[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 14 (Monday, January 23, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4047-4051]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01120]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96680; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2023-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE
Arca Equities Fees and Charges

January 17, 2023.
    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 January 3, 2023, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and
Charges (``Fee Schedule'') to amend the fee for Retail Orders with a
time-in-force of Day that remove liquidity. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to amend the fee
for Retail

Orders \3\ with a time-in-force of Day that remove liquidity. The
proposed change responds to the current competitive environment where
ETP Holders have a choice among both exchange and off-exchange venues
of where to route marketable retail flow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Retail Order is an agency order that originates from a
natural person and is submitted to the Exchange by an ETP Holder,
provided that no change is made to the terms of the order to price
or side of market and the order does not originate from a trading
algorithm or any other computerized methodology. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67540 (July 30, 2012), 77 FR 46539 (August
3, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-77).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change effective January
3, 2023.
Background
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (File No. S7-10-04) (Final
Rule) (``Regulation NMS'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Regulation NMS has enhanced competition, it has also fostered
a ``fragmented'' market structure where trading in a single stock can
occur across multiple trading centers. When multiple trading centers
compete for order flow in the same stock, the Commission has recognized
that ``such competition can lead to the fragmentation of order flow in
that stock.'' \5\ Indeed, equity trading is currently dispersed across
16 exchanges,\6\ numerous alternative trading systems,\7\ and broker-
dealer internalizers and wholesalers, all competing for order flow.
Based on publicly available information, no single exchange currently
has more than 17% market share.\8\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of equity order flow. More
specifically, the Exchange currently has less than 10% market share of
executed volume of equities trading.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61358, 75 FR 3594,
3597 (January 21, 2010) (File No. S7-02-10) (Concept Release on
Equity Market Structure).
    \6\ See Cboe U.S Equities Market Volume Summary, available at
https://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share.
    \7\ See FINRA ATS Transparency Data, available at https://otctransparency.finra.org/otctransparency/AtsIssueData. A list of
alternative trading systems registered with the Commission is
available at https://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/atslist.htm.
    \8\ See Cboe Global Markets U.S. Equities Market Volume Summary,
available at http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/market_share/.
    \9\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
move order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products. While it is not possible to know a firm's reason for shifting
order flow, the Exchange believes that one such reason is because of
fee changes at any of the registered exchanges or non-exchange venues
to which a firm routes order flow. The competition for Retail Orders is
even more stark, particularly as it relates to exchange versus off-
exchange venues.
    The Exchange thus needs to compete in the first instance with non-
exchange venues for Retail Order flow, and with the 15 other exchange
venues for that Retail Order flow that is not directed off-exchange.
Accordingly, competitive forces compel the Exchange to use exchange
transaction fees and credits, particularly as they relate to competing
for Retail Order flow, because market participants can readily trade on
competing venues if they deem pricing levels at those other venues to
be more favorable.
    To respond to this competitive environment, the Exchange has
established a number of Retail Tiers, which are designed to provide an
incentive for ETP Holders to route Retail Orders to the Exchange by
providing higher credits for adding liquidity correlated to an ETP
Holder's higher trading volume in Retail Orders on the Exchange. Under
three of these four tiers, i.e., Retail Tier 1, Retail Tier 2, Retail
Tier 3 and Retail Step-Up Tier, ETP Holders also do not pay a fee when
such Retail Orders have a time-in-force of Day that remove liquidity
from the Exchange. Under Retail Tier 4, ETP Holders currently pay a
standard fee of $0.0030 per share for Retail Orders that that remove
liquidity.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Fee Schedule, Section III. Standard Rates--Transactions
(applicable when Tier Rates do not apply).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change
    The proposed rule change is designed to be available to all ETP
Holders on the Exchange and is intended to provide ETP Holders an
opportunity to not pay a fee for Retail Orders with a time-in-force of
Day that remove liquidity from the Exchange. Specifically, the Exchange
proposes to adopt new footnote (f) under the Retail Tiers table.\11\
Proposed footnote (f) would state that ``ETP Holders that increase
Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day that add and remove that is
an increase over May 2022 of at least 0.05% of CADV would not pay a fee
for Retail Removing with a time-in-force of Day.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ With the proposed adoption of new footnote (f) under the
Retail Tiers table, the Exchange proposes to renumber current
footnote (f) under the Tape B Tiers table as footnote (g) and
renumber current footnote (g) under the Tape B Tiers table as
footnote (h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, ETP Holders that qualify for Retail Tiers 1, 2, 3
and Retail Step-Up Tier currently do not pay a fee for Retail Orders
with a time-in-force of Day that remove liquidity from the Exchange.
ETP Holders that do not currently qualify for Retail Tiers 1, 2, 3 and
Retail Step-Up Tier would benefit from this proposed rule change by
increasing the amount of Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day that
add and remove liquidity by 0.05% over their May 2022 CADV. ETP Holders
that meet the proposed lower volume requirement would qualify to not
pay a fee for Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day that remove
liquidity. ETP Holders that qualify for the proposed no fee would also
continue to receive the standard credit of ($0.0032) per share for
Retail Orders that add liquidity.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To illustrate the application of the proposed fee reduction, assume
an ETP Holder's activity of Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day
in the current month is equal to 0.08% of CADV, which is less than
Retail Tier 4's requirement of 0.10% of CADV. Assume further that this
ETP Holder has a Step-Up of Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day
from April 2018 of 0.02% of CADV, which is less than Retail Step-Up
Tier's requirement of 0.075% of CADV. Based on this activity, the ETP
Holder in this example would receive the standard credit of ($0.0032)
per share for adding Retail liquidity and would pay the standard fee of
$0.0030 per share for removing Retail liquidity, unless the ETP Holder
qualifies for better rates under other pricing tiers.
    Assume further that the same ETP Holder's activity of Retail Orders
with a time-in-force of Day in May 2022 was equal to 0.02% of CADV.
Under the proposed rule change, this ETP Holder would qualify for the
proposed no fee because it had an increase of Retail Orders with a
time-in-force of Day that add and remove liquidity over May 2022 of
0.06% (0.08% in the current month minus 0.02% in May 2022), which meets
the proposed requirement that an ETP Holder's increase of Retail

