[Federal Register: July 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 37293-37294]
[DOCID:fr28jy09-94]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2009-0122]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt thirty-five individuals
from its rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated diabetes
mellitus (ITDM) from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce. The exemptions will enable these individuals to
operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions are effective July 28, 2009. The exemptions
expire on July 28, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Room W64-224,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the
ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT's dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, or other
entity). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register (65 FR 19477, Apr. 11, 2000). This statement is also
available at http://www.regulations.gov.

Background

    On June 2, 2009, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of Federal
diabetes exemption applications from thirty-five individuals, and
requested comments from the public (74 FR 26467). The public comment
period closed on July 2, 2009, and no comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of the thirty-five applicants
and determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level
that would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(3).

Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Experience of the Applicants

    The Agency established the current standard for diabetes in 1970
because several risk studies indicated that diabetic drivers had a
higher rate of crash involvement than the general population. The
diabetes rule provides that ``A person is physically qualified to drive
a commercial motor vehicle if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus currently requiring
insulin for control'' (49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)).
    FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the
Agency's July 2000 study entitled ``A Report to Congress on the
Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated
Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the
Transportation Act for the 21st Century.'' The report concluded that a
safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to
operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 Federal Register Notice
(68 FR 52441) in conjunction with the November 8, 2005, Federal
Register Notice (70 FR 67777) provides the current protocol for
allowing such drivers to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    These thirty-five applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 31
years. These applicants report no hypoglycemic reaction that resulted
in loss of consciousness or seizure, that required the assistance of
another person, or resulted in impaired cognitive function without
warning symptoms in the past 5 years (with one year of stability
following any such episode). In each case, an endocrinologist has
verified that the driver has demonstrated willingness to properly
monitor and manage their diabetes, received education related to
diabetes management, and is on a stable insulin regimen. These drivers
report no other disqualifying conditions, including diabetes-related
complications. Each meets the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
    The qualifications and medical condition of each applicant were
stated and discussed in detail in the June 2, 2009, Federal Register
Notice (74 FR 26471). Therefore, they will not be repeated in this
notice.

Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is
likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would
be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants
to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA

considered medical reports about the applicants' ITDM and vision, and
reviewed the treating endocrinologist's medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV while using insulin.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the
diabetes standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level
of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption will be provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and they include the following:
(1) That each individual submit a quarterly monitoring checklist
completed by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual
checklist with a comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) that each
individual reports within 2 business days of occurrence, all episodes
of severe hypoglycemia, significant complications, or inability to
manage diabetes; also, any involvement in an accident or any other
adverse event in a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or not they are
related to an episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual provide
a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the medical
examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (4) that
each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to
the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep
a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-
employed. The driver must also have a copy of the certification when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the thirty-five exemption
applications, FMCSA exempts, Abdelhadi A. Abdelnabi, Dennis W. Athey,
II., Barry A. Barber, Jeromy B. Birchard, Kevin J. Blue, Lester B.
Brazfield, Bradley M. Brown, Gary L. Brown, Robert F. Browne, III.,
Robert F. Carter, Howard L. Cooksey, William D. Cornwell, III., Brian
P. Dionne, Richard C. Dunn, Donald K. Ennis, Dennis Graves, Michael T.
Harris, Daniel H. Henson, J. Theoginis Kehaias, Harold M. Koski,
Richard B. Lorimer, Lester J. Manis, Trena L. Marshall, Troy A.
Martinson, Ronald R. McDougle, Richard L. Miller, Jerome A. Mjolsness,
David K. Mopps, George E. Patton, Jack E. Rensing, Clayton M. Reynolds,
Jeffrey S. Saint-Vincent, Richard Scott, Gary A. Sweeney, and David L.
Wilhelm from the ITDM standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject to the
conditions listed under ``Conditions and Requirements'' above.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption will
be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption
will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is
still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the person may apply
to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time.

