[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28427-28430]
[FR Doc No: 2023-09486]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0932; FRL-10947-01-OCSPP]

Ledprona (CAS# 2433753-68-3) for Use in or on Potato; Temporary
Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Ledprona (CAS# 2433753-68-3)
in or on potatoes when used in accordance with the terms of
Experimental Use Permit (EUP) No. 94614-EUP-1. GreenLight Bioscience,
Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) for a temporary exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of Ledprona on all raw agricultural products
and food products. After reviewing the petition and supporting data,
the Agency has limited the temporary tolerance exemption to residues of
Ledprona on potatoes only. This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Ledprona in or on
potatoes. This temporary tolerance exemption expires on April 30, 2025.

DATES: This regulation is effective May 4, 2023. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 3, 2023, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-20-2022-0932, is available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (202) 566-
1744. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Ellis, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511M), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following

list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes
is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help
readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially
affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Office of the Federal Register's e-CFR site at
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0932 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
July 3, 2023. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-20-2022-0932, by one
of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background

    In the Federal Register of January 3, 2023 (88 FR 38) (FRL-9410-08-
OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance
petition (2G9024) by GreenLight Bioscience, Inc., 200 Boston Ave.,
Suite 1000, Medford, MA 02155. The petitioner requested that 40 CFR
part 180 be amended by establishing a temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Ledprona on all raw
agricultural products and food products. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner GreenLight
Biosciences, Inc., which is available in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the petition and associated data and in
accordance with its authority under FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A)(i) and
(r), EPA is establishing a temporary exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of Ledprona in or on potatoes only when used
in accordance with the terms of Experimental Use Permit No. 94614-EUP-
1. The EUP is authorized for testing on potatoes only; therefore, the
Agency has limited the temporary tolerance to potatoes alone.

III. Final Rule

A. EPA's Safety Determination

    Section 408(r) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to establish a temporary
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues covered by
an experimental use permit issued under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. That section states that the provisions
of section 408(c)(2) of FFDCA apply to exemptions issued under FFDCA
section 408(r). Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to
establish an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal
limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of
FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty
that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is reliable information.'' This
includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings
but does not include occupational exposure. Pursuant to FFDCA section
408(c)(2)(B), in establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the
factors set forth in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance or tolerance
exemption and to ``ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue . . . .'' Additionally, FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D) requires that EPA consider ``available information
concerning the cumulative effects of [a particular pesticide's] . . .
residues and other substances that have a common mechanism of
toxicity.''
    EPA evaluated the available toxicity and exposure data for Ledprona
and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability, as well as
the relationship of this information to human risk. In summary, dietary
risk from the use of Ledprona is considered negligible because dietary
exposure to residues of Ledprona in or on food or feed is expected to
be negligible and no adverse effects were observed in toxicity testing.
A full summary of the data upon which EPA relied and its risk
assessments based on that data can be found within the document
entitled, ``Human health and product characterization for the
Experimental Use Permit application for CalanthaTM,
containing 0.8% of the new active ingredient `Ledprona' dsRNA for use
on potatoes and associated petition to establish a temporary tolerance
exemption'' (Human Health Risk Assessment). This document, as well as
other relevant information, is available in the docket for this action
as described under ADDRESSES.
    Available data have demonstrated that, with regard to humans,
Ledprona presents no adverse effects of concern and exposure to the
active ingredient will be insignificant. Ledprona consists of double-
stranded ribonucleic acid (dsRNA) that induces mortality of the
Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) via a gene silencing
mode of action. When dsRNA is applied, it causes the inhibition (or
silencing) of the gene product, messenger RNA

(mRNA), preventing the translation of the mRNA to proteins. Ledprona
dsRNA is targets the Proteasome subunit beta type-5 (PSMB5) mRNA
sequence in the Colorado potato beetle. PSMB5 mRNA encodes a protein
that regulates proper folding of other proteins in the Colorado potato
beetle. Once Ledprona is ingested by the Colorado potato beetle, over
time the lack of PSMB5 mRNA leads to the reduction of the PSMB5 protein
and ultimately causes mortality.
    Dietary exposure to Ledprona through residues of the active
ingredient in or on food or feed as well as in drinking water is
expected to be negligible. As detailed in the Human Health Risk
Assessment, dietary exposure to Ledprona is anticipated to be limited
for the following reasons: (1) The EUP is limited to foliar application
on potatoes. Underground tubers would not be directly exposed to
Ledprona, so consumption of residues on potatoes is expected to be
limited; (2) Once applied, Ledprona is expected to undergo rapid
degradation due to microbial activity; (3) Submitted data show that
Ledprona rapidly degrades in the mammalian gut; and (4) Mammals possess
physiological barriers (i.e., nucleases in saliva and gastrointestinal
tract, acidic conditions in the stomach, presence of multiple membrane
barriers) that prevent uptake of dsRNA. Ledprona is expected to degrade
within 20-25 hours after application at the EUP label rates in
microbially rich environments (e.g., soil) Further, Ledprona rapidly
degrades in simulated gastric fluids (within 10 minutes in simulated
intestinal fluid and within 20 minutes in simulated gastric fluid) and
degrades at similar rates as RNA extracted from plants. This
information allows EPA to rely on a well-established history of
exposure to RNA molecules via food. These data indicate that dietary
exposure from the use of this active ingredient is considered
negligible.
    In addition to the lack of exposure described above, submitted
acute oral toxicity studies demonstrated a lack of hazard of Ledprona
to the mammalian surrogate species, rats, in vivo. A bioinformatic
analysis was conducted to evaluate the likelihood of off-target effects
of the Ledprona dsRNA in humans in silico, by computer analysis of
Ledprona RNA segments. The analysis represents the potential for
Ledprona dsRNA 21-mers (21 nucleotide segments) to match RNA segments
in the human transcriptome (i.e., the set of all human RNA transcripts,
including coding and non-coding). The analysis identified three
Ledprona 21-mers which display the potential to match and subsequently
silence target mRNAs in silico. The three 21-mers are predicted to
overlap with non-coding RNAs. However, the analysis assumes that the
21-mers identified would be capable of bypassing physiological barriers
to access the cell nucleus in sufficient quantities. As described
above, submitted data show that Ledprona rapidly degrades in the
mammalian gut, and the physiological barriers present in mammals (i.e.,
nucleases in saliva and gastrointestinal tract, acidic conditions in
the stomach, presence of multiple membrane barriers) impede the uptake
of dsRNA, therefore negating any silencing potential of the 21-mer
partial matches via the oral route of exposure.
    The potential for residential exposure is highly unlikely because
there are no residential uses proposed for the EUP under which Ledprona
would be applied. Non-occupational exposure is unlikely because
applications will occur in experimental plots generally not accessible
to bystanders. However, should bystander exposure occur post-
application (i.e., contact with treated foliage), adverse effects are
not expected since Ledprona is non-toxic through the dermal route of
exposure.
    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency
consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of
a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.'' No risk of cumulative toxicity/effects
from Ledprona have been identified as no toxicity has been shown for
Ledprona in the submitted studies. Therefore, EPA has not assumed that
Ledprona has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
    Although FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides for an additional
tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of
threshold effects, EPA has determined that there are no such effects
due to the lack of toxicity of Ledprona. As a result, an additional
margin of safety for the protection of infants and children is
unnecessary.
    Based upon its evaluation, EPA concludes that there is reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population, including
infants and children, from aggregate exposure to residues of Ledprona
in or on potatoes. This includes all anticipated dietary exposures for
which there is reliable information. The Agency has arrived at this
conclusion based on the rapid degradation of the active ingredient in
environmental and biological conditions, mammalian physiological
barriers limiting the uptake of dsRNA, and the lack of effects observed
in toxicity testing.

