. For purposes of this Rule, the term
``NBBO'' means the national best bid or national best offer at the
particular point in time applicable to the reference, and the term
``Initial NBBO'' means the national best bid or national best offer at
the time an Auction is initiated. Bulk messages are not eligible for
AIM.
* * * * *
    (c) AIM Auction Process. Upon receipt of an Agency Order that meets
the conditions in paragraphs (a) and (b), the AIM Auction process
commences.
    (1)-(4) No change.
    (5) AIM Auction Responses. [All Users] Any User other than the
Initiating TPH (the System rejects a response with the same EFID as the
Initiating Order) may submit responses to an AIM Auction that are
properly marked specifying price, size, side of the market, and the
Auction ID for the AIM Auction to which the User is submitting the
response. An AIM response may only participate in the AIM Auction with
the Auction ID specified in the response.
* * * * *
Rule 5.73. FLEX Automated Improvement Mechanism (``FLEX AIM'' or ``FLEX
AIM Auction'')
    A FLEX Trader (the ``Initiating FLEX Trader'') may electronically
submit for execution an order (which may be a simple or complex order)
it represents as agent (``Agency Order'') against principal interest or
a solicited order(s) [(except, if the Agency Order is a simple order,
for an order for the account of any FLEX Market-Maker with an
appointment in the applicable FLEX Option class on the Exchange)] (an
``Initiating Order'') provided it submits the Agency Order for
electronic execution into a FLEX AIM Auction pursuant to this Rule.
* * * * *
    (c) FLEX AIM Auction Process. Upon receipt of an Agency Order that
meets the conditions in paragraphs (a) and (b), the FLEX AIM Auction
process commences.
    (1)-(4) No change.
    (5) FLEX AIM Responses. Any FLEX Trader other than the Initiating
FLEX Trader (the System rejects a response with the same EFID as the
Initiating Order) may submit responses to a FLEX AIM Auction that are
properly marked specifying price, size, side, and the Auction ID for
the FLEX AIM Auction to which the FLEX Trader is submitting the
response. A FLEX AIM response may only participate in the FLEX AIM
Auction with the Auction ID specified in the response.
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to permit orders for the accounts of Market-
Makers with an appointment in the applicable class to be solicited for
the Initiating Order \3\ submitted for execution against an Agency
Order in a proprietary index option class into a simple AIM Auction
pursuant to Rule 5.37 or a simple FLEX AIM Auction pursuant to Rule
5.73. Currently, the introductory paragraphs of Rules 5.37 and 5.73
prohibit orders for the accounts of Market-Makers with an appointment
in the applicable class to be solicited to execute against the Agency
Order in a simple AIM or FLEX AIM Auction, respectively.\4\ This
provision was initially included in Rules regarding these auctions
because the Exchange initially only permitted appointed Market-Makers
(and TPHs representing customers at the top of the Book) to submit
responses to AIM and FLEX Auctions. However, the Exchange now permits
any user to submit responses to simple AIM and FLEX AIM Auctions.\5\
Therefore, while market participants other than appointed Market-Makers
may contribute liquidity to these crossing auctions as either contra
orders or responses, appointed Market-Makers, who are the primary
source of liquidity on the Exchange in

