[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48732]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22646]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F St. NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 15c1-7, SEC File No. 270-146, OMB Control No.3235-0134

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 15c1-7 (17 CFR 240.15c1-
7) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.)
(``Exchange Act''). The Commission plans to submit this existing
collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 15c1-7 states that any act of a broker-dealer designed to
effect securities transactions with or for a customer account over
which the broker-dealer (directly or through an agent or employee) has
discretion will be considered a fraudulent, manipulative, or deceptive
practice under the federal securities laws, unless a record is made of
the transaction immediately by the broker-dealer. The record must
include (a) the name of the customer, (b) the name, amount, and price
of the security, and (c) the date and time when such transaction took
place.
    The Commission estimates that 394 respondents collect information
related to approximately 400,000 transactions annually under Rule 15c1-
7 and that each respondent would spend approximately 5 minutes on the
collection of information for each transaction, for approximately
33,338 aggregate hours per year (approximately 84.6 hours per
respondent).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Pamela Dyson, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 13, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-22646 Filed 10-18-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37634-37638]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15225]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 721

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0182; FRL-9353-3]
RIN 2070-AB27

Proposed Significant New Use Rule on Certain Chemical Substances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a significant new use rule (SNUR) under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for chemical substances identified
generically as complex strontium aluminum, rare earth doped, which were
the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs) P-12-22, P-12-23, P-12-24,
P-12-25, and P-12-26. This action would require persons who intend to
manufacture, import, or process any of the chemical substances for an
activity that is designated as a significant new use by this proposed
rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity.
The required notification would provide EPA with the opportunity to
evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit the
activity before it occurs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0182, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA
East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC.
Attention: Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0182. The DCO is open from
8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the DCO is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the DCO's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2012-0182. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or email. The
regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in
hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of
operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is
(202) 566-0280. Docket visitors are required to show photographic
identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign the EPA visitor
log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and
subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must
be visible at all times in the building and returned upon departure.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-9232; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
import, process, or use the chemical substances contained in this
proposed rule.

Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Manufacturers, importers, or processors of one or more
subject chemical substances (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g.,
chemical manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Sec.  721.5. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing
import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical
importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import
certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127;
see also 19 CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the
shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules
and orders under TSCA. Importers of chemicals subject to a final SNUR
must certify their compliance with the SNUR requirements. The EPA
policy in support of import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707,
subpart B. In addition, any persons who export or intend to export a
chemical substance that is the subject of a proposed or final SNUR are
subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15
U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see Sec.  721.20) and must comply with the export
notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is proposing a significant new use rule (SNUR) under section
5(a)(2) of TSCA for five chemical substances which were the subject of
PMNs. The five chemical substances are identified generically as
complex strontium aluminum, rare earth doped, which were the subject of
PMNs P-12-22, P-12-23, P-12-24, P-12-25, and P-12-26. This SNUR would
require persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process any of
these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a
significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing
that activity.
    In the Federal Register of April 25, 2012 (77 FR 24613) (FRL-9345-
4), EPA issued a direct final SNUR on these five chemical substances in
accordance with the procedures at Sec.  721.160(c)(3)(i). EPA received
notice of intent to submit adverse comments on this SNUR. Therefore, as
required by Sec.  721.160(c)(3)(ii), EPA has withdrawn the direct final
SNUR in a separate document, published elsewhere in today's Federal
Register, and is now issuing this proposed rule on the 5 chemical
substances. The record for the direct final SNUR on these substances
was established as docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0182. That record includes
information considered by the Agency in developing the direct final
rule and the notice of intent to submit adverse comments.

B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to
determine that a use of a chemical substance is a ``significant new
use.'' EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all
relevant factors, including the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2)
factors listed in Unit III. Once EPA determines that a use of a
chemical substance is a significant new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B)
requires persons to submit a significant new use notice (SNUN) to EPA
at least 90 days before they manufacture, import, or process the
chemical substance for that use. Persons who must report are described
in Sec.  [emsp14]721.5.

C. Applicability of General Provisions

    General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping
requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability
of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the rule.
Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700. According
to Sec.  721.1(c), persons subject to this SNUR must comply with the
same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as submitters of
PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In particular, these requirements
include the information submission requirements of TSCA section 5(b)
and 5(d)(1), the exemptions authorized by TSCA section 5(h)(1), (h)(2),
(h)(3), and (h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once EPA
receives a SNUN, EPA may take regulatory action under TSCA section
5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control the activities for which it has received
the SNUN. If EPA does not take action, EPA is required under TSCA
section 5(g) to explain in the Federal Register its reasons for not
taking action.

III. Significant New Use Determination

    Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that EPA's determination that a use
of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after
consideration of all relevant factors, including:
     The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.

     The extent to which a use changes the type or form of
exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
     The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and
duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical
substance.
     The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of
manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a
chemical substance.
    In addition to these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2),
the statute authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
    To determine what would constitute a significant new use for the 5
chemical substances that are the subject of this proposed SNUR, EPA
considered relevant information about the toxicity of the chemical
substances, likely human exposures and environmental releases
associated with possible uses, taking into consideration the four
bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in this unit.

IV. Substances Subject to This Proposed Rule

    EPA is proposing to establish significant new use and recordkeeping
requirements for 5 chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721, subpart E.
In this unit, EPA provides the following information for each chemical
substance:
     PMN number.
     Chemical name.
     Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number.
     Basis for the SNUR.
     Tests recommended by EPA to provide sufficient information
to evaluate the chemical substance (see Unit VII. for more
information).
     CFR citation assigned in the regulatory text section of
this proposed rule.
    This proposed SNUR encompasses 5 PMN substances for which EPA did
not find that the use scenario described in the PMNs met the criteria
set forth under TSCA section 5(e). However, EPA does believe that
certain changes from the use scenario described in these PMNs could
result in increased exposures and therefore should be designated a
significant new use. This so-called ``non-5(e) SNUR'' is being proposed
pursuant to Sec.  721.170. EPA has determined that every activity
designated as a ``significant new use'' in all non-5(e) SNURs issued
under Sec.  721.170 satisfies the two requirements stipulated in Sec.
721.170(c)(2), i.e., these significant new use activities, ``(i) Are
different from those described in the premanufacture notice for the
substance, including any amendments, deletions, and additions of
activities to the premanufacture notice, and (ii) may be accompanied by
changes in exposure or release levels that are significant in relation
to the health or environmental concerns identified'' for the PMN
substance.