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    EPA has determined that an analytical method is not required for
enforcement purposes since the Agency is establishing an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical limitation.

C. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation in the Human Health Risk Assessment, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the U.S. population, including infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to residues of Ledprona in or on potatoes. Therefore, a
temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established
for residues of Ledprona in or on potatoes when used in accordance with
the terms of Experimental Use Permit No. 94614-EUP-1.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes a tolerance exemption under FFDCA section
408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. 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). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action 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) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.

    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

V. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 1, 2023.
Frank Ellis,
Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR part 180 as follows:

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. Add Sec.  180.1403 to subpart D to read as follows:

Sec.  180.1403  Ledprona; temporary exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.

    A temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established for residues of Ledprona in or on potato when used in
accordance with the terms of Experimental Use Permit No. 94614-EUP-1.
This temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance expires on
April 30, 2025.

[FR Doc. 2023-09486 Filed 5-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 19 (Monday, February 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7754-7757]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02003]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90988; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2021-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its
Schedule of Fees and Charges To Establish Annual Fees for Exchange
Traded Products

January 26, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on January 12, 2021, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Charges to
establish annual fees for Exchange Traded Products that have a maturity
date and for products that are based on an expected return over a
specific outcome period. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee
changes effective January 12, 2021.\4\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange originally filed to amend the Schedule of Fees
and Charges on December 23, 2020 (SR-NYSEArca-2020-117). SR-
NYSEArca-2020-117 was withdrawn and replaced by SR-NYSEArca-2020-
118. SR-NYSEArca-2020-117 was subsequently withdrawn and replaced by
this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees and Charges to
establish annual fees for Exchange Traded Products (``ETPs'') \5\ that
have a maturity date and ETPs that are based on an expected return over
a specific outcome period. As proposed, these types of ETPs would be
eligible for the current annual fees for products that track an index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Exchange Traded Products'' is defined in footnote 3 of the
current Schedule of Fees and Charges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change responds to the current extremely competitive
environment for ETPs listings in which issuers can readily favor
competing venues or transfer their listings if they deem fee levels at
a particular venue to be excessive, or discount opportunities available
at other venues to be more favorable. The Exchange's current annual
fees for ETPs is based on the number of shares outstanding per issuer
and provide incentives for issuers to list multiple series of certain
securities on the Exchange. In response to the competitive environment
for listings, the Exchange adopted a competitive pricing structure that
combines higher minimum annual fees for certain securities with
discounts for issuers that list multiple ETPs. The proposed change is
designed to offer annual listing fees for ETPs that have a maturity
date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome
period based on the annual fees for ETPs that track an index.
    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective
January 12, 2021.
Proposed Rule Change
    Annual fees are assessed each January in the first full calendar
year following the year of listing. The aggregate total shares
outstanding is calculated based on the total shares outstanding as
reported by the Fund issuer or Fund ``family'' in its most recent
periodic filing with the Commission or other publicly available
information. Annual fees apply regardless of whether any of these Funds
are listed elsewhere.
    The Exchange proposes to offer annual listing fees for two types of
ETPs: (1) ETPs that have a specific maturity date, such as a fixed
income ETP that primarily holds a diversified portfolio of fixed income
bonds that provides regular interest payments and distributes a final
payout in its stated maturity year; and (2) ETPs that provide an
expected return over a specific outcome period, which are designed to
provide a particular set of returns over a specific period based on the
performance of an underlying instrument during the ETP's outcome
period. Such ETPs include a buffer strategy that seeks to provide
investment returns that match the gains of a particular index(s) up to
a maximum annual return, or cap level, while guarding against declines
in the same underlying index(s), a buffer level, over a particular time
period. Currently, both types of ETPs are eligible for the annual fees
set forth in section 6.b. of the Schedule of Fees and Charges, which
are applicable to Managed Fund Shares, Managed Trust Securities, Active
Proxy Portfolio Shares, Managed Portfolio Shares and Exchange-Traded
Fund Shares listed under Rule 5.2-E(j)(8) that do not track an index.
Generally, the products eligible for fees under section 6.b. of the
Schedule of Fees and Charges entail more active issuer management and
therefore incur higher Exchange costs, including costs related to
issuer services, listing administration, product development and
regulatory oversight.
    The Exchange proposes that ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs
that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period would be
eligible for the lower fees set forth in section 6.a. of the Schedule
of Fees and