    Issued on: July 21, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-17969 Filed 7-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15982-15983]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05886]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG22-62-000.
    Applicants: LeConte Energy Storage, LLC.
    Description: LeConte Energy Storage, LLC submits Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5101.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2471-004.
    Applicants: NedPower Mount Storm, LLC.
    Description: Refund Report: NedPower Mount Storm LLC submits tariff
filing per 35.19a(b): Refund Report to be effective N/A.

    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-821-002.
    Applicants: Spotlight Power LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2nd Amended Spotlight Power LLC
Baseline MBR Tariff & Application (ER22-821-) to be effective 3/16/
2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5193.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 3/25/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-991-001.
    Applicants: PPL Electric Utilities Corporation, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: PPL Electric Utilities Corporation
submits tariff filing per 35.17(b): PPL Electric submits Amendment to
OATT, Att. M-2 in Docket No. ER22-991 to be effective 4/4/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5133.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1114-001.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to Rate Schedule No. 144
to be effective 3/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 3/22/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1309-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2022-
03-15_SA 2793 ATC-City of Eagle River 2nd Rev CFA to be effective 5/15/
2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1310-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2022-
03-15_SA 2768 ATC-City of Plymouth 2nd Rev CFA to be effective 5/15/
2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5055.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1312-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2022-
03-15_SA 2776 ATC-Village of Prairie du Sac 2nd Rev CFA to be effective
5/15/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5058.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1324-000.
    Applicants: LeConte Energy Storage, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authorization.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5090.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1332-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2022-
03-15_SA 2804 ATC-City of Richland Center 2nd Rev CFA to be effective
5/15/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5108.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1338-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Ohio, Inc., Duke Energy Kentucky, Inc., PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Duke Energy Ohio, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): DEOK submits revisions to
OATT Attachment H-22A to be effective 5/15/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5149.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1344-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy South Carolina, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Depreciation Rates to be
effective 9/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5183.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1346-000.
    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule No. 349,
Concurrence to PNM RS No. 177 to be effective 3/8/2022.
    Filed Date: 3/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20220315-5211.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/22.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 15, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-05886 Filed 3-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 32 (Friday, February 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 10263]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL21-47-000]

Green Development, LLC v. New England Power Company, Narragansett
Electric Company; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on February 10, 2021, pursuant to sections 206 and
306, of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e and 825e and Rule 206 and
212 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 and 385.212, Green Development,
LLC (Complainant or Green Development) filed a formal complaint against
New England Power Company (NEP) and Narragansett Electric Company (NEC)
(collectively, Respondents) alleging that: (1) That NEP has assessed,
and continues to assess, unauthorized FERC-jurisdictional Direct
Assignment Facility Charges (DAF Charges) in connection with four 9.6
MW (AC) solar photovoltaic projects that are interconnected to NEC's
distribution system, which charges are not authorized under the
Transmission, Markets, and Services Tariff of ISO New England (ISO-NE
Tariff); (2) that NEC and NEP have violated and continue to violate the
filed-rate (i.e., the ISO-NE Tariff) and FERC precedent through their
attempt to pass through the unauthorized DAF Charges to Green
Development, and (3) that NEP and NEC have violated and continue to
violate the FPA, by seeking to originate and recover unauthorized FERC-
jurisdictional DAF Charges via a state jurisdictional tariff. Green
Development requests that the Commission find that NEP and NEC's
actions are unjust and unreasonable, order the Respondents to cease the
unauthorized charges, and to pay refunds as necessary, all as more
fully explained in the complaint.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts listed for Respondents in the Commission's list of
Corporate Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondents'
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondents' answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainant.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 2, 2021.