PMN Numbers P-12-22, P-12-23, P-12-24, P-12-25, and P-12-26

    Chemical name: Complex strontium aluminum, rare earth doped
(generic).
    CAS number: Not available.
    Basis for action: The PMNs state that the PMN substances will be
used as dye used in the manufacture of imaging media/products. Based on
analogous respirable and poorly soluble substances, in particular,
titanium dioxide, EPA identified concerns for potential lung overload
to workers from inhalation exposure to the PMN substances.
Specifically, the Agency predicts potential toxicity to workers from
inhalation when more than 5 percent of the PMN substances particles are
less than 10 microns. For the uses described in the PMNs, significant
worker exposure is unlikely, when no more than 5 percent of particles
are less than 10 microns. Therefore, EPA has not determined that the
proposed manufacturing, processing, or use of the substances may
present an unreasonable risk. EPA has determined, however, that any use
of the substances other than as described in the PMNs may cause serious
health effects. Based on this information, the PMN substances meets the
concern criteria at Sec.  721.170(b)(3)(ii).
    Recommended testing: EPA has determined that a 90-day inhalation
toxicity test (OPPTS Test Guideline 870.3465) would help characterize
the human health effects of the PMN substances.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.10423.

V. Rationale and Objectives of the Proposed Rule

A. Rationale

    During review of the PMNs submitted for these 5 chemical
substances, EPA determined that one or more of the criteria of concern
established at Sec.  [emsp14]721.170 were met, as discussed in Unit IV.

B. Objectives

    EPA is proposing this SNUR for specific chemical substances that
have undergone premanufacture review because the Agency wants to
achieve the following objectives with regard to the significant new
uses designated in this proposed rule:
     EPA would receive notice of any person's intent to
manufacture, import, or process a listed chemical substance for the
described significant new use before that activity begins.
     EPA would have an opportunity to review and evaluate data
submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing,
importing, or processing a listed chemical substance for the described
significant new use.
     EPA would be able to regulate prospective manufacturers,
importers, or processors of a listed chemical substance before the
described significant new use of that chemical substance occurs,
provided that regulation is warranted pursuant to TSCA sections 5(e),
5(f), 6, or 7.
    Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that
the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how
to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is
available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/existingchemicals/pubs/tscainventory/index.html.

VI. Applicability of the Proposed Rule to Uses Occurring Before
Effective Date of the Final Rule

    To establish a significant ``new'' use, EPA must determine that the
use is not ongoing. The chemical substances subject to this proposed
rule have undergone premanufacture review. EPA is soliciting comments
on whether any of the uses proposed as significant new uses are
ongoing.
    As discussed in the Federal Register issue of April 24, 1990 (55 FR
17376), EPA has decided that the intent of TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is
best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the
date of publication of this proposed rule rather than as of the
effective date of the final rule. If uses begun after publication of
the proposed rule were considered ongoing rather than new, it would be
difficult for EPA to establish SNUR notice requirements because a
person could defeat the SNUR by initiating the significant new use
before the rule became final, and then argue that the use was ongoing
before the effective date of the final rule. Thus, persons who begin
commercial manufacture, import, or processing of the chemical
substances that would be regulated through this proposed SNUR will have
to cease any such activity before the effective date of the rule if and
when finalized. To resume their activities, these persons would have to
comply with all applicable SNUR notice requirements and wait until the
notice review period, including all extensions, expires.

    EPA has promulgated provisions to allow persons to comply with this
proposed SNUR before the effective date. If a person were to meet the
conditions of advance compliance under Sec.  [emsp14]721.45(h), the
person is considered exempt from the requirements of the SNUR.

VII. Test Data and Other Information

    EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require developing any
particular test data before submission of a SNUN. The two exceptions
are:
    1. Development of test data is required where the chemical
substance subject to the SNUR is also subject to a test rule under TSCA
section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)).
    2. Development of test data may be necessary where the chemical
substance has been listed under TSCA section 5(b)(4) (see TSCA section
5(b)(2)).
    In the absence of a TSCA section 4 test rule or a TSCA section
5(b)(4) listing covering the chemical substance, persons are required
only to submit test data in their possession or control and to describe
any other data known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see Sec.
720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the
authority to require appropriate testing. Descriptions of tests are
provided for informational purposes. EPA strongly encourages persons,
before performing any testing, to consult with the Agency pertaining to
protocol selection and test reporting. To access the harmonized test
guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go to
http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test Methods and Guidelines.''
    The recommended tests specified in Unit IV. may not be the only
means of addressing the potential risks of the chemical substance.
However, submitting a SNUN without any test data may increase the
likelihood that EPA will take action under TSCA section 5(e),
particularly if satisfactory test results have not been obtained from a
prior PMN or SNUN submitter. EPA recommends that potential SNUN
submitters contact EPA early enough so that they will be able to
conduct the appropriate tests.
    SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to
evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:
     Human exposure and environmental release that may result
from the significant new use of the chemical substances.
     Potential benefits of the chemical substances.
     Information on risks posed by the chemical substances
compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.

VIII. SNUN Submissions

    According to Sec.  721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply
with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as
persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health
and environmental effects as described in Sec.  720.50. SNUNs must be
submitted on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN software, and
submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Sec. Sec.  721.25 and 720.40. e-PMN software is available
electronically at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.