Charges for products that track an index, as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Number of shares outstanding (each issue)           Annual fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 25 million....................................          $7,500
25 million up to 49,999,999.............................          10,000
50 million up to 99,999,999.............................          15,000
100 million up to 249,999,999...........................          20,000
250 million up to 499,999,999...........................          25,000
500 million and over....................................          30,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An ETP designed to provide a particular set of returns over a
specific outcome period utilizing a buffer strategy as described above
is designed to provide investment returns that match the gains of a
particular index(s) up to a maximum cap level while guarding against
declines in the same underlying index(s) below a certain buffer level
over a specified time period, which is very similar to how a fund based
on an index operates. Moreover, an ETP with a maturity date designed to
end on a specific date would not require the same open-ended commitment
of Exchange resources as the more traditional types of actively managed
products eligible for fees under section 6.b. of the Schedule of Fees
and Charges that do not have a specified end date. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that the proposed lower fees are appropriate because
ETPS that have a maturity date and that provide an expected return over
a specific outcome period, like products that track an index, generally
require the expenditure of less Exchange resources to support listing
and administration. Charging lower fees for such products would thus
more closely correlate the listing fee applicable to the issuer of ETPs
to the costs associated with listing and trading such products,
including costs related to issuer services, listing administration,
product development and regulatory oversight. Structured products would
continue to be charged annual fees under section 7 of the Schedule of
Fees and Charges.
    The proposed change described above is not otherwise intended to
address 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,\6\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\7\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) & (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Change Is Reasonable
    As discussed above, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive
market for the listing of ETPs. Specifically, ETP issuers can readily
favor competing venues or transfer listings if they deem fee levels at
a particular venue to be excessive, or discount opportunities available
at other venues to be more favorable. The Exchange's current annual
fees for ETPs are based on the number of shares outstanding per issuer
and provide incentives for issuers to list multiple series of certain
securities on the Exchange. 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.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Regulation NMS, 70 FR at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ongoing competition among the
exchanges with respect to new listings and the transfer of existing
listings among competitor exchanges demonstrates that issuers can
choose different listing markets in response to fee changes.
Accordingly, competitive forces constrain exchange listing fees. Stated
otherwise, changes to exchange listing fees can have a direct effect on
the ability of an exchange to compete for new listings and retain
existing listings.
    Annual fees for ETPs are based on the number of shares outstanding
per issuer, and then are further differentiated based on whether the
ETP is index based or not, with lower annual fees for ETPs that are
based on an index. As discussed above, the Exchange believes that it is
reasonable to charge annual fees for ETPs that have a maturity date and
ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period
based on that same differentiation. The Exchange believes that, given
the characteristics of such ETPs, charging the same, lower fees as the
Exchange currently charges ETPs that track an index would be reasonable
because those relatively lower annual fees better correlate with the
generally lesser Exchange costs associated with listing and trading
ETPs that track an index, including costs related to issuer services,
listing administration and product development. Given the current
competitive environment, the Exchange believes that the proposed change
is a reasonable attempt to establish listing fees for products that,
like products that track an index, require a decreased expenditure of
Exchange resources to support listing and administration, thereby
enhancing competition among issuers and listing venues. The Exchange
also believes that lower annual fees may reduce the barriers to entry
and incentivize enhanced competition among issuers of ETPs that have a
maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific
outcome period. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive pricing
structure designed to incentivize issuers to list new products and
transfer existing products to the Exchange, which the Exchange believes
will enhance competition both among ETP issuers and listing venues, to
the benefit of investors.
The Proposal Is An Equitable Allocation of Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposal equitably allocates its fees
among its market participants. In the prevailing competitive
environment, issuers can readily favor competing venues or transfer
listings if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive,
or discount opportunities available at other venues to be more
favorable. The proposed fees for ETPs that have a maturity date and
ETPs that provide an expected return over a specific outcome period are
equitable because the proposed annual fees would apply uniformly to all
issuers. Moreover, the proposed fees would be equitably allocated among
issuers because issuers would continue to qualify for the annual
listing fee based on issuing ETPs that have a maturity date and that
provide an expected return over a specific outcome period and for the
annual fee based on the number of shares outstanding and under criteria
applied uniformly to all such issuers. For the same reasons, the
proposal neither targets nor will it have a disparate impact on any
particular category of market participant.
The Proposal Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly
discriminatory.