their appointed classes, are limited in the manner in which they may
provide liquidity to these auctions. Given that contra orders that
comprise Initiating Orders may be allocated a percentage of the Agency
Order at the conclusion of the auctions, the limited ability of
appointed Market-Makers to participate in simple AIM and FLEX AIM
Auctions may reduce the execution opportunities for these liquidity
providers, which execution opportunities are available to other market
participants who may be solicited or submit responses. The Exchange
believes providing appointed Market-Makers with an additional way to
participate in electronic auctions will expand available liquidity for
these auctions, which may increase execution and price improvement
opportunities for customers' orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The ``Initiating Order'' is the order comprised of principal
interest or a solicited order(s) submitted to trade against the
order the submitting Trading Permit Holder (the ``Initiating TPH''
or ``Initiating FLEX Trader,'' as applicable) represents as agent
(the ``Agency Order'').
    \4\ The proposed rule change amends the introductory paragraph
of Rule 5.73 to add an end quotation market to the defined term
``Initiating FLEX Trader'' in the parenthetical, which was
inadvertently omitted.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87072 (September 24,
2019), 84 FR 51673 (September 30, 2019) (SR-CBOE-2019-045).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No similar restriction applies to crossing transactions in open
outcry trading.\6\ Brokers seeking liquidity to execute against
customer orders on the trading floor regularly solicit appointed
Market-Makers in the applicable class for this liquidity, as they are
generally the primary source of liquidity in a class (as noted above).
Therefore, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will further
align open outcry and electronic crossing auctions and the execution
and price improvement opportunities available in both auctions by
permitting the same participants to be solicited as contras in both
types of auctions across all classes at all times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rules 5.86 and 5.87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As of March 16, 2020, the Exchange suspended open outcry trading to
help prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus and began operating in
an all-electronic configuration.\7\ As a result, the Exchange adopted a
temporary rule change to permit Market-Makers to be solicited for
electronic crossing transactions in its exclusively listed index
options when the Exchange's trading floor was inoperable. The Exchange
believed this would help ensure the same sources of liquidity for
customer orders that executed in open outcry would be available for
those orders in an electronic-only environment.\8\ The Exchange
believed not permitting Market-Makers to participate as contras could
have created a risk that brokers may have difficulty finding sufficient
liquidity to fill their customer orders that may currently be traded
against orders from solicited Market-Makers appointed in the applicable
class. For example, when the Exchange operates in its normal hybrid
manner (with electronic and open outcry trading), if a customer order
is not fully executable against electronic bids and offers, a floor
broker can attempt to execute the order, or remainder thereof, on the
trading floor, where the liquidity to trade with this remainder is
generally provided by Market-Makers in the open outcry trading crowd.
Additionally, brokers may solicit liquidity from upstairs Market-Maker
firms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange continues to operate in an all-electronic
environment, but currently plans to reopen its trading floor on June
8, 2020.
    \8\ See Rule 5.24(e)(1)(A); see also Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 88886 (May 15, 2020), 85 FR 31008 (May 21, 2020) (SR-
CBOE-2020-047).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes appointed Market-Makers should have the
ability to provide liquidity to these electronic auctions, including
when the Exchange is operating in its normal hybrid trading
environment. Market-Makers are subject to quoting obligations and must
expend resources to comply with these obligations to provide liquidity
to the lit market. Given these additional costs and obligations, the
Exchange does not believe these Market-Makers should have fewer
execution opportunities with respect to volume submitted for execution
through AIM auctions and not for electronic execution against interest
in the book. The Exchange believes there is no reason to restrict
Market-Makers' ability to provide liquidity into electronic auctions
when they are able to similarly provide that liquidity in open outcry
trading. By permitting brokers to solicit primary liquidity providers
in a class for electronic auctions, regardless of whether the trading
floor is operational, the Exchange believes brokers will be able to
more efficiently locate liquidity to fill their customer orders,
particularly during times of volatility, which may create additional
execution and price improvement opportunities for customers at all
times.
    Appointed Market-Makers frequently serve as contra parties to
crossing transactions on the trading floor. For example, during the
last week of February 2020 (when the trading floor was open), over 70%
of open outcry trades (consisting of over 30% of volume) across all
classes executed on the trading floor consisted of a crossing
transaction that included an order of a Market-Maker one side of the
transaction. This demonstrates the importance of the liquidity
appointed Market-Makers to the market with respect to crossing
transactions, which they are currently unable to do with respect to
electronic crossing transactions.
    The Exchange notes solicited orders submitted as the Initiating
Order for AIM Auctions are almost always comprised of orders for the
accounts of away market-makers. For example, in April of 2020,
approximately 99.6% of the orders submitted into all AIM Auctions had
Initiating Orders comprised of orders for accounts of away market-
makers, making up approximately 86.2% of the volume executed through
AIM auctions. The Exchange understands these away market-makers often
serve as both appointed Market-Makers on the Exchange and market-makers
on other options exchanges, and thus have accounts for both purposes.
These firms, as a result, can use their accounts for their away market-
maker activities for being solicited with respect to AIM Auctions.
Therefore, the Exchange believes the current restriction has a negative
impact on the ability of firms that serve as Market-Makers on the
Exchange but not other options exchanges, as well as Market-Makers for
single or exclusively listed classes, to participate in AIM Auctions.
During April 2020, when Initiating Orders could be comprised of orders
for accounts of appointed Market-Makers pursuant to a temporary rule,
while approximately 81.5% of the orders in exclusively listed index
options submitted into all AIM Auctions had Initiating Orders comprised
of orders for accounts of away market-makers, these orders represented
only approximately 12.2% of the volume executed through AIM Auctions.
The majority of the volume was represented by orders for accounts of
appointed Market-Makers. This demonstrates the difficulty brokers have
to find sufficient interest to fill customer orders in these classes
when appointed Market-Makers may not be solicited. The Exchange
believes there is no reason to not permit Initiating Orders to be
comprised of orders for the accounts of appointed Market-Makers in all
classes at all times. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change
will provide all firms that act as Market-Makers on the Exchange in all
classes with consistent access to AIM Auctions, which may further
increase liquidity in these auctions and price improvement
opportunities for customers.
    The proposed rule change also amends Rules 5.37(c)(5) and
5.73(c)(5) to codify that any User or FLEX Trader, respectively, other
than the Initiating TPH or FLEX Trader, respectively, may submit
responses to AIM and FLEX AIM Auctions. As set forth in Rules 5.37(e)
and 5.73(e), the Initiating Order may receive an entitlement of 40% or
50% of the Agency Order. The Exchange believes it is appropriate to not
permit the Initiating TPH or Initiating FLEX Trader, as applicable, to
also submit