IX. Economic Analysis

    EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN
requirements for potential manufacturers, importers, and processors of
the chemical substances during the development of the direct final
rule. EPA's complete economic analysis is available in the docket under
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0182.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

    This proposed rule would establish a SNUR for 5 chemical substances
that were the subject of PMNs. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. EPA would amend the table
in 40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB approval number for the information
collection requirements contained in this proposed rule, if the SNUR is
subsequently issued as a final rule. This listing of the OMB control
numbers and their subsequent codification in the CFR satisfies the
display requirements of PRA and OMB's implementing regulations at 5 CFR
part 1320. This Information Collection Request (ICR) was previously
subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB approval, and given
the technical nature of the table, EPA finds that further notice and
comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA finds that there
is ``good cause'' under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), to amend this table without
further notice and comment.
    The information collection requirements related to this action have
already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number
2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action would not impose any burden
requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN
to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and
170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed
to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and
maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required
SNUN.
    Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including
through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director,
Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information
(2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control
number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to
this address.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    On February 18, 2012, EPA certified pursuant to section 605(b) of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), that
promulgation of a SNUR does not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities where the following are true:
    1. A significant number of SNUNs would not be submitted by small
entities in response to the SNUR.
    2. The SNUN submitted by any small entity would not cost
significantly more than $8,300. A copy of that certification is
available in the docket for this proposed rule.
    This proposed rule is within the scope of the February 18, 2012
certification. Based on the economic analysis discussed in Unit IX. and
EPA's experience promulgating SNURs (discussed in the certification),
EPA believes that the following are true:

    1. A significant number of SNUNs would not be submitted by small
entities in response to the SNUR.
    2. Submission of the SNUN would not cost any small entity
significantly more than $8,300. Therefore, the promulgation of the SNUR
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs,
State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these
rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any
State, local, or Tribal government would be impacted by this proposed
rule. As such, EPA has determined that this proposed rule would not
impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise
have any affect on small governments subject to the requirements of
sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).

E. Executive Order 13132

    This action would not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

F. Executive Order 13175

    This proposed rule would not have Tribal implications because it is
not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This
proposed rule would not significantly nor uniquely affect the
communities of Indian Tribal governments, nor would it involve or
impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), do not apply to this proposed rule.

G. Executive Order 13045

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
this action does not address environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.

H. Executive Order 13211

    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001),
because this action is not expected to affect energy supply,
distribution, or use and because this action is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    In addition, since this action does not involve any technical
standards, section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.

J. Executive Order 12898

    This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled
Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 14, 2012.
Maria J. Doa,
Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics.

    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 721 be amended as
follows:

PART 721--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).

    2. Add Sec.  [emsp14]721.10423 to subpart E to read as follows:

Sec.  721.10423  Complex strontium aluminum, rare earth doped
(generic).

    (a) Chemical substances and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substances identified generically as
complex strontium aluminum, rare earth doped (PMNs P-12-22, P-12-23, P-
12-24, P-12-25, and P-12-26) are subject to reporting under this
section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of
this section.
    (2) The significant new uses are:
    (i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements
as specified in Sec.  721.80(j) (manufacture, processing, or use where
no more than 5 percent of particles are less than 10 microns).
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph.
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125 (a), (b), (c), and (i) are applicable to manufacturers,
importers, and processors of these substances.
    (2) Limitations or revocation of certain notification requirements.
The provisions of Sec.  721.185 apply to this section.

[FR Doc. 2012-15225 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 26, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2003-14529

                     							       OST-95-736

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC.,    filed   2/14/03,  for:

XX Exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point Phoenix, Arizona, and Cancun, Mexico.

America West also requests that, for administrative efficiency, the new
Phoenix-Cancun authority here be consolidated into America West’s
Docket OST-95-736 (various U.S.-Mexico exemption authority) and run
concurrently with that authority through October 29, 2004.

Applicant rep: David M. Kirstein<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst: Linda L.
Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The authority granted was effective when taken: _February 25, 2003,
through October 29, 2004.

Action taken by: 	 Paul L. Gretch

			Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated: 	XX  Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

			XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption authority granted is subject to
the dormancy notice requirements set forth in condition 7 of Appendix A
of Order 88-10-2.  Consistent with our standard practice, the dormancy
notice period will begin on June 1, 2003, America West’s proposed
startup date for services in the Phoenix-Cancun market.

- see next page -

														2

Remarks:  We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of
the 15-day answer period with the consent of all parties served.

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the application was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

APPENDIX

U.S. CARRIER

Standard Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of operations authorized by the attached notice, the
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations and with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

										10/2002

 To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder should, before commencing any new
service (including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, inform
its Principal Security Inspector of its plans.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16008-16009]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06372]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-0217]

Premarket Notification Submissions for Electrosurgical Devices
for General Surgery; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug
Administration Staff; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of the draft guidance entitled ``Premarket Notification
(510(k)) Submissions for Electrosurgical Devices for General Surgery.''
FDA has developed this guidance document to assist industry in
preparing premarket notification (510(k)) submissions for
electrosurgical devices intended for use in general surgery. This draft
guidance is not final nor is it in effect at this time.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by June 23, 2014.

ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for
download from the Internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written
requests for a single hard copy of the draft guidance document entitled
``Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions for Electrosurgical
Devices for General Surgery'' to the Office of the Center Director,
Guidance and Policy Development, Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
66, Rm. 5431, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed
adhesive label to assist that office in processing your request.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua Nipper, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. G404, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA has developed this guidance document to assist industry in
preparing premarket notification (510(k)) submissions for
electrosurgical devices intended for use in general surgery. These
devices are designed to cut and/or remove tissue and control bleeding
through the use of high frequency electrical current. For the purpose
of this guidance, electrosurgical devices may also be called
radiofrequency devices or high frequency devices. The scope of this
document is limited to the class II, electrosurgical devices and
accessories classified under 21 CFR 878.4400, Electrosurgical cutting
and coagulation device and accessories.

II. Significance of Guidance

    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the Agency's current thinking on the content
of premarket notification (510(k)) submissions for electrosurgical
devices for general surgery. It does not create or confer any rights
for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An
alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the
requirements of the applicable statute and regulations.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do
so by downloading an electronic copy from the Internet. A search
capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance
documents is available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm. Guidance
documents are also available at http://www.regulations.gov. Persons
unable to download an electronic copy of ``Premarket Notification
(510(k)) Submissions for Electrosurgical Devices for General Surgery,''
may send an email request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to receive an
electronic copy of the document. Please use the document number 1835 to
identify the guidance you are requesting.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E have been
approved under

OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR
part 820 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0073; and the
collections of information in 21 CFR parts 801 and 809 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0485.

V. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: March 18, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-06372 Filed 3-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 75 (Thursday, April 18, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16299-16300]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07824]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85644; File No. SR-NYSE-2018-46]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on
Proceedings To Determine Whether To Approve or Disapprove a Proposed
Rule Change To Amend the Listed Company Manual for Special Purpose
Acquisition Companies To Reduce the Continued Listing Standards for
Public Holders From 300 to 100 and To Enable the Exchange To Exercise
Discretion To Allow Special Purpose Acquisition Companies a Reasonable
Time Period Following a Business Combination To Demonstrate Compliance
With the Applicable Quantitative Listing Standards

April 15, 2019.
    On October 1, 2018, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') 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 the Listed Company Manual for Acquisition
Companies (``ACs'') to reduce the continued listing standards for
public holders from 300 to 100 and to enable the Exchange to exercise
discretion to allow ACs a reasonable time period following a business
combination to demonstration compliance with the applicable
quantitative listing standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on October 18, 2018.\3\ In response, the Commission received
one comment on the proposed rule change.\4\ On November 29, 2018,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ the

Commission designated a longer period within which to approve the
proposed rule change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule
change.\6\ On January 15, 2019, the Commission issued an order
instituting proceedings under Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act \7\ to
determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule change
(``OIP'').\8\ The Commission received one comment on the proposal in
response to the OIP.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84420 (October 12,
2018), 83 FR 52854 (October 18, 2018) (``Notice'').
    \4\ See Letter to Secretary, Commission, from Jeffrey P.
Mahoney, General Counsel, Council of Institutional Investors, dated
November 8, 2018 (``CII Letter'').
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84680 (November 29,
2018), 83 FR 62942 (December 8, 2018). The Commission designated
January 16, 2019, as the date by which it should approve,
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84984 (January 15,
2019), 84 FR 0855 (January 31, 2019).
    \9\ See Letter to Secretary, Commission, from Jeffrey P.
Mahoney, General Counsel, Council of Institutional Investors, dated
February 11, 2019 (``CII Letter II'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \10\ provides that, after initiating
disapproval proceedings, the Commission shall issue an order approving
or disapproving the proposed rule change not later than 180 days after
the date of publication of notice of filing of the proposed rule
change. The Commission may extend the period for issuing an order
approving or disapproving the proposed rule change, however, by not
more than 60 days if the Commission determines that a longer period is
appropriate and publishes the reasons for such determination. The
proposed rule change was published for notice and comment in the
Federal Register on October 18, 2018. The 180th day after publication
of the Notice is April 16, 2019, and June 15, 2019 is an additional 60
days from that date.
    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to issue an order approving or disapproving the proposed
rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed
rule change and the comment letters. Accordingly, the Commission,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\11\ designates June 15, 2019,
as the date by which the Commission shall either approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSE-2018-46).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \11\ Id.

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

    \12\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-07824 Filed 4-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 160 (Tuesday, August 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49127-49132]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19579]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72831; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2014-077]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Rebates and Fees in Penny and Non-Penny Pilot Options

August 13, 2014.
    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 July 30, 2014, 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 and II below, which Items have been prepared by NASDAQ. 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

    NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, entitled ``Options Pricing,''
at Section 2 governing pricing for NASDAQ members using the NASDAQ
Options Market (``NOM''), NASDAQ's facility for executing and routing
standardized equity and index options. Specifically, NOM proposes to:
(i) Amend the Customer \3\ Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options; \4\ (ii) amend certain Penny Pilot Options Rebates to Add
Liquidity and Non-Penny Pilot Options Fees for Adding Liquidity
applicable to Firms,\5\ Non-NOM Market Makers \6\ and Broker Dealers;
\7\ and (iii) amend NOM Market Maker \8\ Penny Pilot Options Rebates to
Add Liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Customer'' applies to any transaction that is
identified by a Participant for clearing in the Customer range at
The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') which is not for the
account of broker or dealer or for the account of a ``Professional''
(as that term is defined in Chapter I, Section 1(a)(48)).
    \4\ The Penny Pilot was established in March 2008 and in October
2009 was expanded and extended through December 31, 2014. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 57579 (March 28, 2008), 73 FR
18587 (April 4, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-026) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness establishing Penny Pilot); 60874 (October
23, 2009), 74 FR 56682 (November 2, 2009) (SR-NASDAQ-2009-091)
(notice of filing and immediate effectiveness expanding and
extending Penny Pilot); 60965 (November 9, 2009), 74 FR 59292
(November 17, 2009) (SR-NASDAQ-2009-097) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot);
61455 (February 1, 2010), 75 FR 6239 (February 8, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-
2010-013) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness adding
seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot); 62029 (May 4, 2010), 75 FR
25895 (May 10, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-2010-053) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness adding seventy-five classes to Penny Pilot);
65969 (December 15, 2011), 76 FR 79268 (December 21, 2011) (SR-
NASDAQ-2011-169) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness
extension and replacement of Penny Pilot); 67325 (June 29, 2012), 77
FR 40127 (July 6, 2012) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-075) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot
through December 31, 2012); 68519 (December 21, 2012), 78 FR 136
(January 2, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2012-143) (notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness and extension and replacement of Penny Pilot
through June 30, 2013); 69787 (June 18, 2013), 78 FR 37858 (June 24,
2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-082); 71105 (December 17, 2013), 78 FR 77530
(December 23, 2013) (SR-NASDAQ-2013-154) and 72244 (May 23, 2014),
79 FR 31151 (May 30, 2014) (SR-NASDAQ-2014-056). See also NOM Rules,
Chapter VI, Section 5.
    \5\ The term ``Firm'' or (``F'') applies to any transaction that
is identified by a Participant for clearing in the Firm range at
OCC.
    \6\ The term ``Non-NOM Market Maker'' or (``O'') is a registered
market maker on another options exchange that is not a NOM Market
Maker. A Non-NOM Market Maker must append the proper Non-NOM Market
Maker designation to orders routed to NOM.
    \7\ The term ``Broker-Dealer'' or (``B'') applies to any
transaction which is not subject to any of the other transaction
fees applicable within a particular category.
    \8\ The term ``NOM Market Maker'' means a Participant that has
registered as a Market Maker on NOM pursuant to Chapter VII, Section
2, and must also remain in good standing pursuant to Chapter VII,
Section 4. In order to receive NOM Market Maker pricing in all
securities, the Participant must be registered as a NOM Market Maker
in at least one security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the changes proposed herein are effective upon filing, the
Exchange has designated that the amendments be operative on August 1,
2014.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, entitled ``Options Pricing,''
at Section 2(1) governing the rebates and fees assessed for option
orders entered into NOM. The Exchange proposes to: (i) Amend the
Customer Penny Pilot Options Fee for Removing Liquidity; (ii) delete
certain Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and Broker-Dealer pricing in Chapter
XV, Section 2; and (iii) amend the NOM Market Maker Pilot Options
Rebates to Add Liquidity.
    Today the Exchange assesses the following Penny Pilot Options Fees
for Removing Liquidity: Customer $0.47 per contract, and
Professional,\9\ Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker, NOM Market Maker and
Broker-Dealer $0.49 per contract. In addition a Professional, Firm,
Non-NOM Market Maker, NOM Market Maker and Broker-Dealer that qualifies
for Customer or Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a
given month will be assessed a Professional, Firm, Non-NOM Market
Maker, NOM Market Maker or Broker-Dealer Fee for Removing Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options of $0.47 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The term ``Professional'' means any person or entity that
(i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) places more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial account(s) pursuant to Chapter
I, Section 1(a)(48). All Professional orders shall be appropriately
marked by Participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to make two amendments related to the
Customer Penny Pilot Options Fees for Removing Liquidity. The Exchange
is proposing to increase the Customer Penny Pilot Options Fee for
Removing Liquidity from $0.47 to $0.48 per contract. Despite the
increase to this fee, the Exchange believes market participants will
continue to remove Customer orders on NOM. Additionally, the Exchange
is proposing to amend note ``d'' in Section 2, Chapter XV to provide,
``Participants or Participants under Common Ownership \10\ that qualify
for Customer or Professional Rebates to Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a
given month will be assessed a Professional, Firm, Non-NOM Market
Maker, NOM Market Maker or Broker-Dealer Fee for Removing Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options of $0.48 per contract and a Customer Fee for
Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options of $0.47 per contract.'' The
Exchange is therefore proposing to offer Customers the opportunity to
lower the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options to
$0.47 per contract, provided they qualify for Customer or Professional
Rebates to Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a given month. Today, the
Exchange offers tiered Penny Pilot Options Rebates to Add Liquidity to
Customers and Professionals based on various criteria with rebates
ranging from $0.20 to $0.48 per contract. To obtain the Tier 7 Customer
and Professional Rebates to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options, a
Participant must have Total Volume \11\ of 150,000 or more contracts
per day in a month, of which 50,000 or more contracts per day in a
month must be Customer and/or Professional liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options.\12\ Tier 7 pays a $0.47 per contract rebate. To obtain the
Tier 8 Customer and Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options, a Participant must add Customer and/or Professional liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of 0.75% or more
of national customer volume in multiply-listed equity and ETF options
classes in a month. Tier 8 pays a rebate of $0.48 per contract for
Customers and $0.47 per contract for Professionals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The term ``Common Ownership'' shall mean Participants under
75% common ownership or control.
    \11\ Total Volume is defined as Customer, Professional, Firm,
Broker-Dealer, Non-NOM Market Maker and NOM Market Maker volume in
Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options which either adds
or removes liquidity on NOM. See note ``b'' in Section 2, Chapter
XV. The Exchange utilizes data from OCC to determine the total
industry customer equity and ETF options ADV figure. OCC classifies
equity and ETF options volume under the equity options category.
Also, both customer and professional orders that are transacted on
options exchanges clear in the customer range at OCC and therefore
both customer and professional volume would be included in the total
industry figure to calculate rebate tiers. This is the case today
for the Total Volume number that appear in Tiers 6 and 7 of the
Customer and Professional rebate today, which includes Customer and
Professional numbers in both the numerator and denominator of that
percentage.
    \12\ Tier 8 requires the Participant have Total Volume of
150,000 or more contracts per day in a month, of which 50,000 or
more contracts per day in a month must be Customer and/or
Professional liquidity in Penny Pilot Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and
Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Options Rebates to Add Liquidity and Non-
Penny Pilot Fees for Adding Liquidity by removing the opportunity to
lower fees as specified in note 2 in Section 2, Chapter XV which
states, ``[a] Participant that adds Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker or
Broker-Dealer liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot
Options of 15,000 contracts per day or more in a given month will
receive a Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options of $0.20 per
contract and will pay a Fee for Adding Liquidity in Non-Penny Pilot
Options of $0.36 per contract.'' Firms, Non-NOM Market Makers and
Broker-Dealers would therefore receive a $0.10 per contract Penny Pilot
Options Rebate to Add Liquidity and pay a $0.45 per contract Non-Penny
Pilot Options Fee for Adding Liquidity. The Exchange believes that this
incentive is not encouraging Firms, Non-NOM Market Makers and Broker-
Dealers to transact additional liquidity on NOM and therefore the
Exchange desires to remove this incentive.
    Today, the Exchange pays Penny Pilot Options NOM Market Maker
Rebates to Add Liquidity based on various criteria in four tiers with
rebates which range from $0.20 to $0.42 per contract as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Rebate to
                       Monthly volume                            add
                                                              liquidity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1 Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny        $0.20
 Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of up to
 0.10% of total industry customer equity and ETF option
 average daily volume (``ADV'') contracts per day in a
 month.....................................................
Tier 2 Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny         0.25
 Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.10%
 to 0.30% of total industry customer equity and ETF option
 ADV contracts per day in a month..........................
Tier 3 Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny         0.30
 Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.30%
 to 0.60% of total industry customer equity and ETF option
 ADV contracts per day in a month..........................
Tier 4 Participant adds NOM Market Maker \1\ liquidity in          (\1\)
 Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of
 above 0.60% of total industry customer equity and ETF
 option ADV contracts per day in a month...................
Tier 5 Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny         0.40
 Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of above
 0.30% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV
 contracts per day in a month and qualifies for the Tier 7
 or Tier 8 Customer and/or Professional Rebate to Add
 Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options..........................