In the prevailing competitive environment, issuers are free to list
elsewhere if they believe that alternative venues offer them better
value. The Exchange believes it is not unfairly discriminatory to offer
the lower annual fees for products tracking an index to ETPs that have
a maturity date and that provide an expected return over a specific
outcome period because the proposed fees would apply to and potentially
benefit all issuers equally. Further, the Exchange believes it is not
unfairly discriminatory to apply the same fees applicable to ETPs that
track an index to ETPs that have a maturity date and that provide an
expected return over a specific outcome period because the proposed
fees would be offered on an equal basis to all issuers listing such
products on the Exchange. Moreover, the proposed annual fees would
apply to issuers in the same manner as the current annual fees for ETPs
that track an index.
    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,\9\ 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 change would encourage competition by offering lower
annual fees for ETPs that have a maturity date and that provide an
expected return over a specific outcome period, thereby incentivizing
issuers to list such products on the Exchange, thereby enhancing
competition among issuers and listing venues, to the benefit of
investors. The Exchange believes that lower annual fees may reduce the
barriers to entry and incentivize enhanced competition among issuers of
ETPs that have a maturity date and that provide an expected return over
a specific outcome period. The proposed rule changes reflect a
competitive pricing structure designed to incentivize issuers to list
and transfer new products on the Exchange, which the Exchange believes
will enhance competition both among ETP issuers and listing venues, to
the benefit of investors. As noted, the market for listing services is
extremely competitive. Issuers have the option to list their securities
on these alternative venues based on the fees charged and the value
provided by each listing exchange. Because issuers have a choice to
list their securities on a different national securities exchange, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed change imposes a burden on
competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed change is a competitive
pricing structure designed to encourage issuers to list and transfer
ETPs that have a maturity date and ETPs that provide an expected return
over a specific outcome period on the Exchange. The Exchange believes
the proposal will enhance competition among ETP issuers, to the benefit
of investors. The Exchange does not believe the proposed change would
burden intramarket competition as it would apply to and potentially
benefit all issuers equally and uniformly and, as such, the proposed
change would not impose a disparate burden on competition among market
participants on the Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive listings market in which issuers can readily choose
alternative listing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must
adjust its fees and discounts to remain competitive with other
exchanges competing for the same listings. The Exchange believes that
such proposal will directly enhance competition among ETP listing
venues by reducing the costs associated with listing on the Exchange
for ETPs that have a maturity date and that provide an expected return
over a specific outcome period, to the benefit of investors. As such,
the proposal is a competitive proposal designed to enhance pricing
competition among listing venues and implement pricing for listings
that better reflects the revenue and expenses associated with listing
these types of ETPs on the Exchange. Because competitors are free to
modify their own fees and discounts in response, and because issuers
may readily adjust their listing decisions and practices, the Exchange
does not believe its proposed change can impose any burden on
intermarket competition.

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 is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \11\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 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) \12\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 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-NYSEArca-2021-04 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-2021-04. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the

Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSEArca-2021-04 and should be submitted on or before February 22,
2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-02003 Filed 1-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: December 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 76623]
[DOCID:fr17de08-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13278-000]

Natural Currents Energy Services, LLC; Notice of Preliminary
Permit Applications Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comment, Motions
To Intervene, and Competing Applications

December 9, 2008.
    On August 11, 2008, Natural Currents Energy Services, LLC filed an
application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act,
proposing to study the feasibility of the Fisher's Island Project, to
be located on Long Island Sound in Suffolk County, New York.
    The proposed Fisher's Island Tidal Energy Project consists of: (1)
250 proposed Red Hawk TISEC generating units having a total installed
capacity of 250 megawatts, (2) a proposed transmission line, and (3)
appurtenant facilities. The Natural Currents Energy Services, LLC,
project would have an average annual generation of 900 gigawatt-hours
and be sold to a local utility.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Roger Bason, Natural Currents Energy
Services, 24 Roxanne Boulevard, Highland, New York 12561, phone (845)
691-4009.
    FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13278) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-29859 Filed 12-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78704-78705]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31565]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2594-013-MT]

Northern Lights, Inc.; Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment

December 9, 2010.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) regulations,
18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy
Projects has reviewed the application for a new license for the
existing Lake Creek Hydroelectric Project, located on Lake Creek in
Lincoln County, Montana, near the City of Troy and prepared a final
environmental assessment (EA). The project does not occupy federal
lands.
    The Final EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential
environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the
project would not constitute a major federal action that would
significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the Final EA is on file with the Commission and is
available for public inspection. The Final EA may

also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-31565 Filed 12-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 3, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 13038]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06464]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2146-251]

Alabama Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing
and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Capacity Amendment of License.
    b. Project No: P-2146-251.
    c. Date Filed: March 5, 2019.
    d. Applicant: Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power).
    e. Name of Project: Coosa River Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Coosa River, in Coosa,
Chilton, Talladega and Shelby counties, Alabama.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: James F. Crew, Alabama Power Company, 600
North 18th Street, P.O. Box 2641, Birmingham, AL 35291-8180, (205) 257-
4265.
    i. FERC Contact: Zeena Aljibury,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: April 27, 2019.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, comments, or recommendations using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-2146-251.
    k. Description of Request: Alabama Power requests approval to
modify Unit 5 at the Lay Development to address significant maintenance
needs and to improve power and efficiency. The proposed scope of work
for Unit 5 includes complete turbine replacement, wicket gate
replacement, wicket gate stem bushings installation, turbine, and
generator bearing upgrades, and related component replacement. Alabama
Power states the turbine replacement is not expected to result in an
increase to the total rated capacity or the maximum discharge of the
unit at rated conditions. Alabama Power notes that project operations
will not change, and refurbishment will not include any structural
changes to the project facilities.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits (P-2146)
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from
the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title COMMENTS, PROTEST, or MOTION TO INTERVENE as
applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and
the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3)
furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person
commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with
the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments,
motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary
basis. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application
must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the
service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in
accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: March 28, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-06464 Filed 4-2-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 80161]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27390]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Nineteenth RTCA SC-227 Standards of Navigation Performance
Navigation Information on Electronic Maps

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Nineteenth RTCA SC-227 Standards of Navigation Performance
Navigation Information on Electronic Maps.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of Nineteenth RTCA SC-227 Standards of Navigation Performance
Navigation Information on Electronic Maps.

DATES: The meeting will be held Monday through Thursday, December 05-
08, 2016 09:00 a.m.-05:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at: RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th
Street NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claudia Chaudhari at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th
Street NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202)
833-9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the Nineteenth RTCA SC-227 Standards of
Navigation Performance Navigation Information on Electronic Maps. The
agenda will include the following:

Plenary--Monday, December 5, 2016, 09:00 a.m.-10:00 a.m.