responses in order to try to trade against a larger percentage of the
Agency Order. This is consistent with allocation rules, pursuant to
which the Initiating Order may only receive more than 40% or 50%, as
applicable, of the Agency Order if there are remaining contracts after
all other interest has executed.
    The Rule change also notes that the System will reject a response
with the same EFID \9\ as the Initiating Order. The Exchange notes that
orders for the same User may have different EFIDs. However, the rule
prohibits all responses from the same User, even with different EFIDs.
The System is currently only able to reject responses with the same
EFID as the Initiating Order, which is why that is specified in the
proposed rule. If the same User submits a response to an auction in
which that same User had an order comprising the Initiating Order (even
with a different EFID), the Exchange may take regulatory action against
that User for a violation of the proposed rule. The Exchange currently
applies this restriction to simple AIM and FLEX AIM Auctions, but it
was inadvertently omitted from the Rules, so the proposed rule change
adds transparency to the Rules. This restriction is also currently in
the Rules related to AIM for complex orders, so the proposed rule
change adds consistency to the rules of Exchange auctions.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Rule 1.1, which defines EFID as an Executing Firm ID.
    \10\ See Rule 5.38(c)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\11\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \12\ requirements that the rules of an 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 investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \13\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change will
benefit investors. The proposed rule change will provide the primary
liquidity providers on the Exchange with an additional way to
participate in electronic auctions. Additionally, by permitting brokers
to solicit primary liquidity providers in a class for electronic
auctions, regardless of whether the trading floor is operational, the
Exchange believes brokers will be able to more efficiently locate
liquidity to fill their customer orders, particularly during times of
volatility. As a result, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
will likely expand available liquidity for these auctions, which may
create additional execution and price improvement opportunities for
customers at all times, which ultimately benefits investors.
    The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change will promote
just and equitable principles of trade and remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because it will further align open outcry and electronic
crossing auctions and the execution and price improvement opportunities
available in both auctions by permitting the same participants to be
solicited as contras in both types of auctions across all classes.
Currently, appointed Market-Makers may be solicited with respect to
crossing transactions on the trading floor but may not be solicited
with respect to electronic crossing transactions. The Exchange believes
there is no reason to restrict Market-Makers ability to provide
liquidity into electronic auctions when they are able to similarly
provide that liquidity in open outcry trading. The Exchange notes the
electronic crossing price improvement auction of another options
exchange currently permits orders for the accounts of appointed market-
makers to be solicited as the contra orders for that auction.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Arca'') Rule 971.1NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers because it will be permit orders for accounts of
appointed Market-Makers to be solicited in the same manner as orders
for the accounts of all other market participants. Currently, all
market participants other than appointed Market-Makers may be solicited
as the contra and submit responses in AIM Auctions, while appointed
Market-Makers are restricted to only submitting responses. Given the
additional costs and obligations associated with being an appointed
Market-Maker, the Exchange does not believe these Market-Makers should
have fewer execution opportunities with respect to volume submitted for
execution through AIM auctions and not for electronic execution against
interest in the book. This is particularly true for Market-Makers that
do not serve in a market-making capacity on other exchanges or that
serve as a Market-Maker in a singly or exclusively listed class. While
it is possible for an order to be solicited for the account of an away
market-maker in a singly or exclusively listed class, it is less common
given the order must be for market-making purposes with respect to that
class. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will provide all
Market-Makers on the Exchange with the same ability to participate in
AIM in all classes at all times. This may further increase execution
and price improvement opportunities for customers, particularly those
that submit orders in singly or exclusively listed classes where the
ability for away market-makers to provide liquidity is limited.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to codify that any
User or FLEX Trader, respectively, other than the Initiating TPH or
FLEX Trader, respectively, may submit responses to AIM and FLEX AIM
Auctions will promote just and equitable principles of trade so that
market participants may not trade against a larger percentage of the
Agency Order than permitted by the rules. The proposed rule change is
consistent with allocation rules. The proposed rule change is
consistent with current functionality and the rules related to AIM for
complex orders, and therefore adds consistency and transparency to the
Rules, which ultimately benefits investors.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because it provides the same execution
opportunities in AIM Auctions to appointed Market-Makers that are