Tier 6 Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny         0.42
 Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.80%
 of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV
 contracts per day in a month and qualifies for the Tier 7
 or Tier 8 Customer and/or Professional Rebate to Add
 Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options or Participant adds NOM
 Market Maker liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-
 Penny Pilot Options above 0.90% of total industry customer
 equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in a month....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ $0.32 or $0.38 in the following symbols BAC, GLD, IWM, QQQ and VXX
  or $0.40 in SPY.

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Tier 2 NOM Market Maker Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options which currently pays a $0.25
per contract rebate to Participants that add NOM Market Maker liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.10% to
0.30% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts
per day in a month. The Exchange intends to instead continue to pay a
$0.25 per contract rebate to Participant that add NOM Market Maker
liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above
0.10% to 0.25% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV
contracts per day in a month. By lowering this tier, the Exchange
believes a greater number of NOM Market Makers may qualify for the Tier
2 rebate.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Tier 3 NOM Market Maker Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options which currently pays a $0.30
per contract rebate to Participants that add NOM Market Maker liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.30% to
0.60% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts
per day in a month. The Exchange intends to instead continue to pay a
$0.30 per contract rebate to Participants that add NOM Market Maker
liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above
0.25% to 0.60% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV
contracts per day in a month. Also, the Exchange intends to offer a
higher rebate for Tier 3 qualifiers of $0.40 per contract in options
overlying PowerShares QQQ (``QQQ''), SPDR S&P 500 (``SPY''), iPath S&P
500 VIX ST Futures ETN (``VXX''). By lowering this tier, and offering a
higher rebate for certain symbols, the Exchange believes a greater
number of NOM Market Makers may qualify for the Tier 3 rebate.
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to amend the Tier 4 NOM Market Maker
Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options which currently pays a
$0.32 rebate in all options, except options overlying Bank of America
Corporation (``BAC''), SPDR Gold Shares (``GLD''), iShares Russell 2000
Index (``IWM''), QQQ and VXX, which pays a $0.38 per contract rebate,
and SPY which pays a $0.40 per contract rebate. The Tier 4 rebate is
paid to Participants that add NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of above 0.60% of total industry
customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in a month. The
Exchange proposes to amend the Tier 4 rebate to pay a $0.32 rebate in
all options, except QQQ, VXX and SPY, which will pay a $0.40 per
contract rebate. The Exchange will pay a $0.32 per contract rebate for
BAC, GLD and IWM with this proposal. Additionally, in order to qualify
for the Tier 4 rebate, a Participant must add NOM Market Maker
liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of
above 0.60% to 0.90% of total industry customer equity and ETF option
ADV contracts per day in a month. The Exchange believes that adding the
language ``above 0.60% to 0.90% of total industry customer equity''
will clarify Tier 4 for purposes of obtaining the rebate. NOM Market
Maker liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options
of above 0.90% today qualifies for the Tier 6 NOM Market Maker
rebate.\13\ The Exchange believes the amendment to the description of
the Tier 4 rebate is non-substantive and clarifies the qualification
for the rebate. The Exchange believes that paying a higher rebate for
QQQ and VXX transactions will encourage a greater number of
transactions in these symbols. Despite the decrease in rebates paid for
transaction in BAC, GLD and IWM, the Exchange believes that market
participants will continue to transact volume in these symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Tier 6 NOM Market Maker Rebate to Add Liquidity pays a
$0.42 per contract rebate to Participants that add NOM Market Maker
liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options
above 0.80% of total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV
contracts per day in a month and qualifies for the Tier 7 or Tier 8
Customer and/or Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot
Options or Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.90% of total
industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in a
month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\14\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in that they provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or
system which NASDAQ operates or controls as described in detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Customer Penny Pilot Options Fee for Removing Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Customer Penny Pilot
Options Fee for Removing Liquidity from $0.47 to $0.48 per contract is
reasonable because the Exchange is seeking to recoup costs associated
with offering Customer rebates in Penny Options to attract greater
liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that increasing the
Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity by $0.01 per contract ($0.47 to
$0.48 per contract) allows the Exchange to recoup costs and offer even
greater Customer rebates, thereby benefitting all market participants
by attracting Customer order flow to NOM.
    The Exchange's proposal to increase the Customer Penny Pilot
Options Fee for Removing Liquidity from $0.47 to $0.48 per contract is
equitable and not unfairly [sic] because Customers would continue to be
assessed lower fees as compared to non-Customer market participants.
Currently, Professionals, Firms, Non-NOM Market Makers and NOM Market
Makers are assessed a $0.49 per contract Fee for Removing Liquidity in
Penny Options. Customer liquidity benefits all market participants by
providing more trading opportunities, which attracts Specialists and
Market Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants
in turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
Further, the Exchange is

