[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 117 (Monday, June 18, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28285-28292]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12935]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83419; File No. SR-PEARL-2018-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX
PEARL Fee Schedule

June 12, 2018.
    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on May 31, 2018, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX PEARL''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') a 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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, 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 amend the Add/Remove Tiered Rebates/Fees
set forth in Section 1(a) of the Fee Schedule to (i) modify the volume
thresholds applicable to transactions for (A) Priority Customers,\3\
(B) MIAX PEARL Market Makers,\4\ and (C) Non-Priority Customers, Firms,
Broker-Dealers and Non-MIAX PEARL Market Makers (collectively herein
``Professional Members''); (ii) add a new Tier 6 and corresponding
rebates and fees applicable to transactions for Priority Customers and
Professional Members; (iii) decrease Maker (as defined below) rebates
in certain Tiers (as defined below) for options transactions in Penny
classes (as defined below) and Non-Penny classes (as defined below) for
Priority Customers and Professional Members; (iv) increase Taker (as
defined below) fees in all Tiers for options transactions in Penny
Classes for Priority Customers, and increase the Taker fees in Tier 2
applicable to options transactions in Penny and Non-Penny classes for
Professional Members; (v) provide alternative Maker rebates for options
transactions in all classes for Professional Members, provided that the
Member meets certain volume criteria; and (vi) create new tiered fee
structures for Taker fees in the symbols SPY, QQQ, IWM and VXX for
Priority Customers. The Exchange also proposes to make certain non-
substantive, technical corrections to the Fee Schedule, as described
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that (i) is
not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See Exchange Rule
100, including Interpretations and Policies .01.
    \4\ ``Market Maker'' means a Member registered with the Exchange
for the purpose of making markets in options contracts traded on the
Exchange. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule and
Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently assesses transaction rebates and fees to all
market participants which are based upon the total monthly volume
executed by the Member \5\ on MIAX PEARL in the relevant, respective
origin type (not including Excluded Contracts) \6\ expressed as a
percentage of TCV.\7\ In addition, the per contract transaction rebates
and fees are applied retroactively to all eligible volume for that
origin type once the respective threshold tier (``Tier'') has been
reached by the Member. The Exchange aggregates the volume of Members
and their Affiliates.\8\ Members that place resting liquidity, i.e.,
orders resting on

the book of the MIAX PEARL System,\9\ are paid the specified ``maker''
rebate (each a ``Maker''), and Members that execute against resting
liquidity are assessed the specified ``taker'' fee (each a ``Taker'').
For opening transactions and ABBO uncrossing transactions, per contract
transaction rebates and fees are waived for all market participants.
Finally, Members are assessed lower transaction fees and receive lower
rebates for order executions in standard option classes in the Penny
Pilot Program \10\ (``Penny classes'') than for order executions in
standard option classes which are not in the Penny Pilot Program
(``Non-Penny classes''), where Members are assessed higher transaction
fees and receive higher rebates. Transaction rebates and fees in
Section (1)(a) of the Fee Schedule are currently assessed according to
the following tables:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Member'' means an individual or organization that is
registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of the Exchange
Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See the Definitions Section of
the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100.
    \6\ ``Excluded Contracts'' means any contracts routed to an away
market for execution. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
    \7\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
total national volume in those classes listed on MIAX PEARL for the
month for which the fees apply, excluding consolidated volume
executed during the period time in which the Exchange experiences an
``Exchange System Disruption'' (solely in the option classes of the
affected Matching Engine (as defined below)). The term Exchange
System Disruption, which is defined in the Definitions section of
the Fee Schedule, means an outage of a Matching Engine or collective
Matching Engines for a period of two consecutive hours or more,
during trading hours. The term Matching Engine, which is also
defined in the Definitions section of the Fee Schedule, is a part of
the MIAX PEARL electronic system that processes options orders and
trades on a symbol-by-symbol basis. Some Matching Engines will
process option classes with multiple root symbols, and other
Matching Engines may be dedicated to one single option root symbol
(for example, options on SPY may be processed by one single Matching
Engine that is dedicated only to SPY). A particular root symbol may
only be assigned to a single designated Matching Engine. A
particular root symbol may not be assigned to multiple Matching
Engines. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and appropriate
to select two consecutive hours as the amount of time necessary to
constitute an Exchange System Disruption, as two hours equates to
approximately 1.4% of available trading time per month. The Exchange
notes that the term ``Exchange System Disruption'' and its meaning
have no applicability outside of the Fee Schedule, as it is used
solely for purposes of calculating volume for the threshold tiers in
the Fee Schedule. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \8\ ``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at least
75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each firm's
Form BD, Schedule A, or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an
Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an Appointed
Market Maker). An ``Appointed Market Maker'' is a MIAX PEARL Market
Maker (who does not otherwise have a corporate affiliation based
upon common ownership with an EEM) that has been appointed by an EEM
and an ``Appointed EEM'' is an EEM (who does not otherwise have a
corporate affiliation based upon common ownership with a MIAX PEARL
Market Maker) that has been appointed by a MIAX PEARL Market Maker,
pursuant to the process described in the Fee Schedule. See the
Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \9\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79778 (January 12,
2017), 82 FR 6662 (January 19, 2017) (SR-PEARL-2016-01).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Per contract rebates/     Per contract rebates/
                                                               fees for penny classes      fees for non-penny
            Origin                 Tier      Volume criteria --------------------------          classes
                                                (percent)                              -------------------------
                                                                 Maker       Taker *       Maker        Taker
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority Customer............            1  0.00-0.05.......      ($0.25)        $0.42      ($0.85)        $0.87
                                         2  Above 0.05-0.35.       (0.40)         0.42       (1.05)         0.86
                                         3  Above 0.35--0.50       (0.50)         0.42       (1.05)         0.85
                                         4  Above 0.50-0.75.       (0.53)         0.42       (1.05)         0.84
                                         5  Above 0.75......       (0.54)         0.42       (1.05)         0.84
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For all Penny Classes other than SPY, QQQ, IWM, and VXX. For SPY, the Priority Customer Taker Fee shall be
  $0.38 per contract. For QQQ, IWM, and VXX, the Priority Customer Taker Fee shall be $0.40 per contract.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Per contract rebates/     Per contract rebates/
                                                               fees for penny classes      fees for non-penny
            Origin                 Tier      Volume criteria --------------------------          classes
                                                (percent)                              -------------------------
                                                                 Maker        Taker       Maker **     Taker **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All MIAX PEARL Market Makers.            1  0.00-0.05.......      ($0.25)        $0.50      ($0.30)        $1.05
                                         2  Above 0.05-0.25.       (0.40)         0.50       (0.30)         1.05
                                         3  Above 0.25-0.50.       (0.40)         0.48       (0.60)         1.03
                                         4  Above 0.50-0.75        (0.47)         0.43       (0.65)         1.02
                                             or Above 2.0 in
                                             SPY.
                                         5  Above 0.75-1.00.       (0.48)         0.43       (0.70)         1.02
                                         6  Above 1.00......       (0.48)         0.43       (0.85)         1.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Per contract rebates/     Per contract rebates/
                                                               fees for penny classes      fees for non-penny
            Origin                 Tier      Volume criteria --------------------------          classes
                                                (percent)                              -------------------------
                                                                 Maker        Taker       Maker **     Taker **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Priority Customer, Firm,             1  0.00-0.10.......      ($0.25)        $0.50      ($0.30)        $1.05
 BD, and Non-MIAX PEARL                  2  Above 0.10-0.50.       (0.40)         0.49       (0.60)         1.04
 Market Makers.
                                         3  Above 0.50-0.75.       (0.45)         0.48       (0.65)         1.04
                                         4  Above 0.75-1.00.       (0.48)         0.48       (0.70)         1.04
                                         5  Above 1.00......       (0.48)         0.48       (0.85)         1.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Members may qualify for the Maker Rebate and the Taker Fee associated with the highest Tier for transactions
  in Non-Penny classes if the Member executes more than 0.30% volume in Non-Penny classes, not including
  Excluded Contracts, as compared to the TCV in all MIAX PEARL listed option classes. For purposes of qualifying
  for such rates, the Exchange will aggregate the volume transacted by Members and their Affiliates in the
  following Origin types in Non-Penny classes: MIAX PEARL Market Makers, and Non-Priority Customer, Firm, BD,
  and Non-MIAX PEARL Market Makers.