currently available to all other market participants. Additionally, the
proposed rule change it will further align open outcry and electronic
crossing auctions and the execution and price improvement opportunities
available in both auctions by permitting the same participants to be
solicited as contras in both types of auctions across all classes. The
Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it relates to orders
submitted into an auction mechanism on the Exchange. Additionally, the
Exchange notes that the rules of at least one other options exchange
permits orders for the accounts of appointed market-makers to be
solicited as contra orders for that exchange's electronic crossing
price improvement auction.\15\ The Exchange believes the proposed rule
change may improve price competition within AIM Auctions, because the
primary liquidity providers will be able to increase participation in
AIM Auctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Arca Rule 971.1NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change to codify that any
User or FLEX Trader, respectively, other than the Initiating TPH or
FLEX Trader, respectively, may submit responses to AIM and FLEX AIM
Auctions will not impose any burden on intramarket competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act,
because it codifies current system functionality. Additionally, it
applies to all market participants that submit orders into AIM
Auctions. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will not
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, because it
relates solely to which market participants may submit responses into
Exchange auction. The proposed rule change is consistent with current
allocation rules and the rules related to AIM for complex orders, and
therefore adds consistency and transparency to the Rules, which
ultimately benefits investors.

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

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

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2020-050 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-CBOE-2020-050. 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-CBOE-2020-050, and should be submitted
on or before July 9, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-13122 Filed 6-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 203 (Monday, October 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56231-56234]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22833]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87299; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2019-016]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
the Fee Schedule Applicable to Members and Non-Members of the Exchange
Pursuant to BYX Rules 15.1(a) and (c)

October 15, 2019.
    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 October 1, 2019, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``BZX'') is filing
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a proposed
rule change to amend the fee schedule applicable to Members and non-
Members \3\ of the Exchange pursuant to BYX Rules 15.1(a) and (c). The
text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Member is defined as ``any registered broker or dealer
that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See Exchange
Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/byx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to adopt a new Non-
Displayed Volume Tier.
    The Exchange first notes that it operates in a highly-competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the
Exchange is only one of 13 registered equities exchanges, as well as a
number of alternative trading systems and other off-exchange venues
that do not have similar self-regulatory responsibilities under the
Exchange Act, to which market participants may direct their order flow.
Based on publicly available information,\4\ no single registered
equities exchange has more than 21% of the market share. Thus, in such
a low-concentrated and highly competitive market, no single equities
exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of order
flow. The Exchange in particular operates a ``Taker-Maker'' model
whereby it pays credits to members that remove liquidity and assesses
fees to those that add liquidity. The Exchange's Fees Schedule sets
forth the standard rebates and rates applied per share for orders that
provide and remove liquidity, respectively. Particularly, for
securities at or above $1.00, the Exchange provides a standard rebate
of $0.0005 per share for orders that remove liquidity and assesses a
fee of $0.0019 per share for orders that add liquidity. The Exchange
believes that the ever-shifting market share among the exchanges from
month to month