1. Welcome and Administrative Remarks
2. Introduction
3. Review of Minutes from Meeting 18.
4. Agenda Overview
    a. Schedule
    b. New Business
5. Review and discussion of MOPS issues and change proposals.

Closing Plenary--Thursday, December 8, 2016, 3:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

1. Working Group 3 Progress Report/Summary
2. Other Business
3. Date of Next Meeting
4. Adjourn

    All other times will be designated for Working Groups.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 9, 2016.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership Contracts Branch, ANG-A17,
NextGen, Procurement Services Division, Federal Aviation
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-27390 Filed 11-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7114-7119]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96762; File No. SR-EMERALD-2023-02]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change by MIAX Emerald, LLC To Amend
Exchange Rule 531, Reports, Market Data Products and Services, To
Provide for the New ``Liquidity Taker Event Report--Resting Simple
Orders''

January 27, 2023.
    Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on January 18, 2023, MIAX Emerald, LLC (``MIAX
Emerald'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 531 to provide for the
new ``Liquidity Taker Event Report--Resting Simple Orders''.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/emerald at MIAX
Emerald's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 531 to provide for the
new ``Liquidity Taker Event Report--Resting Simple Orders'' (the
``Report''). The proposed Report will be an optional product \3\
available to Members.\4\ Currently, the Exchange provides two types of
Liquidity Taker Event Reports, one including information about incoming
orders seeking to remove liquidity from the Simple Order Book \5\
described under Exchange Rule 531(a), and a second including the same
information but about incoming Complex Orders that seek to remove
Complex Orders resting on the Strategy Book \6\ described under
Exchange Rule 531(b). Both of these existing reports provide data for
executions and contra-side responses that occurred within 200
microseconds of the time the resting order was received by the
Exchange. But for the modified timeframe and one difference described
below, the proposed Report would include the same data as the Liquidity
Taker Event Report for Simple Orders but would focus on executions and
contra-side responses that occurred after 200 microseconds of the time
the resting order was received by the Exchange and within 200
microseconds of receipt of the first attempt to execute against the
resting order after the initial 200 microsecond time period has expired
as described further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange intends to submit a separate filing with the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) to propose fees for the
Liquidity Taker Event Report--Resting Simple Orders.
    \4\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100.
    \5\ The term ``Simple Order Book'' means ``the Exchange's
regular electronic book of orders and quotes.'' See Exchange Rule
518(a)(15).
    \6\ The term ``Complex Strategy'' means ``a particular
combination of components and their ratios to one another. New
complex strategies can be created as the result of the receipt of a
complex order or by the Exchange for a complex strategy that is not
currently in the System.'' See Exchange Rule 518(a)(6). The term
``Strategy Book'' means the Exchange's electronic book of complex
orders and complex quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(17). The
Strategy Book is organized by Complex Strategy in that individual
orders for a defined Complex Strategy are organized together in a
book that is separate from the orders for a different Complex
Strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Like for the existing reports, the Exchange believes the additional
data points from the matching engine outlined below for the proposed
Report may also help Members gain a better understanding about their
interactions with the Exchange. The Exchange believes the proposed
Report will provide Members with an opportunity to learn more about
better opportunities to access liquidity and receive better execution
rates. The proposed Report will increase transparency and democratize
information so that all firms that subscribe to the Report have access
to the same information on an equal basis, even for firms that do not
have the appropriate resources to generate a similar report regarding
interactions with the Exchange. Like the existing reports, none of the
components of the proposed Report include real-time market data.
    Members generally would use a liquidity accessing order if there is
a high probability that it will execute against an order resting on the
Simple Order Book. Like the existing reports, the proposed Report would
identify by how much time an order that may have been marketable missed
an execution but would focus on a later timeframe than the existing
reports. The proposed Report will provide greater visibility into the
missed trading execution, which will allow Members to optimize their
models and trading patterns to yield better execution results.
    Like the existing reports, the proposed Report will be a Member-
specific report and will help Members to better understand by how much
time a particular order missed executing against a specific resting
order, thus allowing that Member to determine whether it wants to
invest in the necessary resources and technology to mitigate missed
executions against certain resting orders on the Simple Order Book.
Like the existing reports, the Exchange proposes to provide the Report
on a T+1 basis. As further described below, the proposed Report will be
specific and tailored to the Member that is subscribed to the Report
and any data included in the Report that relates to a Member other than
the Member receiving the Report will be anonymized.
    The Exchange proposes to provide the proposed Report in response to
additional Member demand for data concerning the timeliness of their
incoming orders and executions against certain resting orders that have
been resting on the Simple Order Book for at least 200 microseconds and
within 200 microseconds of receipt of the first attempt to execute
against the resting order after the initial 200 microsecond time period
has expired.. Certain Members that subscribe to the existing reports
have requested the same information as the Simple Order report but for
the later timeframe described herein so that they can better understand
the timeliness of their incoming orders and efficacy of their attempts
to execute against resting liquidity on the Exchange's Simple Order
Book. The purpose of the proposed Report is to provide Members the
necessary data in a standardized format on a T+1 basis to those that
subscribe to the Report on an equal basis.
    Proposed Exchange Rule 531(c) would provide that the Report is a
daily report that provides a Member (``Recipient Member'') with its
liquidity response time details for executions of an order resting on
the Book, where that Recipient Member attempted to execute against such
resting order within an extended timeframe that meets certain criteria
described below.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange proposes to renumber current Exchange Rule
531(c), Market Data Products, as Exchange Rule 531(d), and current
Exchange Rule 531(d), High Precision Network Time Signal Service
(``HPNTSS''), as Exchange Rule 531(e). The Exchange does not propose
to amend the rule text of either rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Report Content
    The content of the proposed Report is basically identical to that
of the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders
described under Exchange Rule 531(a) with two differences. The first
difference is the timeframe of the proposed Report mentioned above and
described in more detail below. The second difference is that, unlike
the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders, the
proposed Report would not include the time difference between the time
the resting order was received by the Exchange and the time the first
response that executes against the resting order was received by the
Exchange. Each of these differences are described below. All other
aspects of the proposed Report are identical to the existing Liquidity
Taker Event Report for Simple Orders described under Exchange Rule
531(a).
    Like current paragraph (a)(1) of Exchange Rule 531 for the existing
Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders, proposed paragraph
(c)(1) of Rule 531 would describe the content of the proposed Report
and delineate which information would be provided