Volume Threshold Tiers
    The Exchange proposes to modify the monthly volume thresholds
applicable to (i) Priority Customers, (ii) MIAX PEARL Market Makers,
and (iii) Professional Members.
Priority Customers
    Specifically, with regard to transactions for Priority Customers,
the Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold of Tier 1's
volume criteria from 0.00% up to 0.05% of the total monthly volume
executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts,
divided by the TCV, to become above 0.00% up to 0.10% of the total
monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL, not including
Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold
of Priority Customer Tier 2's volume criteria from above 0.05% up to
0.35% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above
0.10% up to 0.35% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on
MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV. The
Exchange does not propose any adjustment to Tier 3 or Tier 4 volume
thresholds for Priority Customer transactions.
    The Exchange further proposes to adjust the calculation threshold
of Priority Customer Tier 5's volume criteria from above 0.75% of the
total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL, not
including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above 0.75%
up to 1.25% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX
PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    The Exchange proposes to add a new Tier 6 threshold applicable to
all Priority Customer transactions and corresponding rebates and fees.
The new Tier 6 threshold volume criteria shall be calculated as above
1.25% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV. The new Tier 6
rebates and fees shall be as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Priority customer                                  Per contract rebates/fees for penny classes       Per contract rebates/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    fees for non-penny
                                                                                QQQ, IWM,            classes
                 Tier                        Volume criteria (percent)         Maker       Taker *     SPY taker    VXX taker  -------------------------
                                                                                11           12         Maker        Taker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.....................................  Above 1.25........................      ($0.54)        $0.43        $0.38        $0.40      ($1.05)        $0.84
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For all Penny Classes other than SPY, QQQ, IWM, and VXX.

    The Exchange believes that the proposed modified monthly volume
thresholds, as well as the new rebates and fees in Tier 6, will
continue to provide appropriate incentives for Exchange Members to
provide aggressive liquidity in Priority Customer transactions so that
they can achieve sufficient rebates and lower fees. The Exchange
believes that this amount of volume should continue to make the MIAX
PEARL marketplace an attractive venue where the Exchange's Members are
incentivized to submit Priority Customer orders, deepening and
enhancing the quality of the MIAX PEARL marketplace. This should in
turn provide more trading opportunities and tighter spreads for other
market participants and result in a corresponding increase in order
flow from such other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Proposed fee change to be discussed further below.
    \12\ Proposed fee change to be discussed further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Market Makers
    The Exchange proposes to modify the monthly volume thresholds
applicable to the Exchange's Market Makers and to adjust the thresholds
in all Tiers. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to adjust the
calculation threshold of Tier 1's volume criteria from 0.00% up to
0.05% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above
0.00% up to 0.15% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on
MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold
of Tier 2's volume criteria for Market Makers from above 0.05% up to
0.25% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above
0.15% up to 0.40% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on
MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    The Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold of Tier
3's volume criteria for Market Makers from above 0.25% up to 0.50% of
the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL, not
including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above 0.40%
up to 0.65% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX
PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    The Exchange additionally proposes to adjust the calculation
threshold of Tier 4's volume criteria for Market Makers from above
0.50% up to 0.75% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on
MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV to
become above 0.65% up to 1.00% of the total monthly volume executed by
the Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by
the TCV.
    The Exchange also proposes to modify the alternative Volume
Criteria to Tier 4 based upon the total monthly volume executed by a
Market Maker solely in SPY options on MIAX PEARL, expressed as a
percentage of total consolidated national volume in SPY options.
Pursuant to this alternative Volume Criteria, a Market Maker could
currently reach the Tier 4 threshold if the Market Maker's total
executed monthly volume in SPY options on MIAX PEARL is above 2.0% of
total consolidated national monthly volume in SPY options. The Exchange
now proposes that a Market Maker can reach the Tier 4 threshold if the
Market Maker's total executed monthly volume in SPY options on MIAX
PEARL is above 2.25% of the total consolidated national monthly volume
in SPY options. The Exchange believes that the proposed modification to
the alternative Volume Criteria threshold in Tier 4 for Market Makers
in SPY options (increasing the threshold amount from 2.0% to 2.25%)
will continue to provide a sufficient incentive to those Market Makers
that concentrate their trading activity in limited options classes
(such as SPY options) to reach a higher tier. The alternative Volume
Criteria threshold in Tier 4 for Market Makers in SPY options is also
discussed in the note beneath the transaction fee tables, which
provides more explanation on the alternative threshold. Accordingly,
the Exchange also proposes to change the threshold amount (increasing
it from 2.0% to 2.25%) in that note beneath the tables. The Exchange
also proposes to make another non-substantive technical correction to
that same sentence in the note beneath the transaction fee tables to
correct an inaccurate cross-reference. Presently, the note reads ``[i]n
Tier 3 for MIAX PEARL Market Makers, the alternative Volume Criteria .
. .'' However, the Tier referenced in that note should be to Tier 4,
not Tier 3. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to change the reference
to Tier 4. This particular proposed change does not impact any fees
substantively and only serves to identify the correct Tier.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold
of Tier 5's volume criteria for Market Makers from above 0.75% up to
1.00% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above
1.00% up to 1.40% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on
MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    The Exchange additionally proposes to adjust the calculation
threshold of Tier 6's volume criteria for Market Makers from above
1.00% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above
1.40% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
Professional Members
    The Exchange proposes to modify the monthly volume thresholds
applicable to all Professional Members to adjust the thresholds in all
Tiers as well as to add a new Tier 6 threshold and corresponding Tier 6
rebates and fees. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to adjust the
calculation threshold of Tier 1's volume criteria for Professional
Members from 0.00% up to 0.10% of the total monthly volume executed by
the Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by
the TCV, to become above 0.00% up to 0.15% of the total monthly volume
executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts,
divided by the TCV.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold
of Tier 2's volume criteria for Professional Members from above 0.10%
up to