    Dated: February 12, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-03379 Filed 2-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 83825-83827]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26377]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[USCG-2023-0933]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Upper Mississippi River MM 660.5-659.5, Lansing, IA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters in the Upper Mississippi River at Mile Marker (MM)
660.5 through 659.5. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment from all potential hazards
associated with the implosion of the Lansing Power Station. Entry of
vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River
(COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from December 1,
2023 through December 8, 2023. For the purposes of enforcement, actual
notice will be used from November 28, 2023, until December 1, 2023.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0933 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MSTC Nathaniel Dibley, Sector Upper Mississippi River
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 314-269-
2560, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because a temporary safety zone must be
established immediately to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment from potential hazards created by the use of explosives for
the implosion of the power plant and lack sufficient time to provide a
reasonable comment period and then consider those comments before
issuing the rule. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we
must establish this safety zone by November 28, 2023.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for

making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be
impracticable because action is needed to respond to the potential
safety hazards associated the use of explosives for the implosion of
the Lansing Power Station starting November 28, 2023.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP)
has determined that potential hazards associated with the use of
explosions for the implosion of the Lansing Power Plant will be a
safety concern for anyone operating or transiting within the Upper
Mississippi River from MM 660.5 through 659.5. This rule is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable
waters within the safety zone while the implosion is being conducted.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The implosion event will be occurring on two dates in which
explosives will be used on an implosion of the Lansing Power Plant
located between MM 660.5-659.5 beginning November 28, 2023. The safety
zone is designed to protect waterway users until work is complete.
    No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under
the operational control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River. To seek
permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated representative
via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River
at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Persons and vessels permitted to enter the safety zone
must comply with all lawful orders or directions issued by the COTP or
designated representative. The COTP or a designated representative will
inform the public of the effective period for the safety zone as well
as any changes in the dates and times of enforcement, as well as
reductions in the size of the safety zone through Local Notice to
Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), and/or Safety
Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB), as appropriate.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. The safety zone would impact
a small designated area located on the Upper Mississippi River at MM
660.5-659.5, near Lansing, IA. The Safety Zone is expected to be active
only during the implosion events, from November 28 until December 08,
2023. Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit around this safety
zone when the safety zone is not enforced.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator because the zone will be enforced only when
work is being conducted.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone encompassing the width of the Upper Mississippi River at MM
660.5-659.5. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0933 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0933   Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Mile Markers
660.5-659.5, Lansing, IA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all navigable
waters within Upper Mississippi River, Mile Markers 660.5-659.5,
Lansing, IA.
    (b) Enforcement period. This section will be subject to enforcement
from November 28, 2023, through December 08, 2023.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general safety zone
regulations in Sec.  165.23, entry of persons or vessels into this
safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited
unless authorized by the COTP or a designated representative. A
designated representative is a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assigned to units under the operational
control of USCG Sector Upper Mississippi River.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or a designated
representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through USCG Sector Upper
Mississippi River at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Persons and vessels permitted to
enter the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions
issued by the COTP or designated representative.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public of the effective period for the
safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of
enforcement, as well as reductions in size or scope of the safety zone
through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices to Mariners
(BNMs), and/or Safety Marine Information Broadcast (SMIB) as
appropriate.

    Dated: November 27, 2023.
A.R. Bender,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi
River.
[FR Doc. 2023-26377 Filed 11-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 68 (Thursday, April 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19099-19102]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08109]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74644; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2015-031]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Regarding Rule 4758

April 3, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on March 30, 2015, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 4758 (Order Routing) to (a)
explain the treatment of a DOT or DOTI order designated to participate
in the closing only; (b) explain the treatment of a LIST order
designated to participate in the closing only; and (c) explain the
treatment of a LIST order in the after-hours market.\4\ The Exchange
also proposes to make technical changes to further explain the language
of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For a description of market sessions and hours on the
Exchange, see Rule 4120(b)(4). DOT, DOTI, and LIST orders are
defined below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com/, at the Exchange'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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to amend subsection
(a)(1)(A) of Rule 4758 to: (a) Explain the treatment of a DOT or DOTI
order designated to participate in the closing only; (b) explain the
treatment of a LIST order designated to participate in the closing
only; and (c) explain the treatment of a LIST order in the after-hours
market. The Exchange also proposes to make technical changes to further
explain the language of the rule.
    NASDAQ offers its members optional routing functionality that
allows them to use NASDAQ's facilities to access liquidity available on
other trading venues. The functionality includes a range of defined
routing algorithms--known as strategies--that determine the
destinations and pattern of routing. The particular pattern of routing
to other venues associated with a particular strategy is referred to in
Rule 4758 as the ``System routing table.'' All routing is designed to
be conducted in a manner consistent with the requirements of Regulation
NMS.
    NASDAQ currently offers a set of strategies designed to allow
market participants to route orders to the primary market on which a
security is listed. NASDAQ is proposing minor