offering Customers, similar to other non-Customer market participants
\16\ the opportunity to lower the Customer Penny Pilot Options Fee for
Removing Liquidity by qualifying for Customer or Professional Rebate to
Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a given month.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See current note ``d'' in Section 2, Chapter XV of NOM
Rules.
    \17\ See proposed amendment to note ``d'' in Section 2, Chapter
XV of NOM Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to offer Customers the opportunity to lower
the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options to $0.47
per contract, provided they qualify for Customer or Professional Rebate
to Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a given month is reasonable because
today the Exchange offers all other non-Customer market participants
(Professional, Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker, NOM Market Maker and Broker-
Dealer) the opportunity to lower the Fee for Removing Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options from $0.49 to $0.48 per contract. The Exchange
believes that incentivizing Customers, as today is done with other
market participants,\18\ to transact a greater number of Customer and
Professional orders \19\ in order to lower fees is reasonable because
the liquidity from this order flow will benefit other market
participants that have the opportunity to interact with this order
flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See current note ``d'' in Section 2, Chapter XV of NOM
Rules.
    \19\ Tier 7 requires 50,000 or more contracts per day in a month
to be Customer and/or Professional liquidity in Penny Pilot Options.
Tier 8 requires Participants to add Customer and/or Professional
liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of
0.75% or more of national customer volume in multiply-listed equity
and ETF options classes in a month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to offer Customers the opportunity to lower
the Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options to $0.47
per contract, provided they qualify for Customer or Professional Rebate
to Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a given month, is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory because Customers will have the opportunity to
lower fees similar to other non-Customer market participants.
Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Options Rebate
To Add Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and
Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Options Rebates to Add Liquidity and Non-
Penny Pilot Options Fees for Adding Liquidity by removing the
opportunity to lower fees as specified in note 2 in Section 2, Chapter
XV which states, ``[a] Participant that adds Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker
or Broker-Dealer liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny
Pilot Options of 15,000 contracts per day or more in a given month will
receive a Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options of $0.20 per
contract and will pay a Fee for Adding Liquidity in Non-Penny Pilot
Options of $0.36 per contract'' is reasonable because the Exchange no
longer desires to incentivize these market participants in this manner.
The Exchange believes that focusing on attracting Customer and
Professional order flow will benefit all market participants.
Additionally, the Exchange offers these market participants other
incentives such as the incentive to reduce the Fee for Removing
Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options by qualifying for Tiers 7 and 8.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See current note ``d'' in Section 2, Chapter XV of NOM
Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and
Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Options Rebates to Add Liquidity and Fees for
Adding Liquidity by removing the opportunity to lower fees as specified
in note 2 in Section 2, Chapter XV which states, ``[a] Participant that
adds Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker or Broker-Dealer liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of 15,000 contracts per
day or more in a given month will receive a Rebate to Add Liquidity in
Penny Pilot Options of $0.20 per contract and will pay a Fee for Adding
Liquidity in Non-Penny Pilot Options of $0.36 per contract'' is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the Exchange would
not offer this opportunity to earn higher rebates and receive lower
fees to any market participant in this manner.
NOM Market Maker Penny Pilot Options Rebates To Add Liquidity
    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Tier 2 NOM Market Maker Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options which currently pays a $0.25
per contract rebate to apply to NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.10% to 0.25% of
total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in
a month is reasonable because, specifically, the Exchange believes a
greater number of NOM Market Makers may qualify for the Tier 2 rebate.
Generally, the proposal is reasonable because it should incentivize NOM
Market Makers to post liquidity on NOM. NOM Market Makers are valuable
market participants that provide liquidity in the marketplace and incur
costs unlike other market participants. The Exchange believes that
encouraging NOM Market Makers to be more aggressive when posting
liquidity benefits all market participants through increased liquidity.
    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Tier 2 NOM Market Maker Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options which currently pays a $0.25
per contract rebate to apply to NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.10% to 0.25% of
total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in
a month is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all
eligible Participants that qualify for the Tier 2 NOM Market Maker
Penny Pilot Options Rebate to Add Liquidity metric will be uniformly
paid the rebate.\21\ Further, the NOM Market Maker rebate proposal is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it does not misalign
the current rebate structure because NOM Market Makers will continue to
earn higher rebates as compared to Firms, Non-NOM Market Makers and
Broker-Dealers and will earn the same or lower rebates as compared to
Customers and Professionals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The NOM Market Maker obligations and regulatory
requirements remain unchanged. Pursuant to NOM Rules at Chapter VII
(Market Participants), Section 5 (Obligations of Market Makers), in
registering as a market maker, an Options Participant commits
himself to various obligations. Transactions of a Market Maker in
its market making capacity must constitute a course of dealings
reasonably calculated to contribute to the maintenance of a fair and
orderly market, and Market Makers should not make bids or offers or
enter into transactions that are inconsistent with such course of
dealings. Further, all Market Makers are designated as specialists
on NOM for all purposes under the Act or rules thereunder. See
Chapter VII, Section 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to offer a higher rebate for Tier 3 of
$0.40 per contract for options in SPY, QQQ and VXX is reasonable
because the proposal seeks to encourage Participants to add liquidity
in SPY, QQQ and VXX in order to obtain a higher rebate of $0.40 per
contract. The Exchange believes that offering NOM Market Makers the
ability to obtain higher rebates is reasonable because it will
encourage additional order interaction. The Exchange's proposal to
amend the Tier 3 NOM Market Maker Rebate to Add Liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options which currently pays a $0.30 per contract rebate, or with
this proposal $0.40 per contract for SPY,QQQ and VXX, to apply to NOM
Market Maker liquidity in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot
Options above 0.25% to 0.60% of total industry customer equity and ETF