0.50% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become above
0.15% up to 0.40% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on
MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV.
    Further, the Exchange proposes to adjust the calculation threshold
of Tier 3's volume criteria for Professional Members from above 0.50%
up to 0.75% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX
PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become
above 0.40% up to 0.65% of the total monthly volume executed by the
Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the
TCV.
    The Exchange additionally proposes to adjust the calculation
threshold of Tier 4's volume criteria for Professional Members from
above 0.75% up to 1.00% of the total monthly volume executed by the
Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the
TCV, to become above 0.65% up to 1.00% of the total monthly volume
executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts,
divided by the TCV.
    The Exchange additionally proposes to adjust the calculation
threshold of Tier 5's volume criteria for Professional Members from
above 1.00% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX
PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV, to become
above 1.00% up to 1.40% of the total monthly volume executed by the
Member on MIAX PEARL, not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the
TCV.
    The Exchange proposes to add a new Tier 6 threshold applicable to
all MIAX PEARL Professional Members and corresponding rebates and fees.
The new Tier 6 threshold volume criteria shall be calculated as above
1.40% of the total monthly volume executed by the Member on MIAX PEARL,
not including Excluded Contracts, divided by the TCV. The new Tier 6
rebates and fees shall be as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Non-priority customer, firm, BD, and non-MIAX    Per contract rebates/fees for   Per contract rebates/fees for
               PEARL market makers                         penny classes                 non-penny classes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Volume criteria
           Tier                  (percent)             Maker           Taker         Maker **        Taker **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6........................  Above 1.40...........         ($0.48)           $0.48         ($0.85)           $1.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Members may qualify for the Maker Rebate and the Taker Fee associated with the highest Tier for transactions
  in Non-Penny classes if the Member executes more than 0.30% volume in Non-Penny classes, not including
  Excluded Contracts, as compared to the TCV in all MIAX PEARL listed option classes. For purposes of qualifying
  for such rates, the Exchange will aggregate the volume transacted by Members and their Affiliates in the
  following Origin types in Non-Penny classes: MIAX PEARL Market Makers, and Non-Priority Customer, Firm, BD,
  and Non-MIAX PEARL Market Makers.

    The Exchange believes that the modified new monthly thresholds and
new rebates and fees in Tier 6 should continue to provide sufficient
incentives for Professional Members to aggressively provide liquidity
so that they can achieve higher rebates and fees. The Exchange believes
that this volume should continue to make the MIAX PEARL marketplace an
attractive venue where the Professional Members are incentivized to
submit orders, deepening and enhancing the quality of the MIAX PEARL
marketplace. This should in turn provide more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads for other market participants and result in a
corresponding increase in order flow from such other market
participants.
Maker Rebates
    The Exchange proposes to decrease the Maker rebate amounts in
certain Tiers as described below for Penny and Non-Penny classes for
Priority Customers and Professional Members.
Priority Customers
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to decrease the Maker rebates
in Tiers 3, 4 and 5 for Penny classes and in Tiers 2 through 5 in Non-
Penny classes for Priority Customer transactions. For options
transactions in Penny classes, the Exchange proposes to decrease the
Maker rebate in Tier 3 from ($0.50) to ($0.45), in Tier 4 from ($0.53)
to ($0.52) and in Tier 5 from ($0.54) to ($0.53). For Priority Customer
options transactions in Non-Penny classes, the Exchange proposes to
decrease the Maker rebates in Tier 2 from ($1.05) to ($0.95), in Tier 3
from ($1.05) to ($1.00), in Tier 4 from ($1.05) to ($1.03) and in Tier
5 from ($1.05) to ($1.04).
Professional Members
    The Exchange proposes to decrease the Maker rebates applicable to
Professional Members in Tiers 3 and 4 in Penny classes and in Tiers 2
through 5 in Non-Penny classes. For options transactions in Penny
classes, the Exchange proposes to decrease the Maker rebates in Tier 3
from ($0.45) to ($0.40) and in Tier 4 from ($0.48) to ($0.47). For
Professional Member options transactions in Non-Penny classes, the
Exchange proposes to decrease the Maker rebates in Tier 2 from ($0.60)
to ($0.30), in Tier 3 from ($0.65) to ($0.60), in Tier 4 from ($0.70)
to ($0.65) and in Tier 5 from ($0.85) to ($0.70).
    The purpose of decreasing the amount of the Maker rebates is to
bring the Exchange's rebate amounts more into line with the rebate
amounts offered at other Exchanges.\13\ The Exchange believes that the
decreased amounts will continue to provide a sufficient incentive to
Members to execute Priority Customer orders and to Professional Members
to execute volume at the Exchange. The Exchange believes that this
Maker volume by Members in both Penny and Non-Penny classes will
continue to attract liquidity to the Exchange, which in turn will
benefit all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Cboe BZX Options Exchange Fee Schedule under
``Transaction Fees''; see also Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOM'')
Chapter XV, Section 2, ``Nasdaq Options Market Fees and Rebates.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to provide alternative Maker rebates for
options transactions in all classes for Professional Members, provided
that the Member meets certain volume criteria. Specifically, Members
may qualify for Maker rebates equal to the greater of: (A) ($0.40) for
Penny Classes and ($0.65) for Non-Penny Classes, or (B) the amount set
forth in the applicable Tier reached by the Member in the relevant
Origin, if the Member and their Affiliates execute at least 1.50%
volume in the relevant month, in Priority Customer Origin type, in all
options classes, not including Excluded Contracts, as compared to the
TCV in all MIAX PEARL listed option classes. For example, if a Member
met the monthly volume criteria and reached Tier 1 for Professional
Members' options transactions but reached the Priority