changes to these strategies to improve their functioning and make clear
the language of the rule. As an example, NASDAQ currently offers the
DOT strategy (which includes several variations) as a means of
designating an order for routing to the New York Stock Exchange
(``NYSE'') or NYSE MKT (formerly NYSE Amex) for participation in their
respective opening or closing processes. DOT orders are routed directly
to NYSE or NYSE MKT, as appropriate. After attempting to execute in the
opening or closing process, if any shares remain unexecuted, DOT orders
thereafter check the NASDAQ Market Center System for available shares
and behave as SCAN or STGY orders, depending on the designation of the
entering firm.\5\ DOTI and LIST strategies are discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ STGY is a routing option under which orders check the System
for available shares and simultaneously route the remaining shares
to destinations on the applicable System routing table. If shares
remain un-executed after routing, they are posted on the NASDAQ
book. Once the order is on the book, if the order is subsequently
locked or crossed by another accessible market center, the System
routes the order to the locking or crossing market center. SCAN
behaves similarly, but once the order is on the NASDAQ book, the
System will not route the order to a locking or crossing market
center. Although both options are described in Rule 4758 as
variations of the DOT strategy, NASDAQ's system specifications refer
to the SCAN option as either ``DOTA'' or ``DOTD'' and refer to the
STGY option as ``DOTM.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposal
    First, NASDAQ is proposing to modify the language of subsection
(a)(1)(A) of Rule 4758 to make it clear that a DOT order may be
designated to participate in the opening only or in the closing only,
with different outcomes. Currently, an order entered before the open
(or close) that is designated as opening only (or closing only) will
likely be cancelled by the destination market after the open (or close)
in accordance with its terms and therefore will not return to NASDAQ,
even if not executed in full. Similarly, if NASDAQ receives a DOT order
after the security has opened (or closed) and the order has been
designated to participate in the opening only (or closing only), the
order will nevertheless be routed to NYSE or NYSE MKT (which would be
expected to reject the order based on its designation as opening only
or closing only).\6\ Specifically, the Exchange proposes in subsection
(a)(1)(A)(i) of Rule 4758 to delete the option of a DOT order being
designated to participate in the closing only at the proper time as
described below, in which case a closing only order would be expected
to be rejected by the destination market and would also be cancelled by
NASDAQ if returned by the destination market. The Exchange proposes new
language in subsection (a)(1)(A)(i) stating that if a DOT order entered
in NYSE or NYSE MKT securities has been designated to participate in
the closing only and is entered at 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time or later (or
in the case of an early closing, is entered 15 minutes prior to the
close or later), the order will be rejected.\7\ A DOT order entered in
non-NYSE or non-NYSE MKT securities, however, will be treated as a SCAN
or STGY order depending on the designation of the firm. The Exchange
believes the proposed explanation of how DOT orders will be treated
makes the rule clearer and easier to follow, and should serve to
minimize any potential confusion regarding its application.\8\ The
modifications make clear the processing logic for NYSE or NYSE MKT and
non- NYSE or non-NYSE MKT orders. The modifications also make clear the
processing logic for NYSE or NYSE MKT DOT orders designated to
participate in the closing only and entered at 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time
or later (or in the case of an early closing, entered 15 minutes prior
to the close or later), which would be rejected. Also, the
modifications make clear the processing logic for a non-NYSE or NYSE
MKT DOT order, which would continue to be treated as SCAN or STGY