regarding the resting order,\8\ the response that successfully executed
against the resting order, and the response submitted by the Recipient
Member that missed executing against the resting order. It is important
to note that the content of the Report will be specific to the
Recipient Member and the Report will not include any information
related to any Member other than the Recipient Member, other than
certain information about the resting order described below. The
Exchange will restrict all other market participants, including the
Recipient Member, from receiving another market participant's data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Only displayed orders will be included in the Report. The
Exchange notes that it does not currently offer any non-displayed
orders types on its options trading platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Resting Order Information. Like current paragraph (a)(1)(i) of
Exchange Rule 531 for the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for
Simple Orders, proposed Exchange Rule 531(c)(1)(i) would provide that
the following information would be included in the Report regarding the
resting order: (A) the time the resting order was received by the
Exchange; \9\ (B) symbol; (C) order reference number, which is a unique
reference number assigned to a new order at the time of receipt; (D)
whether the Recipient Member is an Affiliate \10\ of the Member that
entered the resting order; \11\ (E) origin type (e.g., Priority
Customer,\12\ Market Maker \13\); (F) side (buy or sell); and (G)
displayed price and size of the resting order.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The time the Exchange received the resting order would be in
nanoseconds and is the time the resting order was received by the
Exchange's System.
    \10\ The term ``affiliate'' of or person ``affiliated with''
another person means a person who, directly, or indirectly,
controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, such
other person. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \11\ The Report will simply indicate whether the Recipient
Member is an Affiliate of the Member that entered the resting order
and not include any other information that may indicate the identity
of the Member that entered the resting order.
    \12\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). The
number of orders shall be counted in accordance with Interpretation
and Policy .01 to Exchange Rule 100. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \13\ The term ``Market Maker'' refers to ``Lead Market Makers'',
``Primary Lead Market Makers'' and ``Registered Market Makers''
collectively. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \14\ The Exchange notes that the displayed price and size are
also disseminated via the Exchange's proprietary data feeds and the
Options Price Reporting Authority (``OPRA''). The Exchange also
notes that the displayed price of the resting order may be different
than the ultimate execution price. This may occur when a resting
order is displayed and ranked at different prices upon entry to
avoid a locked or crossed market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Execution Information. Like current paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of
Exchange Rule 531 for the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for
Simple Orders, proposed Exchange Rule 531(c)(1)(ii) would provide that
the following information would be included in the Report regarding the
execution of the resting order: (A) the EBBO \15\ at the time of
execution; \16\ (B) the ABBO \17\ at the time of execution; \18\ (C)
the time first response that executes against the resting order was
received by the Exchange and the size of the execution and type of the
response; \19\ and (D) whether the response was entered by the
Recipient Member. If the resting order executes against multiple
contra-side responses, only the EBBO and ABBO at the time of the
execution against the first response will be included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The term ``EBBO'' means the best bid or offer on the
Exchange. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \16\ Exchange Rule 531(c)(1)(ii)(A) would further provide that
if the resting order executes against multiple contra-side
responses, only the EBBO at the time of the execution against the
first response will be included.
    \17\ The term ``ABBO'' or ``Away Best Bid or Offer'' means the
best bid(s) or offer(s) disseminated by other Eligible Exchanges
(defined in Exchange Rule 1400(g)) and calculated by the Exchange
based on market information received by the Exchange from OPRA. See
Exchange Rule 100.
    \18\ Exchange Rule 531(c)(1)(ii)(B) would further provide that
if the resting order executes against multiple contra-side
responses, only the ABBO at the time of the execution against the
first response will be included.
    \19\ The time the Exchange received the response order would be
in nanoseconds and would be the time the response was received by
the Exchange's network, which is before the time the response would
be received by the System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 531(a)(1)(ii)(D) provides that the existing Liquidity
Taker Event Report for Simple Orders also includes the time difference
between the time the resting order was received by the Exchange and the
time the first response that executes against the resting order was
received by the Exchange. The proposed Report would not include the
same information because that timeframe could be for an extended period
of time since the proposed Report focuses on orders that have been
resting on the Simple Order Book for longer than 200 microseconds and,
therefore, the Exchange believes is less likely to be valuable to the
Recipient Member.
    Recipient Member's Response Information. Like current paragraph
(a)(1)(iii) of Exchange Rule 531 for the existing Liquidity Taker Event
Report for Simple Orders, proposed Rule 531(c)(1)(iii) would provide
that the following information would be included in the Report
regarding response(s) sent by the Recipient Member: (A) Recipient
Member identifier; (B) the time difference between the time the first
response that executes against the resting order was received by the
Exchange and the time of each response sent by the Recipient Member,
regardless of whether it executed or not; \20\ (C) size and type of
each response submitted by Recipient Member; and (D) response reference
number, which is a unique reference number attached to the response by
the Recipient Member.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ For purposes of calculating this duration of time, the
Exchange will use the time the resting order and the Recipient
Member's response(s) is received by the Exchange's network, both of
which would be before the order and response(s) would be received by
the System. This time difference would be provided in nanoseconds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timeframe for Data Included in Report
    The timeframe covered by the proposed Report is the primary
difference between it and the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for
Simple Orders. The existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple
Orders provides data for executions and contra-side responses that
occurred within 200 microseconds of the time the resting order was
received by the Exchange. Meanwhile, the proposed Report would include
the same data as the Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders but
would focus on executions and contra-side responses that occurred after
200 microseconds of the time the resting order was received by the
Exchange, and within 200 microseconds of receipt of any Member's first
attempt to execute against the resting order after the initial 200
microsecond time period has expired. More specifically, the resting
order must rest on the Simple Order Book for at least 200 microseconds
and once that initial 200 microsecond period has passed, a Member must
then submits an order to attempt to execute against that resting order.
This event starts a second 200 microsecond period within which the
proposed Report would include data on executions and contra-side
responses submitted by the Recipient Member to execute against that
resting order.
    For example, Member A submits an order that is posted to the Simple
Order Book. 200 microseconds passes and Member A's order remains posted
to the Simple Order Book. Then Member B enters a marketable order to
execute against Member A's resting order, starting the second 200
microsecond window. Within this next 200 microsecond window, Member C
sends a marketable order to execute against Member A's resting Order.
Because Member B's order is received by the