Customer monthly threshold of over 1.50% of TCV, the Member would
receive a rebate of ($0.40) per contract in Penny Classes (instead of
($0.25) per contract) and ($0.65) per contract in Non-Penny Classes
(instead of ($0.30) per contract). The member would receive the Taker
rates associated with the Tier, $0.50 for Penny and $1.05 for Non-
Penny. Also, for purposes of qualifying for such rates, the Exchange
will aggregate the Priority Customer volume transacted by Members and
their Affiliates. The purpose of providing alternative Maker rebate
rates for options transactions in all classes for Professional Members
(if the Member meets certain volume criteria) is to encourage Members
to execute additional Priority Customer and Professional Member volume
on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that additional Priority
Customer and Professional Member volume executed on the Exchange will
attract further liquidity to the Exchange, which in turn will benefit
all market participants.
Taker Fees
    The Exchange proposes to: (i) Increase the Taker fees in all Tiers
for options transactions in all Penny classes (other than SPY, QQQ,
IWM, and VXX) with respect to Priority Customer orders; and (ii)
increase the Taker fee for Professional Members in Tier 2 for options
transactions in Penny and Non-Penny classes.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to increase the Taker fees for
Priority Customer orders in options in Penny Classes in Tier 1 from
$0.42 to $0.48, in Tier 2 from $0.42 to $0.46, in Tier 3 from $0.42 to
$0.44, in Tier 4 from $0.42 to $0.44 and in Tier 5 from $0.42 to $0.44.
    The Exchange also proposes to increase the Taker fee for
Professional Members for options transactions in Penny classes in Tier
2 from $0.49 to $0.50 and in Non-Penny classes in Tier 2 from $1.04 to
$1.05.
    The purpose of increasing the specified Taker fees and decreasing
Maker rebates is for business and competitive reasons. As a new
exchange, in order to attract order flow, the Exchange initially set
its Maker rebates and Taker fees so that they were meaningfully higher/
lower than other options exchanges that operate comparable maker/taker
pricing models.\14\ The Exchange now believes that it is appropriate to
adjust these Maker rebates and Taker fees so that they are more in line
with other exchanges, but will still remain highly competitive such
that they should enable the Exchange to continue to attract order flow
and grow market share.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 80915 (June 13,
2017), 82 FR 27912 (June 19, 2017) (SR-PEARL-2017-29); 80914 (June
13, 2017), 82 FR 27910 (June 19, 2017) (SR-PEARL-2017-30).
    \15\ See supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SPY Taker Fees
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Priority Customer table to
establish a separate tiered structure of Taker fees for options on SPY.
The Exchange currently charges a Taker fee of $0.38 for all
transactions on behalf of Priority Customers in SPY options. The
Exchange proposes instead to assess the following Taker fees for
Priority Customer orders for SPY options corresponding to the Tiers and
volume thresholds which are applicable to Priority Customer orders:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1..................................................           $0.44
Tier 2..................................................            0.43
Tier 3..................................................            0.42
Tier 4..................................................            0.41
Tier 5..................................................            0.40
Tier 6..................................................            0.38
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further, in order to provide a clearer explanation of the requirements
for achieving the specified Volume Criteria thresholds in SPY, the
Exchange proposes to add a new column setting forth the SPY Taker fees
in Section 1(a) of the Fee Schedule under ``Per Contract Rebates/Fees
for Penny Classes''.
QQQ, IWM and VXX Taker Fees
    The Exchange further proposes to amend the Priority Customer table
to establish a separate tiered structure of Taker fees for options
transactions in QQQ, IWM and VXX. The Exchange currently charges a
Taker fee of $0.40 for all transactions on behalf of Priority Customers
in QQQ, IWM and VXX options. The Exchange proposes instead to assess
the following Taker fees for Priority Customer orders for QQQ, IWM and
VXX options corresponding to the Tiers and volume thresholds which are
applicable to Priority Customer orders:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1..................................................           $0.47
Tier 2..................................................            0.46
Tier 3..................................................            0.44
Tier 4..................................................            0.43
Tier 5..................................................            0.42
Tier 6..................................................            0.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further, in order to provide a clearer explanation of the requirements
for achieving the specified Volume Criteria thresholds in in the
symbols QQQ, IWM and VXX, the Exchange proposes to add a new column
setting forth the Taker fees for such symbols in Section 1(a) of the
Fee Schedule under ``Per Contract Rebates/Fees for Penny Classes''.
    Since the Exchange is adding the new columns to Section 1(a) of the
Fee Schedule for SPY and QQQ, IWM, VXX Taker Fees for Priority Customer
orders, the Exchange proposes to delete the last sentence in the
asterisked footnote below the Priority Customer table which contained
the Taker fees for those symbols.
    With all proposed changes, Section 1(a) of the Fee Schedule shall
be the following:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Per contract rebates/fees for penny classes       Per contract rebates/
                                                                           ----------------------------------------------------    fees for non-penny
               Origin                     Tier         Volume criteria                                                                   classes
                                                          (percent)            Maker       Taker *     SPY taker    QQQ, IWM,  -------------------------
                                                                                VXX taker      Maker        Taker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority Customer...................            1  0.00-0.10..............      ($0.25)        $0.48        $0.44        $0.47      ($0.85)        $0.87
                                                2  Above 0.10-0.35........       (0.40)         0.46         0.43         0.46       (0.95)         0.86
                                                3  Above 0.35-0.50........       (0.45)         0.44         0.42         0.44       (1.00)         0.85
                                                4  Above 0.50-0.75........       (0.52)         0.44         0.41         0.43       (1.03)         0.84
                                                5  Above 0.75-1.25........       (0.53)         0.44         0.40         0.42       (1.04)         0.84
                                                6  Above 1.25.............       (0.54)         0.43         0.38         0.40       (1.05)         0.84
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For all Penny Classes other than SPY, QQQ, IWM, and VXX.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Per contract rebates/     Per contract rebates/
                                                               fees for penny classes      fees for non-penny
            Origin                 Tier      Volume criteria --------------------------          classes
                                                (percent)                              -------------------------
                                                                 Maker        Taker       Maker **     Taker **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All MIAX PEARL Market Makers.            1  0.00-0.15.......      ($0.25)        $0.50      ($0.30)        $1.05
                                         2  Above 0.15-0.40.       (0.40)         0.50       (0.30)         1.05

                                         3  Above 0.40-0.65.       (0.40)         0.48       (0.60)         1.03
                                         4  Above 0.65-1.00        (0.47)         0.43       (0.65)         1.02
                                             or Above 2.25
                                             in SPY.
                                         5  Above 1.00-1.40.       (0.48)         0.43       (0.70)         1.02
                                         6  Above 1.40......       (0.48)         0.43       (0.85)         1.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Per contract rebates/     Per contract rebates/
                                                               fees for penny classes      fees for non-penny
                                             Volume criteria --------------------------          classes
            Origin                 Tier         (percent)                              -------------------------
                                                                 Maker        Taker       Maker **
                                                               [supcaret]                [supcaret]    Taker **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Priority Customer, Firm,             1  0.00-0.15.......      ($0.25)        $0.50      ($0.30)        $1.05
 BD, and Non-MIAX PEARL
 Market Makers.
                                         2  Above 0.15-0.40.       (0.40)         0.50       (0.30)         1.05
                                         3  Above 0.40-0.65.       (0.40)         0.48       (0.60)         1.04
                                         4  Above 0.65-1.00.       (0.47)         0.48       (0.65)         1.04
                                         5  Above 1.00-1.40.       (0.48)         0.48       (0.70)         1.04
                                         6  Above 1.40......       (0.48)         0.48       (0.85)         1.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Members may qualify for the Maker Rebate and the Taker Fee associated with the highest Tier for transactions
  in Non-Penny classes if the Member executes more than 0.30% volume in Non-Penny classes, not including
  Excluded Contracts, as compared to the TCV in all MIAX PEARL listed option classes. For purposes of qualifying
  for such rates, the Exchange will aggregate the volume transacted by Members and their Affiliates in the
  following Origin types in Non-Penny classes: MIAX PEARL Market Makers, and Non-Priority Customer, Firm, BD,
  and Non-MIAX PEARL Market Makers.
[supcaret] Members may qualify for Maker Rebates equal to the greater of: (A) ($0.40) for Penny Classes and
  ($0.65) for Non-Penny Classes, or (B) the amount set forth in the applicable Tier reached by the Member in the
  relevant Origin, if the Member and their Affiliates execute at least 1.50% volume in the relevant month, in
  Priority Customer Origin type, in all options classes, not including Excluded Contracts, as compared to the
  TCV in all MIAX PEARL listed option classes.