demonstrates that market participants can shift order flow, or
discontinue to reduce use of certain categories of products, in
response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces constrain the
Exchange's transaction fees, and market participants can readily trade
on competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those other venues
to be more favorable. In response to the competitive environment, the
Exchange also offers tiered pricing which provides Members
opportunities to qualify for higher rebates or reduced fees where
certain volume criteria and thresholds are met. Tiered pricing provides
incremental incentives for Members to strive for higher or different
tier levels, which provides increasingly higher or different benefits
or discounts for satisfying increasingly more stringent criteria or
different criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Cboe Global Markets, U.S. Equities Market Volume Summary
(September 30, 2019), available at https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_statistics/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, pursuant to footnote 2 of the Fees Schedule, the
Exchange offers a Mid-Point Peg Tier that provides Members an
opportunity to receive a discounted rate for orders that yield fee code
``MM'', which is appended to non-displayed orders that add liquidity
using the Mid-Point Peg order type.\5\ To qualify for a discounted rate
for such orders, pursuant to the Mid-Point Peg Tier, a Member must add
an ADAV \6\ of greater than or equal to 0.30% of the TCV \7\ for orders
yielding a fee code MM. The Exchange notes that this tier is designed
to encourage Members that provide non-displayed Mid-Point Peg liquidity
on the Exchange to increase their order flow, thereby contributing to a
deeper and more liquid market to the benefit of all market
participants. The Exchange also notes that it currently does not
provide for a similar tier that accounts for other non-displayed order
types that add liquidity. The Exchange now proposes to add such a tier
to its fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ An order yielding fee code MM is assessed a fee of $0.001
per share. See Rule 11.9(c)(9), which states that a Mid-Point Peg
order is a limit order that after entry into the System, the price
of the order is automatically adjusted by the System in response to
changes in the NBBO to be pegged to the mid-point of the NBBO, or,
alternatively, pegged to the less aggressive of the midpoint of the
NBBO or one minimum price variation inside the same side of the NBBO
as the order.
    \6\ ``ADAV'' means average daily volume calculated as the number
of shares added per day. ADAV is calculated on a monthly basis.
    \7\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
volume reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a
consolidated transaction reporting plan for the month for which the
fees apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add a new Non-Displayed
Volume Tier under footnote 2 which would provide Members an opportunity
to qualify for a fee reduction on other non-displayed orders that add
liquidity, specifically, those yielding fee code ``HA'' \8\, as well as
an additional opportunity to qualify for a fee reduction on order
yielding fee code MM. Under the proposed Non-Displayed Volume Tier, a
Member would receive a reduction in fees by $0.0004 per share for their
qualifying orders which yield fee codes HA or MM where the Member has
an ADAV that is greater or equal to 0.075% of the TCV as orders
yielding fee codes HA, MM, or ``HI''.\9\ Members that achieve the
proposed Non-Displayed Volume Tier must therefore increase their non-
displayed, liquidity adding order flow as a percentage greater than or
equal to 0.075% of the TCV as orders yielding fee codes HA, HI, or MM.
The Exchange believes the proposed fee reduction for liquidity adding
non-displayed orders will incentivize increased overall order flow to
the Book and price-improvement opportunities. The proposed tier gives
liquidity providing Members on the Exchange an additional opportunity
to receive a discounted rate. It is designed to provide Members that
provide non-displayed liquidity on the Exchange a further incentive to
contribute to a deeper, more liquid market, in turn providing
additional execution opportunities at improved prices as a result of
such increased, non-displayed liquidity. The Exchange believes that
this, in turn, benefits all Members by contributing towards a robust
and well-balanced market ecosystem. The Exchange notes the proposed
tier is available to all Members and is competitively achievable for
all Members that submit non-displayed order flow, in that all firms
that submit the requisite non-displayed order flow could compete to
meet the tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Fee code ``HA'' is appended to non-displayed orders that add
liquidity and are assessed $0.0024 per share.
    \9\ Fee code ``HI'' is appended to non-displayed orders that add
liquidity and receive a price improvement, and are assessed a fee of
$0.0030 per share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the proposed tier under footnote 2, the Exchange also
proposes to rename footnote 2 ``Non-Displayed Liquidity Incentives''
and move the existing Mid-Point Peg Tier into a distinct tier table
under footnote 2.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\10\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\11\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \12\
requirements that the rules of an 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 investors and the public interest, and, particularly, is not
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange operates in a highly-competitive market in which
market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues
if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive or
incentives to be insufficient. The proposed rule change reflects a
competitive pricing structure designed to incentivize market
participants to direct their order flow to the Exchange, which the
Exchange believes would enhance market quality to the benefit of all
Members.
    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed tier is
reasonable because it provides an additional opportunity for Members to
receive a discounted rate by reaching the proposed threshold by means
of liquidity adding non-displayed orders. The Exchange notes that
relative volume-based incentives and discounts have been widely adopted
by exchanges,\13\ including the Exchange,\14\ and are reasonable,
equitable and non-discriminatory because they are open to all members
on an equal basis and provide additional benefits or discounts that are
reasonably related to (i) the value to an exchange's market quality and
(ii) associated higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels
of liquidity provision and/or growth patterns. Additionally, as noted
above, the Exchange operates in highly competitive market. The Exchange
is only one of several equity venues to which market participants may
direct