Orders with a time-in-force of Day that add or remove must be at least
0.05% of CADV over the ETP Holder's May 2022 CADV. Under the proposed
rule change, this ETP Holder would continue to receive the standard
credit of ($0.0032) per share for adding Retail liquidity and would not
pay a fee for Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day that remove
liquidity.
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to encourage greater
participation from ETP Holders and promote additional liquidity in
Retail Orders. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to
adopt a lower volume requirement to qualify for the proposed fee
reduction would incentivize ETP Holders to direct a greater number of
Retail Orders to the Exchange that add and remove liquidity. As
described above, ETP Holders have a choice of where to send their
Retail Orders that add and remove liquidity. The Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change to reduce fees paid by ETP Holders for Retail
Orders could lead to more ETP Holders choosing to route such orders for
execution to the Exchange rather than to a competing exchange.
    The Exchange does not know how much Retail Order flow ETP Holders
choose to route to other exchanges or to off-exchange venues. Without
having a view of ETP Holders' activity on other markets and off-
exchange venues, the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this
proposed rule change would result in any ETP Holder sending more of its
Retail Orders to the Exchange. The Exchange cannot predict with
certainty how many ETP Holders would avail themselves of this
opportunity, but additional liquidity of Retail Orders would benefit
all market participants because it would provide greater execution
opportunities on the Exchange.
    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any significant problems
that market participants would have in complying with the proposed
changes.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\14\ in particular,
because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and other persons
using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between
customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Fee Change Is Reasonable
    As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly fragmented
and competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly expressed its
preference for competition over regulatory intervention in determining
prices, products, and services in the securities markets. Specifically,
in Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance of market
forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized
that current regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably
successful in promoting market competition in its broader forms that
are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given this competitive environment, the proposal represents a
reasonable attempt to attract additional order flow to the Exchange.
    As noted above, the competition for Retail Order flow is stark
given the amount of retail limit orders that are routed to non-exchange
venues. The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among
the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain
categories of products, in response to fee changes. ETP Holders can
choose from any one of the 16 currently operating registered exchanges,
and numerous off-exchange venues, to route such order flow.
Accordingly, competitive forces constrain exchange transaction fees,
particularly as they relate to competing for retail orders. Stated
otherwise, changes to exchange transaction fees can have a direct
effect on the ability of an exchange to compete for order flow.
    In particular, the Exchange believes that the proposal to adopt
lower volume requirement to qualify for the proposed fee reduction is
reasonable because it is designed to encourage greater participation
from ETP Holders and promote additional liquidity in Retail Orders. The
Exchange believes it is reasonable to require ETP Holders to meet the
applicable volume threshold to qualify for the proposed no fee for
Retail Orders with a time-in-force of Day that remove liquidity, which
the Exchange believes will encourage ETP Holders to direct more of
their Retail Orders to the Exchange. Further, the proposed change is
reasonable as it would allow ETP Holders that do not presently qualify
for Retail Tiers 1, 2, 3 and Retail Step-Up Tier an additional
opportunity to qualify and not pay a fee for Retail Orders with a time-
in-force of Day that remove liquidity.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to adopt reduced fees for
ETP Holders that meet the proposed volume requirement is a reasonable
means to encourage additional liquidity on the Exchange because ETP
Holders would benefit from the greater amounts of displayed liquidity
present on a public exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed
lower volume requirement would incentivize additional liquidity to a
public exchange to qualify for lower fees for Retail Orders with a
time-in-force of Day that remove liquidity, thereby promoting price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for ETP Holders. The proposal is thus reasonable because all ETP
Holders would benefit from such increased levels of liquidity. The
Exchange notes that ETP Holders are free to shift their order flow to
competing venues if they believe other markets offer more favorable
fees and credits.
    On the backdrop of the competitive environment in which the
Exchange currently operates, the proposed rule change is a reasonable
attempt to increase liquidity on the Exchange and improve the
Exchange's market share relative to its competitors.
The Proposed Fee Change Is an Equitable Allocation of Fees and Credits
    The Exchange believes that, for the reasons discussed above, the
proposed rule change is an equitable allocation of its fees and
credits. The proposed rule change is intended to provide ETP Holders an
incentive to send a greater number of Retail Orders to the Exchange in
order to qualify and not pay a fee for such orders when removing
liquidity from the Exchange, thereby increasing the number of orders
that are executed on the Exchange, promoting price discovery and
transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities and improving
overall liquidity on a public exchange. The Exchange also believes that
the proposed change is equitable because it would apply to all
similarly situated ETP Holders that remove liquidity. As previously
noted, the Exchange operates in a competitive environment, particularly
as it relates to attracting Retail Orders to the Exchange. The Exchange
does not know how much order flow ETP Holders choose to route to other
exchanges or to off-exchange venues. The Exchange believes that pricing
is just one of the factors that ETP Holders consider when determining
where to direct their order flow. Among