    Except as otherwise set forth herein, the Volume Criteria is
calculated based on the total monthly volume executed by the Member in
all options classes on MIAX PEARL in the relevant Origin type, not
including Excluded Contracts, (as the numerator) expressed as a
percentage of (divided by) TCV (as the denominator). In Tier 4 for MIAX
PEARL Market Makers, the alternative Volume Criteria (above 2.25% in
SPY) is calculated based on the total monthly volume executed by the
Market Maker solely in SPY options on MIAX PEARL in the relevant Origin
type, not including Excluded Contracts, (as the numerator) expressed as
a percentage of (divided by) SPY TCV (as the denominator). The per
contract transaction rebates and fees shall be applied retroactively to
all eligible volume once the threshold has been reached by Member. The
Exchange aggregates the volume of Members and their Affiliates in the
Add/Remove Tiered Fees. The per contract transaction rebates and fees
shall be waived for transactions executed during the opening and for
transactions that uncross the ABBO.
    The proposed changes are scheduled to become operative June 1,
2018.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \16\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\17\ in that it
is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among Exchange members and issuers and other persons using its
facilities, and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\18\ in that it is 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 facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and (b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed new Tier structures
applicable to Priority Customers, Market Makers and Professional
Members are consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act in that they are
fair, equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory and should continue
to improve the market quality for the Exchange's Members and
consequently all market participants. The proposed changes to the MIAX
PEARL Tier structures and rebates and fees are fair and equitable and
not unreasonably discriminatory because they apply equally to all MIAX
PEARL orders for the applicable origin type. All similarly situated
MIAX PEARL orders are subject to the same rebate and fee schedule, and
access to the Exchange is offered on terms that are not unfairly
discriminatory.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed new Tier structures
applicable to Priority Customers, Market Makers and Professional
Members are consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that they
promote equitable access to the Exchange for all market participants.
To the extent that MIAX PEARL Member volume is increased by the
proposal, market participants will increasingly compete for the
opportunity to trade on the Exchange including sending more orders to
the Exchange. The resulting increased volume and liquidity will benefit
all Exchange participants by providing more trading opportunities and
tighter spreads.
    The specific volume thresholds of the Tiers for Priority Customers,
Market Makers and Professional Members as well as the rebates and fees
are set based upon business determinations and an analysis of current
volume levels. The Exchange believes that the proposed new Maker
rebates and Taker fees are generally within the range of rebates and
fees at other exchanges that have a Maker-Taker fee structure.\19\ The
volume thresholds are intended to continue to incentivize MIAX PEARL
Members to increase the number of orders they send to the Exchange so
that they can achieve the next threshold, and to encourage all market
participants to send more orders as well. Increasing the number of
orders sent to the Exchange will in turn provide tighter and more
liquid markets, and therefore attract

more business overall. Similarly, the different rebate rates at the
different Tier levels are based on an analysis of current revenue and
volume levels and are intended to provide continued incentives to MIAX
PEARL market participants to increase the volume of orders sent to, and
contracts executed on, the Exchange. The specific volume thresholds of
the Tiers and rates are set in order to encourage MIAX PEARL market
participants to continue to reach for higher tiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed Maker rebate decrease in Penny and Non-Penny Classes
applicable to Priority Customers and Professional Members in the
specified Tiers is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because all similarly situated market participants are
subject to the same tiered rebates and fees and access to the Exchange
is offered on terms that are not unfairly discriminatory. For
competitive and business reasons, the Exchange initially set its Maker
rebates for Priority Customer and Professional Member orders higher
than certain other options exchanges that operate comparable maker/
taker pricing models.\20\ The Exchange now believes that it is
appropriate to decrease those Maker rebates so that they are more in
line with other exchanges, and will still remain highly competitive
such that they should enable the Exchange to continue to attract order
flow and grow market share.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See supra note 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal to provide alternative Maker rebates for options
transactions in all classes for Professional Members, provided that the
Member meets certain volume criteria (the Member and their Affiliates
execute at least 1.50% volume in the relevant month, in Priority
Customer Origin type, in all options classes, not including Excluded
Contracts, as compared to the TCV in all MIAX PEARL listed option
classes), is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because all similarly situated market participants are subject to the
same tiered rebates and fees and access to the Exchange is offered on
terms that are not unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange believes that
providing alternative Maker rebates for options transactions in all
classes for Professional Members (if the Member meets certain volume
criteria relating to Priority Customer volume) will encourage Members
to execute additional Priority Customer and Professional Member volume
on the Exchange. The Exchange believes that additional Priority
Customer and Professional Member volume executed on the Exchange will
attract further liquidity to the Exchange, which in turn will benefit
all market participants.
    The Exchange's proposal to modify the Alternative Volume Criteria
for Tier 4 based on SPY volume executed on the Exchange is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory, since it is intended to
incentivize order flow in increased volume levels to be sent to the
Exchange for execution in an actively traded options class. SPY options
are the most actively traded class. The Exchange therefore believes
that incentivizing Members that concentrate their trading activity in
SPY options will consequently increase order flow sent to the Exchange,
which will benefit all market participants through increased liquidity,
tighter markets and order interaction.
    The proposed Taker fee increases applicable to orders submitted by
a Member for the account of Priority Customers and Professional Members
are reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all
option orders of the same origin type are subject to the same tiered
Taker fees and access to the Exchange is offered on terms that are not
unfairly discriminatory. The Exchange initially set its Taker fees at
the various levels based upon business determinations and an analysis
of current Taker fees and volume levels at other exchanges. For
competitive and business reasons, the Exchange initially set its Taker
fees for Priority Customer and Professional Member orders lower than
certain other options exchanges that operate comparable maker/taker
pricing models.\21\ The Exchange now believes that it is appropriate to
increase those Taker fees so that they are more in line with other
exchanges, and will still remain highly competitive such that they
should enable the Exchange to continue to attract order flow and grow
market share. The Exchange notes that, even as amended, its Taker fees
for Priority Customers and Professional Members are generally lower
than certain other options exchanges operating competing models.\22\
The Exchange believes for these reasons that increasing certain Taker
fees for Priority Customer and Professional Member transactions in the
specified Tiers is equitable, reasonable and not unfairly
discriminatory, and thus consistent with the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, the proposed increases to the Taker fees for Priority
Customer transactions promotes just and equitable principles of trade,
fosters cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities, and protects investors and the
public interest, because even with the increases, the Exchange's
proposed Taker fees for Priority Customer and Professional Member
orders still remain highly competitive with certain other options
exchanges offering comparable pricing models, and should enable the
Exchange to continue to attract order flow and grow market share. The
Exchange believes that the amount of such fees, as proposed to be
increased, will continue to encourage Members to send Priority Customer
and Professional Member orders to the Exchange. To the extent that
order flow is increased by the proposal, market participants will
increasingly compete for the opportunity to trade on the Exchange,
including sending more orders which will have the potential to be
assessed lower fees and higher rebates than certain other competing
options exchanges. The resulting increased volume and liquidity will
benefit all Exchange participants by providing more trading
opportunities and tighter spreads.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to offer tiered Taker fees
assessable to transactions solely in SPY, QQQ, IWM, and VXX options is
consistent with other options markets that also assess different
transaction fees for select option classes (including SPY, QQQ, IWM,
and VXX) as compared to other option classes. The Exchange believes
that establishing separate tiered pricing for these select products for
Priority Customers is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory because these select products are generally more liquid
than other option classes. Additionally, certain other competing
options exchanges differentiate pricing in a similar manner.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Nasdaq ISE Schedule of Fees, Section I, Regular Order
Fees and Rebates; see also Nasdaq Options Market LLC (``NOM'')
Chapter XV, Section 2, ``Nasdaq Options Market Fees and Rebates.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive, technical
corrections to the note beneath the transaction fee tables will promote
just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because it will improve the readability of the Fee Schedule. The
proposed changes do not alter the substantive application of fees or
rebates. As such, the proposed change is intended to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities

and would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system. In particular, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will provide greater clarity to
Members and the public regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule, and it is
in the public interest for rules to be accurate and concise so as to
eliminate the potential for confusion.

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

    MIAX PEARL does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes in the Tier structure for the market participants
should continue to encourage the provision of liquidity that enhances
the quality of the Exchange's markets and increases the number of
trading opportunities on MIAX PEARL for all participants who will be
able to compete for such opportunities. The proposed rule change should
enable the Exchange to continue to attract and compete for order flow
with other exchanges. However, this competition does not create an
undue burden on competition but rather offers all market participants
the opportunity to receive the benefit of competitive pricing.
    The proposed Maker rebate decreases, alternative Maker rebates, and
Taker fee increases as well as the tiered Taker fees for SPY, QQQ, IWM
and VXX options, are intended to keep the Exchange's fees highly
competitive with those of other exchanges, and to encourage liquidity
and should enable the Exchange to continue to attract and compete for
order flow with other exchanges which offer comparable Maker rebates
and Taker fees and enhanced pricing on transactions in select symbols.
    Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed modification to
the alternative Volume Criteria threshold in Tier 4 based on SPY
options volume applicable to Market Makers will continue to provide
incentives to those Market Makers that concentrate their trading
activity in SPY options to send additional SPY orders and creates
additional opportunity for additional liquidity to the market.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change to make
technical corrections to its rules will impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act. This aspect of the proposed rule change is not designed to
address any competitive issues but rather is designed to add additional
clarity and to remedy minor, non-substantive issues in the text of the
Fee Schedule.
    The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market
in which market participants can readily favor competing venues if they
deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive. In such an
environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its rebates and fees
to remain competitive with other exchanges and to attract order flow.
The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes reflect this
competitive environment because they modify the Exchange's fees in a
manner that encourages market participants to continue to provide
liquidity and to send order flow to the Exchange.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\24\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \25\ 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 shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2018-13 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-PEARL-2018-13. 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-PEARL-2018-13 and should be submitted on
or before July 9, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-12935 Filed 6-15-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 81 (Monday, April 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23352-23353]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08877]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0090; FRL-10008-47]

Carbaryl and Methomyl Registration Review; Draft Endangered
Species Act Biological Evaluations; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register of March 17, 2020,
opening a 60-day comment period on the draft nationwide biological
evaluations (BEs) for the registration review of the pesticides
carbaryl and methomyl relative to the potential effects on threatened
and endangered species and their designated critical habitats. This
document extends the comment period for 45 days, from May 18, 2020 to
July 2, 2020.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPP-2020-0090, must be received on or before July 2, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in
the Federal Register document of March 17, 2020 (85 FR 15168) (FRL-
10006-38).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy Perry, Pesticide Re-Evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal Register document of March 17, 2020
(85 FR 15168) (FRL-10006-38), which opened a 60-day public comment
period for the draft nationwide biological evaluations (BEs) for the
registration review of the pesticides carbaryl and methomyl relative to
the potential effects on threatened and endangered species and their
designated critical habitats. As noted in that document, the schedule
for conducting the carbaryl and methomyl BEs was negotiated as part of
a partial settlement agreement pursuant to a joint stipulation filed on
October 18, 2019 and entered by the court on October 22, 2019, in
Center for Biological Diversity et al. v. EPA et al. (N.D. Ca) (3:11-
cv-00293). EPA is hereby extending the public comment period, which was
set to end on May 18, 2020 to July 2, 2020.
    After considering a number of requests to extend the comment period
received from various stakeholders, EPA is extending the comment period
for the following reasons: (1) The draft BEs are complex and highly
technical; (2) the need for some stakeholders to engage experts
familiar with the subject matter to assist them with providing
comments; (3) the large number of stakeholders potentially impacted by
the draft BEs; (4) the importance of soliciting feedback from
stakeholders who may be affected; (5) the stakeholders' need for
additional time to review and develop constructive comments for these
complex and lengthy Bes; and (6) the carbaryl and methomyl BEs are the
first ones where EPA applied the Revised Method, which was updated to
reflect input from public comments and released in March along with the
draft carbaryl and methomyl BEs.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in the Federal Register
document of March 17, 2020. If you have questions, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: April 22, 2020.
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2020-08877 Filed 4-24-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13007-13010]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05440]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77309; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2016-035]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Establish a Secondary
Contingency Procedure To Enable the Exchange To Report an Official
Closing Price on Behalf of an Impaired Primary Listing Exchange

March 7, 2016.
    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 March 2, 2016, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``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

    The Exchange proposes to establish a Secondary Contingency
Procedure that would enable the Exchange to report an Official Closing
Price on behalf of an impaired primary listing exchange.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these

statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below.
The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C
below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Nasdaq has robust and resilient systems that are designed to ensure
fair and orderly markets, including multiple redundancies and back-up
systems. For the critical Nasdaq Official Closing Price (``NOCP''),
Nasdaq currently has three systems that are designed to ensure the
orderly execution and dissemination of the NOCP: (1) The Nasdaq Closing
Cross set forth in Rule 4754(b)(1); Auxiliary Procedures described in
Rule 4754(b)(5); and Contingency Procedures contained in Rule
4754(b)(7).
    Here, Nasdaq is proposing to establish Secondary Contingency
Procedures in proposed new Rule 4754(b)(8). This proposal is made in
conjunction with the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE Arca,
Inc., and the exclusive securities information processors for the
Nasdaq UTP Plan and the Consolidated Quote/Consolidated Tape Plan
(``SIPs'').
Overview of Secondary Contingency Procedures
    Procedurally, Nasdaq, as a primary listing market, will designate a
back-up exchange to provide an official closing price in the event that
Nasdaq's market is impaired and unable to execute a closing auction for
all or a subset of listed securities. Nasdaq would invoke the Secondary
Contingency Procedures by announcing publicly that its market is
impaired and unable to execute a closing auction. If Nasdaq makes that
announcement prior to 3:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time (``EST''), the
official closing price from Nasdaq's designated back-up exchange would
serve as the NOCP. If Nasdaq makes that announcement after 3:00 p.m.,
EST, the SIP would calculate a Volume Weighted Average Price
(``VWAP''), described in more detail below. Whether the announcement is
made before or after 3:00 p.m., EST, the SIP would publish the NOCP on
Nasdaq's behalf either: (1) Based on a message from Nasdaq's back-up
exchange or (2) based on the VWAP calculation.
Designation of Back-Up Exchange
    Nasdaq proposes to designate NYSE Arca as its official back-up
exchange. Nasdaq believes that NYSE Arca is best positioned to serve as
Nasdaq's back-up for two primary reasons: (1) NYSE Arca and Nasdaq
membership substantially overlaps; (2) NYSE Arca already operates an
effective closing cross that it can use to execute a closing cross in
Nasdaq-listed securities. In the event Nasdaq is unable to execute a
closing cross, Nasdaq members that are also NYSE Arca members should be
technically prepared to transfer liquidity to NYSE Arca to ensure a
deeply liquid closing cross.
    Nasdaq expects NYSE Arca will designate Nasdaq as its back-up
exchange for the same reasons. Again, the two exchanges' memberships
substantially overlap, meaning that liquidity can and already does flow
smoothly from one exchange to the other. Also, Nasdaq already operates
a closing cross for securities listed on NYSE Arca, as well as all
other securities for which consolidated information is disseminated via
Tapes A and B.
The Role of the SIPs
    The Operating Committees for the Nasdaq and CQ/CT Plans have
already voted to modify the SIPs to support this proposal.
Specifically, each exchange that is designated as a back-up exchange
(Nasdaq and NYSE Arca), will disseminate via the SIPs an official
closing price in every listed security marked with the .M sale
condition code.
    The SIPs will apply the following procedures:
    1. Each primary listing exchange would print a standardized
Official Closing Price (``OCP''), with a sale condition `M,' in each
security it trades, whether as primary or on a UTP basis.
    2. Each primary listing exchange would include in its rules that,
in the event that it is impaired and cannot conduct a closing auction,
the exchange's contingency OCP would be the OCP of a specified ``back-
up exchange'' or, if the impairment is announced after 3:00 p.m., EST,
a VWAP calculation.
    3. In the event that a primary listing exchange publicly announces
that it is impaired and unable to conduct a closing auction for all or
a subset of its primary symbols, the SIP would print the primary
listing exchange's contingency OCP as the OCP of the primary listing
exchange, including calculation of the VWAP. The advantages of the SIP
reprinting the contingency OCP as the OCP of the primary listing
exchange, rather than the back-up exchange separately sending to the
SIP its OCP as the OCP of the primary exchange are that:
    a. The SIP provides a centralized service of which each primary
listing exchange can take advantage
    b. Participant--line validations are retained
    c. There is assurance of full symbol coverage
    d. The SIP provides a single location for future updates or
configuration changes or new primary listing exchanges
    e. A single source and method for VWAP calculations
    ** this is so with either proposal
    4. The primary listing exchange's contingency OCP would differ
depending on what time the impaired primary market announces that it
will be using the closing contingency plan.
    a. If announced prior to 3:00 p.m., EST, the primary listing
exchange's contingency OCP would be based on the following hierarchy:
    i. Official Closing Price (sale condition `M') of a pre-designated
back-up exchange(s). An exchange that has more than 1 back-up exchange
as part of its hierarchy of contingency OCPs, will announce publicly
the exchange(s) that will be relied on for the contingency OCP.
    ii. If no such contingency OCP exists, then a VWAP calculated by
the SIP of the final 5 minute regular trading session. The VWAP
calculations would include all last sale eligible trades in the last 5
minutes of the normal trading day, including the closing auctions
prints of all markets.
    iii. If no last sale eligible trades printed in the last 5 minutes,
then the consolidated last sale during regular trading hours.
    iv. If no such same day consolidated last sale eligible trades
exist, then the primary listing exchange's prior trading day's Official
Closing Price.
    b. If announced after 3:00 p.m., EST, the primary listing
exchange's contingency OCP would be determined by the following
hierarchy:
    i. Final 5 minute VWAP of regular trading session (same calculation
as described above).
    ii. If no last sale eligible trades printed in the last 5 minutes,
then the consolidated last sale during regular trading hours.
    iii. If no such same day consolidated last sale eligible trades
exist, then the primary listing exchange's prior trading day's Official
Closing Price.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \3\ in general, and furthers the

objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \4\ in particular, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because it would provide transparency in how
the Exchange would determine the Nasdaq Official Closing Price in
Exchange-listed securities when the Exchange is unable to conduct a
closing transaction due to a systems or technical issue. The Exchange
believes that the proposed amendments would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system because the proposed determination of a Nasdaq Official Closing
Price was crafted in response to input from industry participants and
would:
     Provide a pre-determined, consistent solution that would
result in a closing print to the SIP within a reasonable time frame
from the normal closing time;
     minimize the need for industry participants to modify
their processing of data from the SIP; and
     provide advance notification of the applicable closing
contingency plan to provide sufficient time for industry participants
to route any closing interest to an alternate venue to participate in
that venue's closing auction.
    More specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed hierarchy for
determining the Nasdaq Official Closing Price if the Exchange
determines that it is impaired before 3:00 p.m., EST, would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because the proposal, which is based on input
from market participants, would provide sufficient time for market
participants to direct closing-only interest to a designated alternate
exchange in time for such interest to participate in a closing auction
on such alternate venue in a meaningful manner.
    The Exchange further believes that relying on the official closing
price of a designated alternate exchange would provide for an
established hierarchy for determining an Official Closing Price for an
Exchange-listed security if there is insufficient interest to conduct a
closing auction on the alternate exchange. In such case, the rules of
NYSE Arca and Nasdaq already provide a mechanism for determining an
official closing price for securities that trade on those markets.
    The Exchange further believes that if the Exchange determines after
3:00 p.m., EST, that it is impaired and unable the conduct a closing
transaction, the proposed VWAP calculation would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system because it would provide for a mechanism to determine the
value of an affected security for purposes of determining a Nasdaq
Official Closing Price. By using a volume-weighted calculation that
would include the closing transactions on an affected security on
alternate exchanges as well as any busts or corrections that were
reported up to the time that the SIP calculates the value, the Exchange
believes that the proposed calculation would reflect the correct price
of a security. In addition, by using a VWAP calculation rather than the
last consolidated last-sale eligible price as of the end of regular
trading hours, the Exchange would reduce the potential for an anomalous
trade that may not reflect the true price of a security from being set
as the Nasdaq Official Closing Price for a security.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change would
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system because the proposal would have
minimal impact on market participants. As proposed, from the
perspective of market participants, even if the Exchange were impaired,
the SIP would publish a Nasdaq Official Closing Price for Exchange-
listed securities on behalf of the Exchange in a manner that would be
no different than if the Exchange were not impaired. If the Exchange
determines that it is impaired after 3:00 p.m., market participants
would not have to make any system changes. If the Exchange determines
that it is impaired before 3:00 p.m., EST, and designates an alternate
exchange, market participants may have to do systems work to re-direct
closing-only orders to the alternate exchange. However, the Exchange
understands, based on input from market participants, that such changes
would be feasible based on the amount of advance notice.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that designating an alternate
exchange when there is sufficient time to do so would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system because it would allow for the price-discovery
mechanism of a closing auction to be available for impacted Exchange-
listed securities