their order flow, and it represents a small percentage of the overall
market. It is also only one of several taker-maker exchanges. Competing
equity exchanges offer similar tiered pricing structures to that of the
Exchange, including schedules of rebates and fees that apply based upon
members achieving certain volume and/or growth thresholds. These
competing pricing schedules, moreover, are presently comparable to
those that the Exchange provides, including the pricing of comparable
tiers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See e.g., The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC Rules, Equity 7, Sec.
118(a)(1), which generally provides for discounts for participants'
non-displayed orders that together reach certain thresholds of
consolidated volume.
    \14\ See e.g., Cboe BYX U.S. Equities Exchange Fee Schedule,
Footnote 1, Add/Remove Volume Tiers, which has an ADV component to
its required criteria for certain volume-adding and/or removing
orders.
    \15\ See supra note 13. For example, Nasdaq offers a rebate of
$0.0030 per share where a member with shares of liquidity provided
in all securities through one or more of its Nasdaq Market Center
MPIDs that represent more than 0.75% of Consolidated Volume during
the month and member provides a daily average of at least 5 Million
shares of non-displayed liquidity. The Exchange notes that this is
substantially similar to the proposed
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the Exchange believes the proposed Non-Display Volume
Tier is a reasonable means to encourage Members to increase their
overall non-displayed order flow to the Exchange based on increasing
their daily total added volume (ADAV) above a percentage of the total
volume (TCV). Particularly, the Exchange believes that adopting a Non-
Displayed Volume Tier based on a Member's non-displayed adding orders
will encourage non-displayed liquidity providing Members to provide for
a deeper, more liquid market, and, as a result, increased execution
opportunities at improved price levels and, thus, overall order flow.
The Exchange believes that these increases benefit all Members by
contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem.
Increased overall order flow benefits all investors by deepening the
Exchange's liquidity pool, providing greater execution incentives and
opportunities, offering additional flexibility for all investors to
enjoy cost savings, supporting the quality of price discovery,
promoting market transparency and improving investor protection. The
proposed discount (i.e., fee reduction) per share amount also does not
represent a significant departure from the rebates currently offered,
or required criteria, under the Exchange's existing tiers. For example,
the fee assessed under the existing Mid-Point Peg Tier, for which, as
stated, a Member must have a daily volume add (ADAV) of 0.30% or
greater than the TCV, is $0.0005 per share. In other words, under this
tier, Members receive a $0.0005 ``discount'' from the standard $0.001
assessed for orders yielding fee code MM, which is comparable to the
proposed $0.0004 discount offered under the proposed Non-Displayed
Volume Tier.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal represents an equitable
allocation of rebates and is not unfairly discriminatory because all
Members are eligible for the proposed Non-Displayed Volume Tier, and
would have the opportunity to meet the tier's criteria and would
receive the proposed rebate if such criteria is met. Given previous
months' data, the Exchange notes that one of its Members would have
reached this proposed tier in recent past months had the proposed tier
been in place. Accordingly, the proposed tier is designed as an
incentive to any and all Members interested in meeting the tier
criteria to submit additional non-displayed order flow to achieve the
proposed discount. Without having a view of activity on other markets
and off-exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether
this proposed rule change would definitely result in any Members
qualifying for this tier. While the Exchange has no way of predicting
with certainty how the proposed tier will impact Member activity, the
Exchange anticipates that at up to five Members will be able to compete
for and reach the proposed tier. The Exchange anticipates that these
will include multiple Member types, including liquidity providers and
broker-dealers, each providing distinct types of order flow to the
Exchange to the benefit of all market participants. For example,
broker-dealer customer order flow provides more trading opportunities,
which attracts Market Makers. Increased Market Maker activity
facilitates tighter spreads which potentially increases order flow from
other market participants. The Exchange also notes that the proposed
tier will not adversely impact any Member's pricing or their ability to
qualify for other rebate tiers. Rather, should a Member not meet the
proposed criteria, the Member will merely not receive an enhanced
rebate. Furthermore, the proposed rebate would uniformly apply to all
Members that meet the required criteria under proposed Non-Displayed
Volume Tier.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intramarket or intermarket competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Rather, as discussed above, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change would encourage the submission of additional order flow to a
public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, execution incentives
and enhanced execution opportunities, as well as price discovery and
transparency for all Members. As a result, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting
Regulation NMS of fostering competition among orders, which promotes
