[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13851-13854]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05753]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77332; File No. SR-NYSE-2016-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 98 To Provide
That When Designated Market Makers Enter Interest for the Purpose of
Facilitating the Execution of Customer Orders, Such Orders Would Not Be
Required To Be Designated as DMM Interest

March 9, 2016.
    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 March 4, 2016, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II, 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 Rule 98 to provide that when
Designated Market Makers (``DMM'') enter interest for the purpose of
facilitating the execution of customer orders, such orders would not be
required to be designated as DMM interest. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 98 to provide that when DMMs
enter interest on a proprietary basis for the purpose of facilitating
the execution of customer orders, such orders would not be required to
be designated as DMM interest.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As defined in Rule 2(i), the term ``DMM'' means an
individual member, officer, partner, employee or associated person
of a Designated Market Maker Unit who is approved by the Exchange to
act in the capacity of a DMM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    In 2014, the Exchange amended Rule 98 to adopt a principles-based
approach to prohibit the misuse of material nonpublic information by a
member organization that operates a DMM unit and make conforming
changes to other Exchange rules.\5\ Those rule changes provide member
organizations operating DMM units with the ability to integrate DMM
unit trading with other trading units, while maintaining tailored
restrictions to address that DMMs while on the Trading Floor may have
access to certain Floor-based non-public information. By removing
prescriptive restrictions, the 2014 Filing was designed to enable a
member organization that engages in market-making operations on
multiple exchanges to house its DMM operations together with the other
market-making operations, even if such operations are customer-facing,
or, to enable a member organization to consolidate all equity trading,
including customer-facing operations and the DMM unit, within a single
independent trading unit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 72534 (July 3,
2014), 79 FR 39019 (July 9, 2014) (Approval Order) and 71837 (April
1, 2014), 79 FR 19146 (April 7, 2014) (``2014 Notice'') (SR-NYSE-
2014-12) (``2014 Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 98(c) sets forth specified restrictions to operating a DMM
unit.\6\ Among other requirements, Rule 98(c)(4) provides that any
interest entered into Exchange systems by the DMM unit in DMM
securities \7\ must be identifiable as DMM unit interest. Current Rule
98(c)(4) was designed to ensure that all trading activity by a DMM unit
in DMM securities at the Exchange is available for review. As discussed
below, under Rule 98(c)(5), DMMs would continue to be required to
submit information to the Exchange to make available to the Exchange
for review all trading activity by a DMM unit in DMM securities. The
Exchange did not specify which system(s) a DMM unit must use because,
as the Exchange's trading systems continue to evolve, the manner by
which interest would be identified as DMM interest could change.
Accordingly, the current rule requires any trading for the account of
the DMM unit in DMM securities at the Exchange to be identifiable as
DMM interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As defined in Rule 98(b)(1), the term ``DMM unit'' means a
trading unit within a member organization that is approved pursuant
to Rule 103 to act as a DMM unit.
    \7\ As defined in Rule 98(b)(2), the term ``DMM securities''
means any securities allocated to the DMM unit pursuant to Rule 103B
or other applicable rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 98(c)(5) provides that a member organization must provide the
Exchange with real-time net position information for trading in DMM
securities by the DMM unit and any independent trading unit of which it
is a part, at such times and in the manner prescribed by the Exchange.
Rule 98(d) further specifies that the DMM rules \8\ will apply only to
a DMM unit's quoting or trading in its DMM securities for its own
accounts at the Exchange. Accordingly, the DMM rules do not apply to
any customer orders that a member organization that operates a DMM unit
sends to the Exchange as agent.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As defined in Rule 98(b)(3), the term ``DMM rules'' means
any rules that govern DMM or DMM unit conduct or trading.
    \9\ See 2014 Notice, supra note 5 at 19152 (specifying that Rule
98(d) was added because DMM rules are not applicable to any customer
orders routed to the Exchange by a member organization as agent).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because Rule 98(c)(4) currently requires that any interest entered
into Exchange systems by the DMM unit in DMM securities be identifiable
as DMM interest, a DMM unit integrated with a customer-facing unit that
would send customer orders in DMM securities to the Exchange as
proprietary interest must identify it as DMM interest. As a result,
although agency orders are not subject to DMM rules, customer-driven
interest entered on a proprietary basis is subject to all DMM rules.
    To date, none of the member organizations operating a DMM have
integrated a DMM unit with a customer-facing trading unit and the
Exchange believes that the current rule requiring customer-driven
orders that are represented on a proprietary basis be designated as DMM
interest has served as a barrier to achieving such integration.\10\
Specifically, there are

certain scenarios when the rules governing DMMs may conflict with a
member organization's obligations to its customers. For example, DMMs
are not permitted to enter Market Orders, MOO Orders, CO Orders, MOC
Order, LOC Orders, or orders with Sell ``Plus''--Buy ``Minus''
Instructions.\11\ But to meet customer instructions, a customer-driven
order entered by a member organization on a proprietary basis may need
to be one of these order types. As another example, DMMs are restricted
from engaging in specified trading in the last ten minutes of trading
before the close of trading.\12\ But a member organization may have a
best execution obligation to route a customer-driven order to the
Exchange in the last ten minutes of trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange understands it is a common practice among
market makers that operate as wholesalers, and thus have their own
customer orders as well as retail order flow from another broker
dealer, to facilitate the execution of customer order flow by
representing it on a proprietary basis when such orders are routed
to an exchange. Once a customer-driven order that has been
represented on a proprietary basis on an exchange has been executed,
the market maker uses the position acquired on the Exchange to fill
the customer order either on a riskless-principal basis or with
price improvement to the customer.