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is not
designed to address any competitive issues, but rather to provide for
how the Exchange would determine an Official Closing Price for
Exchange-listed securities if it is impaired and cannot conduct a
closing transaction due to a systems or technical issue. The proposal
has been crafted with input from market participants, Nasdaq, and the
SIPs, and is designed to reduce the burden on competition by having
similar back-up procedures across all primary listing exchanges if such
exchange is impaired and cannot conduct a closing transaction.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date 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 shall: (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-NASDAQ-2016-035 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2016-035. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2016-035 and should
be submitted on or before April 1, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-05440 Filed 3-10-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Date:	July 27, 2016

To:	Brenda Shine and Jonathan Witt, EPA/OAQPS/SPPD

From:	Justin Spencer and Cassy Becker

Subject:	Meeting Record for July 27, 2016 meeting between
Representatives of IPAA and Representatives of OAQPS (U.S. EPA)

On July 27, 2016, representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and their contractor (RTI International) participated in a
conference call with a representative of the Independent Petroleum
Association of America (IPAA). The names and affiliations of the
participants are included in Attachment 1. The purpose of the meeting
was to discuss the existing source oil and gas information collection
request (ICR) as it pertains to the oil and gas production facilities.
The following topics were discussed.

Economic Addition to the ICR. The IPAA representative stated that one of
their main concerns after reviewing the ICR was the lack of economic
information that is being requested from facilities. In particular, the
IPAA representative felt that 70% of small producers with old and/or low
producing wells (marginal wells) would be inadequately characterized by
the ICR.  IPAA felt that the addition of more economic-focused questions
to the ICR would allow the EPA to better understand the financial burden
of small producers to implement additional programs for existing
equipment. IPAA noted that the useful life of many of these marginal
wells is decided from a financial standpoint and that the addition of
any further financial burdens to these producers could diminish the
value of these wells and shorten their useful lives. The EPA stated that
the ICR would be complementary to other forms of information available
to the agency when they begin the rule making process.

Challenges for Small Producers When Completing Part 2. The IPAA
representative stated that many of their small upstream members could
have issues in completing Part 2 of the ICR from both a financial and a
technical perspective. According to the IPAA representative, the
quantity of data required by Part 2 may be overwhelming to small
producers, especially as the data collection will be concurrent with
Subpart OOOOa and Subpart W compliance efforts, so that IPAA members may
not have the necessary resources available to complete the ICR.

Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America (RPSEA). The IPAA
representative mentioned that RPSEA was currently looking for research
proposals related to small producers. IPAA recommended that EPA contact
RPSEA to discuss emissions information needs for upstream producers, as
RPSEA is currently looking for upstream research opportunities.

EPA Response to Comments.  The IPAA representative expressed concern
that EPA’s timeline for addressing comments on the ICR would not allow
the agency adequate time to evaluate the issues.

Attachment 1

Participants in July 27, 2016 EPA/IPAA Conference Call

IPAA Representative

Lee Fuller

U.S. EPA Representatives

Angie Carey

David Cozzie

Joe Goffman

Amy Hambrick

Jodi Howard

Penny Lassiter

Brenda Shine

Lisa Thompson

Melissa Weitz

Jonathan Witt

RTI International (EPA Contractor)

Cassy Becker

Justin Spencer

 PAGE

 PAGE   2

  PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  3


Meeting Summary:  5/16/19 EPA Teleconference with 2,4-DB Task Force
The following is a list of the EPA 2,4-DB team members that participated:
Samantha Thomas  -  Chemical Review Manager, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division,
Khue Nguyen  -  Team Leader, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division
Cathryn Britton  -  Branch Chief, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division
Sunil Ratnayake  -  Biologist, Biological and Economic Analysis Division
William Chism  -  Senior Biologist, Biological and Economic Analysis Division
Derek Berwald -- Senior Economist, Biological and Economic Analysis Division

The following is a list of the 2,4-DB Task Force representatives that participated:
Mike Schofield, Technical Chair, 2,4-DB Task Force
Fred Trudwig, Aceto
Morris Gaskins, Albaugh
Nathan Ehresman, Nufarm
Bill Mahlburg, Consultant to the Task Force
Andrew Bond, Consultant to the Task Force
Ed Sharkey, Executive Director, 2,4-DB Task Force
Alice Otten, Data Group Management
Debra Miller, Data Group Management
Discussion:
EPA sought feedback from the 2,4-DB Task Force on potential risk mitigation for the 2,4-DB Proposed Interim Registration Review Decision. EPA discussed tolerance adjustments, corrections to the restricted entry interval on one label, potential spray drift management language, potential label advisory statements, and other potential label clean-up measures. The registrants agreed to the outlined potential risk mitigation without revisions or comments.
The potential risk mitigation was previously emailed to the 2,4-DB Task Force on 5/6/2019, but consist of the following deliberative measures:
 Removal/modification of some tolerances  -  indicated on page 7 of Human Health Assessment.
 Update all labels with REI (Restricted Entry Interval) of 48 hours -- most labels have this information already, except EPA Reg. No. 34704-906, which lists an REI of 12 hrs.
 Spray drift management language (most of this is already indicated on newer 2,4-DB labels):
 Aerial Application
 Do not release spray at a height greater than 10 ft above the ground or vegetative canopy, unless a greater application height is necessary for pilot safety.
 Applicators must use (1/2) swath displacement upwind at the downwind edge of the field.
 Do not apply when wind speeds exceed 15 mph at the application site. If the windspeed is greater than 10 mph, the boom length must be 65% or less of the wingspan for fixed wing aircraft and 75% or less of the rotor diameter for helicopters. Otherwise, the boom length must be 75% or less of the wingspan for fixed-wing aircraft and 90% or less of the rotor diameter for helicopters.
 Ground Application
 User must only apply with the release height recommended by the manufacturer, but no more than 4 feet above the ground or crop canopy.
 For both aerial and ground application
 Applicators are required to use a medium or coarser droplet size (ASABE S572.1).
 Do not apply during temperature inversions.
 Non-target organism advisory statement (applied for all herbicides):
 "This product is toxic to plants and may adversely impact the forage and habitat of non-target organisms, including pollinators, in areas adjacent to the treated site.  Protect the forage and habitat of non-target organisms by following label directions intended to minimize spray drift."
 Revised groundwater advisory statement:
 "2,4-DB is known to leach through soil into groundwater under certain conditions as a result of label use. This chemical may leach into groundwater if used in areas where soils are permeable, particularly where the water table is shallow."
 Additional label clean up:
 Ensure labels have a maximum yearly rate for each crop.
 Remove references to VMD (volumetric mean diameter).

The Task Force had a comment about the inhalation data used in the 2,4-DB human health risk assessment, which refers to 2,4-D results instead of 2,4-DB results.  The Task Force is primarily concerned with data compensation issues, as well as the cost burden of the 2,4-DB inhalation studies.  The 2,4-DB HED team was not in attendance at the meeting, but PRD urged the Task Force to submit formal comments outlining these concerns, so they could be addressed.