orders depending on the designation of the firm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In the event that an opening or closing only order was
returned to NASDAQ after the time of the open or close on the
destination market, NASDAQ would cancel the order.
    \7\ NYSE and NYSE MKT rules do not permit the entry of on close
orders after 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time unless they are offsetting an
imbalance. Since the Exchange is a pass through for these purposes
and does not read imbalances, the System is set to reject at the
3:45 p.m. Eastern Time cut-off or later (or in the case of an early
closing, to reject 15 minutes prior to the close or later), so that
the Exchange is in synch with the rules of NYSE and NYSE MKT. As
discussed, the Exchange adds language to ensure that the noted
orders are rejected if there is an early market close. This is
similar for DOT, DOTI, and LIST.
    \8\ For additional explanation and clarity in subsection
(a)(1)(A)(i), the Exchange proposes to add the phrase ``if
applicable'' following ``after attempting to execute in the opening
or closing process.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, NASDAQ is proposing similar changes to the DOTI routing
strategy in subsection (a)(1)(A) of Rule 4758 to make it clear that a
DOTI order may be designated to participate in the opening only but not
in the closing only under certain circumstances. Currently, DOTI is a
routing option for orders that the entering firm wishes to direct to
the NYSE or NYSE MKT without them returning to the NASDAQ Market
Center. DOTI orders check the System for available shares and then are
sent to destinations on the System routing table before being sent to
NYSE or NYSE MKT, as appropriate. Alternatively, the member entering
the order may opt to have it check the System and then be sent directly
to NYSE or NYSE MKT, without routing to destinations on the System
routing table.\9\ DOTI orders do not return to the NASDAQ Market Center
book after routing. Specifically, the Exchange proposes in subsection
(a)(1)(A)(ii)a. of Rule 4758 to delete the current option of a DOTI
order being designated to participate in the closing only at the proper
time as described below, in which case a closing only order would be
expected to be rejected by the destination market and would also be
cancelled by NASDAQ if returned by the destination market. The Exchange
proposes new language in subsection (a)(1)(A)(ii)a. stating that if a
DOTI order entered in NYSE or NYSE MKT securities has been designated
to participate in the closing only and is entered at 3:45 p.m. Eastern
Time or later (or in the case of an early closing, is entered 15
minutes prior to the close or later) it will be rejected.\10\ The
Exchange believes the proposed explanation of how DOTI orders will be
treated makes the rule clearer and easier to follow, and should serve
to minimize any potential confusion regarding its application. As is
the case with DOT, the modifications make clear the processing logic
for NYSE or NYSE MKT DOTI orders designated to participate in the
closing only and entered at 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time or later (or in the
case of an early closing, entered 15 minutes prior to the close or
later), which would be rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ This option is referred to in system specifications as
``DOTZ''.
    \10\ See also supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, NASDAQ is proposing similar changes to the LIST routing
strategy in subsection (a)(1)(A) of Rule 4758 to make it clear how a
LIST order designated to participate in the closing only will be
handled. Currently, LIST is a routing option designed to allow orders
to participate in the opening and/or closing process of the primary
listing market for a security, and to follow additional routing logic
as described below. A LIST order received before the security has
opened on its primary listing market will be routed to the primary
listing market for participation in that market's opening process.
After the security has opened on its primary listing market, unexecuted
shares will be returned to the NASDAQ system; the order would be
returned only to the extent that the order has not been designated
opening only and has not