Exchange before Member C's order, Member B's order executes against
Member A's resting order. The proposed Report would provide Member C
the data points necessary for that firm to calculate by how much time
they missed executing against Member A's resting order.
    The above timeframe would be codified under proposed paragraph
(c)(2) of Rule 531 which would provide that the proposed Report would
include the data set forth under Rule 531(c)(1) described above for
executions and contra-side responses that occurred (i) after 200
microseconds of the time the resting order was received by the Exchange
and (ii) within 200 microseconds of receipt of the first attempt to
execute against the resting order after the initial 200 microsecond
time period under (c)(2)(i) of this paragraph has expired.
Scope of Data Included in the Report
    Like current paragraph (a)(3) of Exchange Rule 531 for the existing
Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders, proposed paragraph
(c)(3) of Exchange Rule 531 would provide that the proposed Report will
only include trading data related to the Recipient Member and, subject
to the proposed paragraph (4) of Rule 531(c) described below, will not
include any other Member's trading data other than that listed in
paragraphs (1)(i) and (ii) of Exchange Rule 531(c) described above.
Historical Data
    Like current paragraph (a)(4) of Exchange Rule 531 for the existing
Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders, proposed paragraph
(c)(4) of Rule 531 would specify that the proposed Report will contain
historical data from the prior trading day and will be available after
the end of the trading day, generally on a T+1 basis.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\21\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \22\ requirements that the rules
of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts
and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
This proposal is in keeping with those principles in that it promotes
increased transparency through the dissemination of the optional Report
to those interested in subscribing to receive the data. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \23\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The timeframe covered by the proposed Report is the primary
difference between it and the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for
Simple Orders. However, this difference only pertains to the timeframe
covered by each report, with each report containing the exact same data
fields with one exception described here. The existing Liquidity Taker
Event Report for Simple Orders provides data for executions and contra-
side responses that occurred within 200 microseconds of the time the
resting order was received by the Exchange. Meanwhile, the proposed
Report would basically include the same data as the Liquidity Taker
Event Report for Simple Orders but would focus on executions and
contra-side responses that occurred after 200 microseconds of the time
the resting order was received by the Exchange and one additional
difference. The one difference is that unlike the existing Liquidity
Taker Event Report for Simple Orders, the proposed Report would not
include the time difference between the time the resting order and
first response that executes against the resting order are received by
the Exchange. Each report focuses on 200 microsecond windows with the
existing Report's window starting at the time of receipt of the resting
order and the proposed Report's window starting with the first attempt
to execute against the resting order after the order was resting on the
Simple Order Book for at least 200 microseconds.
    The Exchange believes the proposed Report will serve to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general protect investors and the public interest
because it will benefit investors by facilitating their prompt access
to the value added information that is included in the proposed Report.
The proposed Report will allow Members to access information regarding
their trading activity that they may utilize to evaluate their own
trading behavior and order interactions.
    Like the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders,
the proposed Report is designed for Members that are interested in
gaining insight into latency in connection with orders that failed to
execute against an order resting on the Exchange's Simple Order Book by
providing those Members data to analyze by how much time their order
may have missed an execution against a contra-side order resting on the
Book. The Exchange believes that providing this optional latency data
to interested Members is consistent with facilitating transactions in
securities, removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
protecting investors and the public interest because it provides
greater visibility into the latency of Members' incoming orders.
Members may use this data to optimize their models and trading patterns
in an effort to yield better execution results by calculating by how
much time their order may have missed an execution.
    Like the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders,
the proposed Report is designed to offer latency information in a
systematized way and standardized format to any Member that chooses to
subscribe to the proposed Report. As a result, the proposal will make
latency information for liquidity-seeking orders available in an
equalized manner and will increase transparency, particularly for
Recipient Members that may not have the expertise to generate the same
information on their own. The proposed Report may better enable
Recipient Members to increase the fill rates for their liquidity-
seeking orders. At the same time, as is also discussed above, the
Report is designed to prevent a Recipient Member from learning other
Members' sensitive trading information. The Report would not be a real-
time market data product, as it would provide only historical trading
data for the previous trading day, generally on a T+1 basis. In
addition, the data in the Report regarding incoming orders that failed
to execute would be specific to the Recipient Member's orders, and
other information in the proposed Report regarding resting orders and
executions would be anonymized if it relates to a Member other than the
Recipient Member.