``more efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders,
large and small.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808, 70 FR 37495,
37498-99 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (Final Rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not impose any
burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Particularly, the proposed
change applies to all Members equally in that all Members are eligible
for the proposed tier, have a reasonable opportunity to meet the tier's
criteria and will all receive the proposed rebate if such criteria is
met. Additionally the proposed change is designed to attract additional
order flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed
tier would incentivize market participants to direct non-displayed
liquidity and, as a result, executable and price-improving order flow,
to the Exchange. Greater overall order flow benefits all market
participants on the Exchange by providing more trading opportunities
and continuing to encourage Members to send orders, thereby
contributing towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem, which
benefits all market participants.
    Next, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As previously
discussed, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market.
Members have numerous alternative venues that they may participate on
and direct their order flow, including 12 other equities exchanges and
off-exchange venues and alternative trading systems. Additionally, the
Exchange represents a small percentage of the overall market. Based on
publicly available information, no single equities exchange has more
than 21% of the market share.\17\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of option order flow.
Indeed, 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. Moreover, 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.'' \18\ The fact
that this market is competitive has also long been recognized by the
courts. In NetCoalition v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C.
Circuit stated as follows: ``[n]o one disputes that competition for
order flow is `fierce.' . . . As the SEC explained, `[i]n the U.S.
national market system, buyers and sellers of securities, and the
broker-dealers that act as their order-routing agents, have a wide
range of choices of where to route orders for execution'; [and] `no
exchange can afford to take its market share percentages for granted'
because `no exchange possesses a monopoly, regulatory or otherwise, in
the execution of order flow from broker dealers'. . . .''.\19\
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its proposed fee change
imposes any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 4.
    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
    \19\ NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525, 539 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
(quoting Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770, 74782-83 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-
21)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \20\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \21\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is 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 will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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-CboeBYX-2019-016 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-CboeBYX-2019-016. 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-CboeBYX-2019-016 and should be submitted
on or before November 12, 2019.

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

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-22833 Filed 10-18-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 139 (Friday, July 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 33899]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15333]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC17-230-000]

AEP Texas Central Company; AEP Texas North Company; Notice of
Request for Waiver

    Take notice that on July 14, 2017, AEP Texas Central Company and
AEP Texas North Company filed a request for waiver of requirement to
file FERC Form No. 3-Q, as required by 18 CFR 141.400.
    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, 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 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 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
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
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 24, 2017.

    Dated: July 17, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-15333 Filed 7-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 151 (Monday, August 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 46776]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19209]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission held a Closed Meeting on Wednesday, August 1,
2012 at 2:30 p.m.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), 4, 8 and 9(A) and (B) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(4),
(8) and 9(A) and (B) permit consideration of the scheduled matter at
the Closed Meeting. Certain staff members who had an interest in the
matter were present.
    Commissioner Paredes, as duty officer, voted to consider the item
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session, and determined that
no earlier notice thereof was possible
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting on August 1, 2012 was a
matter related to a financial institution.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 1, 2012.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-19209 Filed 8-2-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P