been fully executed, rejected, or cancelled by the destination market.
Thereafter, the order will check the System for available shares and
simultaneously route the remaining shares to destinations on the System
routing table. Any remaining shares will be posted on the book. As with
DOT and DOTI, if a LIST order is received by NASDAQ before the
destination market is able to receive orders for its opening process,
the order will be held until such time as the destination market can
receive it. The Exchange specifically proposes new language in
subsection (a)(1)(A)(x) to state that for NYSE and NYSE MKT securities,
LIST orders that have been designated to participate in the closing
only and are entered at the 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time cut-off or later (or
in the case of an early closing, are entered 15 minutes prior to the
close or later), will be rejected. This is the same as DOT and DOTI.
Currently, the provision in subsection (a)(1)(A)(x) governing a LIST
order that has been designated to participate in the closing only and
is entered after the security has closed states that the order will
nevertheless be routed to the primary listing market. The Exchange
proposes to add language stating ``unless the primary market for the
security is NYSE or NYSE MKT.'' \11\ Accordingly, if a LIST order has
been designated to participate in the closing only and is entered after
the security has closed and the primary market for the security is
other than NYSE or NYSE MKT, the order will nevertheless be routed to
the primary listing market. Currently, subsection (a)(1)(A)(x) states
that LIST Orders received after market close that have not been
designated as closing only will check the System for available shares
and simultaneously route the remaining shares to destinations on the
System routing table. The Exchange proposes to add language regarding
such LIST orders, stating ``and are eligible, based on the orders'
time-in force,\12\ to participate in the after-hours market.''
Accordingly, LIST Orders received after market close that have not been
designated as closing only and are eligible, based on the orders' time-
in force, to participate in the after-hours market will check the
System for available shares and simultaneously route the remaining
shares to destinations on the System routing table. Any remaining
shares will be posted to the NASDAQ book. This additional language
explains the processing logic if a LIST order is received after market
close and is not designated to participate in the closing only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Based on its designation as closing only, this type of
eligible LIST order will nevertheless be routed to the primary
listing market; based on its designation as closing only, such an
order would be expected to be rejected by the destination market,
and would also be cancelled by NASDAQ if returned by the destination
market. Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(x). If the primary market for the
security is NYSE or NYSE MKT, the order will be rejected because the
cutoff is at 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time or later (or in the case of an
early closing, is at 15 minutes prior to the close or later). See
also supra note 6.
    \12\ For example, orders with a time in force that is valid for
extended hours trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of housekeeping, the Exchange also proposes additional
explanatory language in respect of LIST orders. First, where currently
Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(x) states that two minutes before market close, all
LIST orders on the book ``will route'' to the security's primary
listing market for participation in its closing process, the Exchange
proposes to say ``will begin routing'' in recognition of the fact that
the sheer volume of orders will not allow all orders to route at
exactly the same time. Second, where currently Rule 4758(a)(1)(A)(x)
states that after the security has closed on the primary listing
market, a LIST order that has not been designated as ``a closing only
order'' and that has not been fully executed, rejected, or cancelled by
the market to which it was routed will be returned to the NASDAQ
System, the Exchange proposes to state ``a closing only or MDAY order''
in recognition of the time in force of a MDAY order.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ ``Market Hours Day'' or ``MDAY'' shall mean for orders so
designated, that if after entry into the System, the order is not
fully executed, the order (or unexecuted portion thereof) shall
remain available for potential display and/or execution until 4:00
p.m. Eastern Time, unless canceled by the entering party, after
which it shall be returned to the entering party. MDAY Orders shall
be available for entry from 4:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time
and for potential execution from 9:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. Eastern
Time. Rule 4751(h)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that these proposed explanatory changes are
non-controversial and are consistent with the Act.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder, including the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\14\ In particular, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \15\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to and to perfect the mechanism for a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ believes that the changes will make clear to market
participants that they may not designate DOT and DOTI orders to
participate in the closing only of a primary listing venue under
certain circumstances. In addition, NASDAQ proposes to clearly explain
to market participants how orders designated to participate in the
closing only and are entered at 3:45 p.m. Eastern Time or later (or in
the case of an early closing, are entered 15 minutes prior to the close
or later) will be handled. Collectively, the changes discussed in the
proposal facilitate transactions in securities and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
providing NASDAQ members with greater explanation regarding the routing
of their orders. The Exchange believes the changes make clear the
language to Rule 4758 and make it easier to follow, and should serve to
minimize any potential confusion regarding its application. The
majority of the changes are explanatory, and some are technical in
nature.
    As noted, the Exchange believes that the changes proposed are
explanatory and non-controversial in nature.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \16\ and subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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.