    The proposed Report generally contains three buckets of
information, each of which are identical to the same buckets of
information contained in the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for
Simple Orders, with one exception discussed herein and again below. The
first two buckets include information about the resting order and the
execution of the resting order. This information is generally available
from other public sources, such as OPRA and the Exchange's proprietary
data feeds, or is similar to information included in a report offered
by another exchange. For example, OPRA provides bids, offers, and
consolidated last sale and quotation information for options trading on
all national securities exchanges, including the Exchange. In addition,
the Exchange offers the Top of Market (``ToM'') feed which provides
real-time quote and last sale information for all displayed orders on
the Book.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Section 6)a) of the Exchange's fee schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the first bucket of information contained in the
Report for the resting order includes the time the resting order was
received by the Exchange, the symbol, unique reference number assigned
at the time of receipt, side (buy or sell), and the displayed price and
size of the resting order. Further, the symbol, origin type, side (buy
or sell), and displayed price and size are also available either via
OPRA or the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. The first bucket of
information also indicates whether the Recipient Member is an Affiliate
of the Member that entered the resting order. This data field will not
indicate the identity of the Member that entered the resting order and
would simply allow the Recipient Member to better understand the
scenarios in which it may execute against the orders of its
Affiliates.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The Exchange's surveils to monitor for abhorrent behavior
related to internalized trades and identify potential wash sales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The secondbucket of information contained in the Report regards the
execution of the resting order and includes the EBBO and ABBO at the
time of execution. These data points are also available either via OPRA
or the Exchange's proprietary data feeds. The second bucket of
information will also indicate whether the response was entered by the
Recipient Member. This data point is simply provided as a convenience.
If not entered by the Recipient Member, this data point will be left
blank so as not to include any identifying information about other
Member activity. The second bucket of information also includes the
size, as well as the time and type of first response that executes
against the resting order. These data points would assist the Recipient
Member in analyzing by how much time their order may have missed an
execution against a contra-side order resting on the Book. Unlike the
existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders, the proposed
Report would not include the time difference between the time the
resting order and first response that executes against the resting
order are received by the Exchange. The proposed Report would not
include this data point because the Exchange understands Recipient
Members may not find it useful due to the fact that the proposed Report
focuses on orders that have been resting on the Simple Order Book for
longer than 200 microseconds. Therefore, the Exchange does not propose
to include this data point as a means to streamline the proposed Report
and remove unnecessary data.
    The third bucket of information is about the Recipient Member's
response(s) and the time their response(s) is received by the Exchange.
This includes the time difference between the time the first response
that executes against the resting order was received by the Exchange
and the time of each response sent by the Recipient Member, regardless
of whether it executed or not. As above, this data point would assist
the Recipient Member in analyzing by how much time their order may have
missed an execution against a contra-side order resting on the Book.
This bucket would also include the size and type of each response
submitted by the Recipient Member, the Recipient Member identifier, and
a response reference number which is selected by the Recipient Member.
Each of these data points are unique to the Recipient Member and should
already be known by Recipient Member even if not included in the
Report.
    Like the existing Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders,
the Exchange proposes to provide the Report on a voluntary basis and no
Member will be required to subscribe to the Report. The Exchange notes
that there is no rule or regulation that requires the Exchange to
produce, or that a Member elect to receive, the Report. It is entirely
a business decision of each Member to subscribe to the Report. The
Exchange proposes to offer the Report as a convenience to Members to
provide them with additional information regarding trading activity on
the Exchange on a delayed basis after the close of regular trading
hours. A Member that chooses to subscribe to the Report may discontinue
receiving the Report at any time if that Member determines that the
information contained in the Report is no longer useful.
    In summary, the proposed Report will help to protect a free and
open market by providing additional data (offered on an optional basis)
to the marketplace and by providing investors with greater choices.\26\
Additionally, the proposal would not permit unfair discrimination
because the proposed Report will be available to all Exchange Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Sec. Indus. Fin. Mkts. Ass'n (SIFMA), Initial Decision
Release No. 1015, 2016 SEC LEXIS 2278 (ALJ June 1, 2016) (finding
the existence of vigorous competition with respect to non-core
market data).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change 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 believes that the proposed Report will enhance competition
\27\ by providing a new option for receiving market data to Members.
The proposed Report will also further enhance competition between
exchanges by allowing the Exchange to expand its product offerings to
include an additional report to provide latency information requested
by Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this instance, the proposed rule change to offer the optional
Report is in response to Member interest and requests for such
information, including from some Members that subscribe to the existing
Liquidity Taker Event Report for Simple Orders. The Exchange does not
believe the proposed Report will have an inappropriate burden on intra-
market competition between Recipient Members and other Members who do
not receive the Report. As discussed above, the first two buckets of
information included in the Report contain information about the
resting order and the execution of the resting order, both of which are
generally available to Members that choose not to receive the Report
from other public sources, such as OPRA and the Exchange's proprietary
data feeds. The third bucket of information is about the Recipient
Member's response and the time their response is received by the
Exchange, information which the Recipient Member would be able to
obtain without receiving the Report. Additionally, some Members may
already be able to derive a substantial amount of the same data that is
provided by some of the components

based on their own executions and algorithms.
    In sum, if the proposed Report is unattractive to Members, Members
will opt not to receive it. Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe
that the proposed change will impair the ability of Members or
competing order execution venues to maintain their competitive standing
in the financial markets.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \28\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \29\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \29\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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-EMERALD-2023-02 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-EMERALD-2023-02. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-EMERALD-2023-02, and should be submitted
on or before February 23, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-02127 Filed 2-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24292-24293]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08751]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-167-000]

Roaring Fork Midstream, LLC; Notice of Petition for Declaratory
Order

    Take notice that on April 13, 2022, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, Roaring Fork Midstream, LLC (RFM) filed a
petition for declaratory order requesting the Commission issue an order
stating that RFM's planned natural gas gathering pipelines in Weld
County, Colorado, and Laramie County, Wyoming, will perform a gathering
function and are not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under
section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717b.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene, or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at https://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar
pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (https://ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call tollfree,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on May 19, 2022.

    Dated: April 19, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-08751 Filed 4-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P