option ADV contracts per day in a month is reasonable because the
Exchange believes a greater number of NOM Market Makers may qualify for
the Tier 3 rebate.
    The Exchange's proposal to offer a higher rebate for Tier 3 of
$0.40 per contract for options in SPY, QQQ and VXX, or $0.30 for other
symbols, if the Participant adds NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.25% to 0.60% of
total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in
a month is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because all NOM
Market Makers may qualify for the Tier 3 NOM Market Maker Penny Pilot
Options Rebate to Add Liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable, and not
unfairly discriminatory to adopt specific pricing for SPY, QQQ and VXX
because pricing by symbol is a common practice on many U.S. options
exchanges as a means to incentivize order flow to be sent to an
exchange for execution in the most actively traded options classes, in
this case actively traded Penny Pilot Options.\22\ The Exchange notes
that SPY, QQQ and VXX are some of the most actively traded options in
the U.S. The Exchange believes that this pricing will incentivize
members to transact options on SPY, QQQ and on NOM in order to obtain
the higher $0.40 per contract rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC's Pricing Schedule. See also the
International Securities Exchange LLC's Fee Schedule. Both of these
markets segment pricing by symbol.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Tier 4 rebates to assess BAC,
GLD and IWM the lower rebate of $0.32 per contract is reasonable
because the Exchange believes that despite the decrease, Participants
will continue to be incentivized to earn the $0.32 per contract rebate.
The Exchange's proposal to increase the Tier 4 rebates for QQQ and VXX
to $0.40 per contract, similar to SPY, is reasonable because the
proposal seeks to encourage Participants to add more liquidity in QQQ
and VXX in order to obtain a higher rebate of $0.40 per contract. The
Exchange believes that offering NOM Market Makers the ability to obtain
higher rebates is reasonable because it will encourage additional order
interaction.
    The Exchange's proposals to amend the Tier 4 rebates to assess BAC,
GLD and IWM the lower rebate of $0.32 per contract and the Exchange's
proposal to increase the Tier 4 rebates for QQQ and VXX to $0.40 per
contract, similar to SPY, are equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because all NOM Market Makers may qualify for the Tier 4 NOM Market
Maker Penny Pilot Options Rebate to Add Liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that adding to the phrase ``above 0.60%'' the
words ``to 0.90%'' to Tier 4 is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because it will clarify the rule text with respect to
the qualification for the rebate and apply uniformly to all market
participants. The Exchange pays a Rebate to Add Liquidity in Tier 6 to
Participants that add NOM Market Maker in Penny Pilot Options and/or
Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.90% in Tier 6.\23\ The Exchange
believes clarifying Tier 4 will make this clear.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule changes will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The Exchange's
proposal to increase the Customer Penny Pilot Options Fee for Removing
Liquidity to $0.48 per contract does not create an undue burden on
competition because Customers will continue to be assessed lower fees
as compared to non-Customer market participants. Customer liquidity
benefits all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities, which attracts Specialists and Market Makers. An
increase in the activity of these market participants in turn
facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants.
Also, the Exchange is offering Customers, similar to other non-Customer
market participants, the opportunity to lower the Customer Penny Pilot
Options Fee for Removing Liquidity by qualifying for Customer or
Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity Tiers 7 or 8 in a given month. The
Exchange believes that offering Customers the opportunity to lower the
Customer Fee for Removing Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options, provided
they qualify for Customer or Professional Rebate to Add Liquidity Tiers
7 or 8 in a given month, does not impose an unfair burden on
competition because incentivizing Customers to transact a greater
number of Customer and Professional orders,\24\ in order to lower fees,
results in increased liquidity which benefits other market participants
that have the opportunity to interact with this order flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See note 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker and
Broker-Dealer Penny Pilot Options Rebates to Add Liquidity and Non-
Penny Pilot Fees for Adding Liquidity to remove the incentive if a
Participant adds Firm, Non-NOM Market Maker or Broker-Dealer liquidity
in Penny Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options of 15,000
contracts per day or more in a given month they will receive a Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options of $0.20 per contract and will
pay a Fee for Adding Liquidity in Non-Penny Pilot Options of $0.36 per
contract does not create an undue burden on competition because the
Exchange would not offer this opportunity to earn higher rebates and
receive lower fees to any market participant in this manner.
    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Tier 2 NOM Market Maker Rebate
to Add Liquidity in Penny Pilot Options which currently pays a $0.25
per contract rebate to apply to NOM Market Maker liquidity in Penny
Pilot Options and/or Non-Penny Pilot Options above 0.10% to 0.25% of
total industry customer equity and ETF option ADV contracts per day in
a month does not create an undue burden on competition because it
should incentivize NOM Market Makers to post liquidity on NOM. NOM
Market Makers are valuable market participants that provide liquidity
in the marketplace and incur costs unlike other market participants.
The Exchange believes that encouraging NOM Market Makers to be more
aggressive when posting liquidity benefits all market participants
through increased liquidity.
    The Exchange's proposal to offer a higher rebate for Tier 3 of
$0.40 per contract for options in SPY, QQQ and VXX does not create an
undue burden on competition because all NOM Market Makers may qualify
for the Tier 3 NOM Market Maker Penny Pilot Options Rebate to Add
Liquidity. Also more Participants may qualify for the rebate because of
the lower tier, 0.25% to 0.60% as compared to 0.30% to 0.60%.
    The Exchange's proposal to amend the Tier 4 rebates to assess BAC,
GLD and IWM the lower rebate of $0.32 per contract and raise the QQQ
and VXX rebate to $0.40 per contract, similar to SPY, does not create
an undue burden on competition because all NOM Market Makers may
qualify for the Tier 4 NOM Market Maker Penny Pilot Options Rebate to
Add Liquidity. The Exchange believes that adding the ``to 0.90%''
language to Tier 4 does not create an undue burden on competition
because it will clarify the rule text with respect to the qualification
for the rebate and

apply uniformly to all market participants.
    The Exchange believes the differing outcomes, rebates and fees
created by the Exchange's proposed pricing incentives contribute to the
overall health of the market place to the benefit of all Participants
that willing choose to transact options on NOM. For the reasons
specified herein, the Exchange does not believe this proposal creates
an undue burden on competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market comprised of twelve U.S. options exchanges in which
many sophisticated and knowledgeable market participants can readily
and do send order flow to competing exchanges if they deem fee levels
or rebate incentives at a particular exchange to be excessive or
inadequate. These market forces support the Exchange belief that the
proposed rebate structure and tiers proposed herein are competitive
with rebates and tiers in place on other exchanges. The Exchange
believes that this competitive marketplace continues to impact the
rebates present on the Exchange today and substantially influences the
proposals set forth above.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \25\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \26\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \27\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2014-077 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-NASDAQ-2014-077. 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-2014-077, and should
be submitted on or before September 9, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-19579 Filed 8-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 37999-38000]
[DOCID:fr02jy08-117]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension: Form N-8b-4; SEC File No. 270-180; OMB Control No. 3235-
0247.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit these
existing collections of information to the Office of Management and
Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Form N-8b-4 (17 CFR 274.14) is the form used by face-amount
certificate companies to comply with the filing and disclosure
requirements imposed by section 8(b) of the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-8(b)). Form N-8b-4 requires disclosure about the
organization of a face-amount certificate company, its business and
policies, its investment in securities, its certificates issued, the
personnel and affiliated persons of the depositor, the distribution and
redemption of securities, and financial statements. The Commission uses
the information provided in the collection of information to determine
compliance with section 8(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940.
    Based on the Commission's industry statistics, the Commission
estimates that there would be approximately 1 annual filing on Form N-
8b-4. The Commission estimates that each registrant filing a Form N-8b-
4 would

spend 171 hours in preparing and filing the Form and that the total
hour burden for all Form N-8b-4 filings would be 171 hours. Estimates
of the burden hours are made solely for the purposes of the PRA, and
are not derived from a comprehensive or even a representative survey or
study of the costs of SEC rules and forms.
    The information provided on Form N-8b-4 is mandatory. The
information provided on Form N-8b-4 will not be kept confidential. The
Commission may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 24, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-14986 Filed 7-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P