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-2015-031 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-2015-031. 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 such filing will also 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-2015-031 and should
be submitted on or before April 30, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-08109 Filed 4-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 127 (Friday, July 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38714-38715]
[FR Doc No: 2011-16550]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64753; File No. SR-BYX-2011-009]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Amend BYX Rule 11.9, Entitled
``Orders and Modifiers'' and BYX Rule 11.13, Entitled ``Order
Execution''

 June 27, 2011.

I. Introduction

    On May 9, 2011, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.. (The ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend BYX Rule 11.9, entitled ``Orders and
Modifiers'' and BYX Rule 11.13, entitled ``Order Execution.'' The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on May 18, 2011.\3\ The Commission received no comment letters on the
proposed rule change. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64476 (May 12,
2011); 76 FR 28826 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    First, the Exchange proposes to change its order handling
procedures to allow both Non-Displayed Orders \4\ and orders subject to
price sliding that are not executable at their most aggressive price to
be executed in the manner and under the circumstances described
below.\5\ Second, the Exchange proposes to modify the Exchange's rules
to make clear that an order subject to ``NMS price sliding'' \6\ can be
ranked at the same price as an order displayed on the other side of the
BATS Book,\7\ although temporarily not executable at that price and
displayed at one minimum price variation less aggressive than its
price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ BYX Rule 11.9(c)(11) defines a Non-Displayed Order as ``a
market or limit order that is not displayed on the Exchange.''
    \5\ The reference to the most ``aggressive'' price means for
bids the highest price the User is willing to pay, and for offers
the lowest price at which the User is willing to sell.
    \6\ For bids, this means that a price slid order is displayed at
one minimum price variation less than the current national best
offer (``NBO''), and for offers, this means that a price slid order
is displayed at one minimum price variation more than the current
national best bid (``NBB''). See BYX Rule 11.9(g)(1).
    \7\ As defined in BYX Rule 1.5(e), the BATS Book is ``the
System's electronic file of orders.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's first proposed change noted above, amending BYX
Rules 11.9 and 11.13, is intended to address two specific scenarios
that currently exist on the Exchange: (1) Non-Displayed Orders posted
opposite same-priced displayed orders and (2) orders subject to price
sliding under BYX Rule 11.9(g) that are ranked at a price equal to an
opposite-side displayed order (collectively ``Resting Orders'').\8\
These two scenarios can occur when an order on either side of the
market is a BATS Post Only Order.\9\ Consistent with the Exchange's
current rule regarding priority of orders, BYX Rule 11.12, these
Resting Orders cannot be executed by the Exchange pursuant to BYX Rule
11.13 when such orders would be executed at prices equal to displayed
orders on the opposite side of the market (the ``locking price'')
because if the incoming orders were allowed to execute against such
Resting Orders at the locking price, such incoming orders would receive
a priority advantage over the prior, displayed order at the locking
price.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice, supra note 3.
    \9\ See id. As defined in BYX Rule 11.9(c)(6), a BATS Post Only
Order is ``[a]n order that is to be ranked and executed on the
Exchange pursuant to Rule 11.12 and Rule 11.13(a)(1) or cancelled,
as appropriate, without routing away to another trading center
except that the order will not remove liquidity from the BATS
Book.'' Accordingly, a BATS Post Only Order does not remove
liquidity, but posts to the BATS Book to the extent permissible.
    \10\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to provide for the execution of these Resting
Orders under certain circumstances. For bids or offers equal to or
greater than $1.00 per share, in the event that an order submitted to
the Exchange on the side opposite such Resting Order is a market order
or a limit order priced more aggressively than the locking price, the
Exchange proposes to amend BYX Rule 11.13 to provide for the execution
of the Resting Order at, in the case of a Resting Order bid, one-half
minimum price variation less than the locking price, and, in the case
of a Resting Order offer, at one-half minimum price variation more than
the locking price.\11\ The Exchange also proposes adding Interpretation
and Policy .01 to BYX Rule 11.13 to state that the Exchange will
consider it inconsistent with just and equitable principles of trade to
engage in a pattern or practice of using Non-Displayed Orders or orders
subject to price sliding solely for the purpose of executing such
orders at one-half minimum price variation from the locking price.\12\
Evidence of such behavior may include, but is not limited to, a User's
pattern of entering orders at a price that would lock or be ranked at
the price of a displayed quotation and cancelling orders when they no
longer lock the displayed quotation.\13\ The Exchange has also stated
that it will conduct surveillance to ensure that users are not
intentionally seeking to create an internally locked book for the
purpose of obtaining an execution at a one-half minimum price
variation.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed changes to BYX Rule 11.13(a)(1). For bids or
offers under $1.00 per share, Resting Orders priced at the locking
price will not be executed by the Exchange. Id.
    \12\ See proposed Interpretation and Policy .01 to BYX Rule
11.13.
    \13\ See id.
    \14\ See Notice, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that its proposal to modify its handling of
Resting Orders is intended to address specific conditions that are a
current, natural consequence of the Exchange's order handling
procedures because such orders are priced at the very inside of the
market but are temporarily un-executable at their full limit price due
to the Exchange's priority rule and order handling procedures.\15\ The
Exchange believes the proposed change will provide incoming orders with
the benefit of price improvement against such aggressively priced
Resting Orders.\16\ The Exchange believes this will optimize available
liquidity for incoming orders and provide price improvement for market
participants at times when such participants are not receiving
executions from the Exchange or are receiving less price improvement
than is currently available.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See id. The Exchange further notes that by permitting a
Member's Non-Displayed Order to rest at a locking price on the other
side of a displayed order, the Exchange is incenting Members to post
aggressively priced liquidity, rather than discouraging such
liquidity by leaving it unexecuted. Id.
    \16\ See id. In addition, if the BATS Book changes so that such
orders are no longer resting or ranked opposite a displayed order,
then such orders will again be executable at their full limit price,
and in the case of price slid orders, will be displayed at that
price. Id.
    \17\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's second proposed change is to clarify, by amending
BYX Rule 11.9, that an order subject to NMS price sliding can be ranked
at the same price as an order displayed on the other side of the BATS
Book.