    \11\ See Rule 104(b)(vi).
    \12\ See Rule 104(g)(i)(A)(III) (defining Prohibited
Transactions). Specifically, a DMM with a long position in a
security is prohibited from making a purchase in a security that
results in a new high price on the Exchange for the day, and a DMM
with a short position in a security is prohibited from making a sale
in such security that results in a new low price for the day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Amendments
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 98 to better reflect how member
organizations that integrate DMM unit operations with customer-facing
operations may facilitate customer-driven order flow to the Exchange in
DMM securities. As noted above, one of the intended goals of the 2014
Filing was to permit member organizations to integrate DMM unit
operations with other market-making operations, including customer-
facing units. However, as discussed above, subjecting customer order
flow that is entered on a proprietary basis to DMM rules may be
inconsistent with a member organization's obligations to its customers,
and thus continue to serve as a barrier to integrating DMM units within
a member organization. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
98 to facilitate better integration of DMM units with a member
organization's existing customer-facing market-making trading units by
specifying that, as with agency orders, customer-driven orders that are
entered on a proprietary basis by the DMM unit would not be required to
be designated as DMM interest.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 98 to provide that proprietary
interest that is entered by a DMM unit for the purposes of facilitating
customer orders would not be required to be designated as DMM interest.
The Exchange proposes to replace the phrase ``any interest'' with the
phrase ``proprietary interest'' in Rule 98(c)(4) to clarify that the
existing rule only governs proprietary interest of a DMM unit, i.e.,
interest for the account of the member organization. As further
proposed, the Exchange would amend Rule 98(c)(4) to provide that if
proprietary interest entered into Exchange systems by the DMM unit in
DMM securities is for the purposes of facilitating the execution of an
order from a customer (whether its own customer or the customer of
another broker-dealer), such interest would not be required to be
identifiable as DMM unit interest. The Exchange proposes to define such
interest as a ``customer-driven order.''
    The proposed definition of ``customer-driven order'' is not a novel
concept in that other SROs rules define the concept of a proprietary
order being entered to facilitate a customer order. For example,
Supplementary Material .03 to FINRA Rule 5320 defines the term
``facilitated order'' to mean a proprietary trade that is for the
purposes of facilitating the execution, on a riskless principal basis,
of an order from a customer (whether its own customer or another
broker-dealer).\13\ The Exchange proposes a distinction for the
definition of ``customer-driven order'' in Rule 98 as compared to the
Rule 5320 definition of ``facilitated order'' because as proposed, a
customer-driven order would not be required to be entered on a riskless
basis. Rather, the Exchange believes that any customer order that a
member organization facilitates on a proprietary basis should be
eligible for treatment under proposed Rule 98(c)(4).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See also Supplementary Material .03 to NYSE Rule 5320.
    \14\ If a customer-driven order, as defined in Rule 98(c)(4), is
not handled on a riskless principal basis, it would not be eligible
for the riskless principal exception to the prohibition against
trading ahead of customer orders as specified in Rule 5320.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change is designed to reflect how member
organizations handle customer orders, which in many circumstances, are
routed to an exchange on a proprietary basis to facilitate execution of
a customer's order. Therefore, the Exchange believes that the proposed
amendment is consistent with the current rule, which does not require
agency orders entered by the member organization that operates a DMM
unit to be subject to DMM rules.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further proposes to amend Rule 98(d) to specify which
rules would be applicable to trading by the DMM unit. As proposed, the
rules, fees, or credits applicable to DMM quoting or trading activity
would apply only to a DMM unit's quoting or trading in its DMM
securities for its own account at the Exchange that has been identified
as DMM interest. In addition, consistent with the proposal that
customer-driven orders would not be required to be designated as DMM
interest, the Exchange proposes to add text to Rule 98(d) to state that
customer-driven orders for the account of a DMM unit that have not been
identified as DMM interest would not be subject to DMM rules or be
eligible for any fees or credits applicable to DMM quoting or trading
activity.\16\ In addition, such customer-driven orders could not be
aggregated with interest that has been identified as DMM interest for
purposes of any DMM-related fees or credits or DMM quoting obligations
specified in Rule 104(a). This proposed rule text would provide that
customer-driven orders not designated as DMM interest would not be
subject to DMM rules, which, as described above, include restrictions
on availability of certain order types and entry of specified orders
during the last ten minutes of trading. Because a customer-driven order
that has not been designated as DMM interest would not be subject to
DMM rules, it would also not be eligible for a parity allocation
applicable for DMMs pursuant to Rule 72(c) or be used to assist a DMM
in meeting its quoting obligations, or be eligible for DMM fees or
credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Rather, such customer-driven orders would be eligible for
any fees or credits applicable to equity transactions at the
Exchange that are not DMM or Floor broker trades. See NYSE Price