other things, factors such as execution quality, fill rates, and
volatility, are important and deterministic to ETP Holders in deciding
where to send their order flow. The Exchange believes that a number of
ETP Holders could qualify for the proposed no fee based on their
current trading profile on the Exchange if they choose to direct more
of their order flow to the Exchange. However, without having a view of
an ETP Holder's activity on other exchanges and off-exchange venues,
the Exchange has no way of knowing whether this proposed rule change
would result in any ETP Holder directing Retail Orders to the Exchange
in order to qualify for the proposed no fee.
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change would improve market
quality for all market participants on the Exchange and, as a
consequence, attract more Retail Orders to the Exchange, thereby
improving market-wide quality and price discovery.
The Proposed Fee Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to adopt a lower volume
requirement to qualify for the proposed fee reduction is not unfairly
discriminatory. In the prevailing competitive environment, ETP Holders
are free to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they believe that
alternatives offer them better value. Moreover, the proposal neither
targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any particular category
of market participant. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will incentivize ETP Holders to direct a greater number of
Retail Orders to a public exchange to qualify for the proposed reduced
fee for removing liquidity, thereby promoting price discovery and
transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities for ETP
Holders. The proposal does not permit unfair discrimination because the
proposed volume requirement for removing liquidity would be applied to
all similarly situated ETP Holders, who would all be eligible to not
pay a fee on an equal basis. Accordingly, no ETP Holder already
operating on the Exchange would be disadvantaged by this allocation of
fees. The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to
provide lower fees for removing liquidity as the proposed fee would be
provided on an equal basis to all ETP Holders that remove liquidity by
meeting the proposed volume requirement. Further, the Exchange believes
the proposed reduced fee would provide an incentive for ETP Holders to
execute more of their Retail Orders on the Exchange. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed change is not unfairly discriminatory
because it is reasonably related to the value to the Exchange's market
quality associated with higher volume.
    In addition, the submission of orders to the Exchange is optional
for ETP Holders in that they could choose whether to submit orders to
the Exchange and, if they do, the extent of its activity in this
regard.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\16\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change would not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for ETP Holders. As a result, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change furthers the Commission's goal in adopting Regulation NMS of
fostering integrated competition among orders, which promotes ``more
efficient pricing of individual stocks for all types of orders, large
and small.'' \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \17\ See supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The Exchange believes the proposed rule
change does not impose any burden on intramarket competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The proposed change is designed to attract Retail Orders to the
Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed change would
incentivize market participants to direct retail order flow to the
Exchange. Greater overall order flow, trading opportunities, and
pricing transparency would benefit all market participants on the
Exchange by enhancing market quality and would continue to encourage
ETP Holders to send their orders to the Exchange, thereby contributing
towards a robust and well-balanced market ecosystem. The proposed fee
reduction would be available to all similarly situated market
participants, and, as such, the proposed change would not impose a
disparate burden on competition among market participants on the
Exchange. Additionally, the proposed change would apply to all ETP
Holders equally in that all ETP Holders would have a reasonable
opportunity to meet the volume requirement to qualify for the proposed
fee reduction and would not pay a fee for removing liquidity if such
criteria is met.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange believes the proposed rule
change does not impose any burden on intermarket competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily choose to send their orders to other exchanges
and off-exchange venues if they deem fee levels at those other venues
to be more favorable. As noted above, the Exchange's market share of
intraday trading (i.e., excluding auctions) is currently less than 10%.
In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust its fees
and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges and with off-
exchange venues. Because competitors are free to modify their own fees
and credits in response, and because market participants may readily
adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange does not believe
this proposed fee change would impose any burden on intermarket
competition.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including
those that currently offer similar order types and comparable
transaction pricing, by encouraging additional orders to be sent to the
Exchange for execution.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant
to section 19(b)(3)(A) \18\ of the Act and paragraph (f) thereunder. At
any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the
Commission summarily may

temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2023-01 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-NYSEARCA-2023-01. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal offices of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2023-01, and should be
submitted on or before February 13, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-01120 Filed 1-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 8, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 30517]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11902]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Elizabeth Betsy Pope d/b/a Eastgate Laboratory Testing and Mounir
R. Khouri; Removal From the Public Interest Exclusion List

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a decision and
order under the Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and
Alcohol Testing Programs excluding a service agent, Elizabeth ``Betsy''
Pope d/b/a Eastgate Laboratory Testing in Tennessee and all other
places doing business, and all other individuals who are employees or
all other individuals associated with Ms. Pope and Eastgate Laboratory
Testing, from providing drug and alcohol testing services in any
capacity to any DOT-regulated employer for a period of 5 years. Ms.
Pope and her company provided Medical Review Officer services to DOT-
regulated employers directly and through other service agents when Ms.
Pope was not qualified to act as a Medical Review Officer. The 5-year
period has ended and Ms. Pope, et al., have been removed from the list
of excluded service agents.

DATES: This Notice is effective as of January 21, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bohdan Baczara, Deputy Director, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and
Compliance, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; (202) 366-
3784 (voice),<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax), or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of Transportation (DOT)
issued a decision and order under the Procedures for Transportation
Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs excluding a service agent,
Mounir R. Khouri d/b/a Mobile Testing Services, Inc., in Vermont and
all other places it is incorporated, franchised, or otherwise doing
business, and all other individuals who are officers, employees,
directors, shareholders, partners, or other individuals associated with
Mr. Khouri and Mobile Testing Services, Inc., from providing drug and
alcohol testing services in any capacity to any DOT-regulated employer
for a period of 5 years. Mr. Khouri and his company provided Medical
Review Officer services to DOT-regulated employers directly and through
other service agents when Mr. Khouri was not qualified to act as a
Medical Review Officer. The 5-year period has ended and Mr. Khouri, et
al., have been removed from the list of excluded service agents.
    The Department published notice of the Public Interest Exclusion
for Elizabeth Betsy Pope, et al., on August 24, 2015 (80 FR 51349) and
for Mounir R. Khouri, et al., on January 27, 2016 (81 FR 4739). The
exclusions were for 5-year periods, respectively, which have now run
their term. We have removed Ms. Pope and Mr. Khouri from the DOT's list
of Public Interest Exclusions on our website at: http://www.transportation.gov/odapc/pie. We are also notifying the public of
the removal by publishing this Federal Register notice as required by
49 CFR 40.401(d).

    Issued on May 20, 2021, in Washington, DC.
Bohdan Baczara,
Deputy Director, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-11902 Filed 6-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 123 (Monday, June 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41553-41554]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15098]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-D-1170]

Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: Developing Direct-Acting
Antiviral Drugs for Treatment; Draft Guidance for Industry; Extension
of the Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; extension of the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is extending the
comment period for the notice of availability, published in the Federal
Register of May 4, 2016 (81 FR 26805), announcing the draft guidance
for industry entitled ``Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: Developing
Direct-Acting Antiviral Drugs for Treatment.'' We are taking this
action due to maintenance on the Federal eRulemaking portal from July 1
through July 5, 2016.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments by July 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are

solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be
posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social
Security number, or confidential business information, such as a
manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name,
contact information, or other information that identifies you in the
body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2013-D-1170 for ``Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: Developing
Direct-Acting Antiviral Drugs for Treatment; Draft Guidance for
Industry.'' Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except
for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable
at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available,
you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body
of your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Murray, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6360, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-1500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of May 4, 2016 (81
FR 26805), FDA published a notice of availability.
    Interested persons were originally given until July 5, 2016, to
comment on the draft guidance for industry entitled ``Chronic Hepatitis
C Virus Infection: Developing Direct-Acting Antiviral Drugs for
Treatment.''
    From July 1 through July 5, 2016, the Federal eRulemaking Portal,
http://www.regulations.gov, is undergoing maintenance. We are,
therefore, extending the comment period for the draft guidance for
industry entitled ``Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: Developing
Direct-Acting Antiviral Drugs for Treatment.'' The extended comment
period will close on July 19, 2016.

    Dated: June 21, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-15098 Filed 6-24-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P