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act \18\
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\19\ In

particular, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ which requires, among other things,
that the Exchange's rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, 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. Additionally,
the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Rules 610(d)
\21\and 612 \22\ of Regulation NMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \19\ In approving this proposal, the Commission has considered
the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \21\ SEC Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS requires policies and
procedures to avoid the display of quotations that lock or cross
protected quotations. 17 CFR 242.610(d).
    \22\ SEC Rule 612 of Regulation NMS states that no national
securities exchange, national securities association, alternative
trading system, vendor, or broker or dealer shall display, rank, or
accept from any person a bid or offer, an order, or an indication of
interest in any NMS stock priced in an increment smaller than $0.01
if that bid or offer, order, or indication of interest is priced
equal to or greater than $1.00 per share. 17 CFR 242.612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed order handling rule
change providing for the execution, under certain circumstances, of
certain Non-Displayed Orders and orders subject to price sliding that
are not executable at their most aggressive prices should serve to
enhance the quality of execution on the Exchange by facilitating
executions that would not occur pursuant to the Exchange's current
order handling process. In addition to facilitating executions that
currently would not take place, the proposed rule change will offer
price improvement to the orders executed under the new order handling
process. The Commission believes that the new order handling process
should benefit market participants by, among other things, providing
greater opportunities for buy and sell orders to interact with each
other and potentially reducing certain trading costs for market
participants. The Commission further believes that any potential abuses
are mitigated by the Exchange's addition of Interpretation and Policy
.01 to BYX Rule 11.13 and its commitment to monitor relevant trading on
its market. Additionally, the Commission believes that this proposed
order handling process is consistent with Rule 612 of Regulation NMS
because any executions in an increment smaller than $0.01 are the
result of bids, offers or orders that are priced in increments at least
equal to $0.01.\23\ With regard to the proposed rule change clarifying
that an order subject to NMS price sliding pursuant to BYX Rule 11.9
can be ranked at the same price as an order displayed on the other side
of the BATS Book, the Commission believes that such clarification is
consistent with Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS because the proposed rule
change would not result in the display of a locking quotation.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Rule 612 of Regulation NMS. 17 CFR 242.612.
    \24\ See Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS. 17 CFR 242.610(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\25\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BYX-2011-009) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-16550 Filed 6-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P