List, available here: https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/NYSE_Price_List.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rule 98(c)(5) obligation to provide the Exchange with real-time
net position information in DMM securities would continue to be
applicable to the DMM unit's position in DMM securities together with
any position of a Regulation SHO independent trading unit of which the
DMM unit may be included, regardless of whether they are positions
resulting from trades in away markets, trades as a result of DMM
interest entered at the Exchange, or customer-driven orders routed to
the Exchange that were not identified as DMM interest.\17\ For example,
if a DMM

unit is combined with market-making desks that are trading on away
markets and that route customer-driven orders to the Exchange in DMM
securities that are not identified as DMM interest, the member
organization would be required to report the position of the entire DMM
unit in DMM securities, not only the DMM's Exchange-traded positions
resulting from DMM interest. The Exchange also proposes a non-
substantive amendment to Rule 98(c)(5) to delete the term ``for
trading,'' which the Exchange believes is extraneous rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Under Regulation SHO, determination of a seller's net
position is based on the seller's position in the security in all
proprietary accounts. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50103
(July 28, 2004), 69 FR 48008, 48010, n.22 (Aug. 6, 2004); see also
Securities Exchange Act Release Not 48709 (Oct. 29, 2003), 68 FR
62972, 62991 and 62994 (Nov. 6, 2003); Letter from Richard R.
Lindsey, Director, Division of Market Regulation, to Roger D. Blanc,
Wilkie Farr & Gallagher, SEC No-Action Letter, 1998 SEC No-Act.
LEXIS 1038, p. 5 (Nov. 23, 1998); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 30772 (June 3, 1992), 57 FR 24415, 24419 n.47 (June 9, 1992);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 27938 (Apr. 23, 1990), 55 FR
17949, 17950 (Apr. 30, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Act for this proposed rule change is the
requirement under Section 6(b)(5) \18\ that an Exchange have rules that
are designed to promote the just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market by providing greater specificity in
Rule 98 regarding which proprietary interest would be required to be
entered as DMM interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to define the
term ``customer-driven order'' to be proprietary interest of a DMM that
is for the purposes of facilitating the execution of an order from a
customer (whether its own customer or the customer of another broker-
dealer) reflects the current reality of how broker-dealers facilitate
customer orders that are routed to an exchange. Specifically, such
customer orders are routed to an exchange on a proprietary basis, and
once an execution is received from an exchange, the execution is
provided to the customer either on a riskless principal basis or with
price improvement. Facilitating customer orders on a proprietary basis
is not a novel concept and serves as the basis of the definition of the
term ``facilitated order'' in Supplementary Material .03 to FINRA Rule
5320. While the Exchange proposes that customer-driven orders for the
purposes of Rule 98 would not be required to be executed on a riskless
principal basis, this difference does not alter the premise of how
member organizations facilitate customer orders, as already established
in Rule 5320.03. Because the proposed definition reflects how customer
orders are facilitated on a proprietary basis when routed to an
exchange, the Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Rule
98(c)(4) to define the term ``customer-driven order'' would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market.
    The Exchange further believes that providing DMM units with a
choice of whether to designate a customer-driven order as DMM interest
would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market because certain DMM rules may conflict with a broker-
dealer's obligation to its customers. As discussed in the 2014 Filing,
agency orders entered by a member organization that operates a DMM unit
are not subject to DMM rules.\19\ Yet, if that same customer order were
routed to the Exchange on a proprietary basis, which is the manner by
which broker-dealers may handle customer order flow, it would be
subject to DMM rules. Accordingly, because Rule 98 does not currently
require agency flow to be subject to DMM rules, the Exchange believes
it is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest that agency flow that is facilitated by a member organization
on a proprietary basis at the Exchange would similarly not be required
to be subject to DMM rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would further be consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest because it would enable
customer-driven orders to not be subject to DMM rules and eliminate any
conflict with customer instructions or best execution obligations.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed amendments to Rule
98(d) would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market by promoting transparency in Exchange rules regarding
which rules, fees or credits applicable to DMM quoting or trading
activity would be applicable to which interest. More specifically, the
Exchange believes that it would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market to provide specificity in Exchange
rules that customer-driven orders that have not been designated as DMM
interest would not be subject to the DMM rules and also would not be
eligible for DMM fees or credits or to be aggregated with DMM interest
for purposes of any DMM-related fees or credits or DMM quoting
obligations.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to Rule
98(c)(5) would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market by removing extraneous rule text, thus promoting
simplicity in Exchange rules.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
designed to be pro-competitive because it would remove a restriction
unique to DMMs as specified in Rule 98, thus enabling existing
customer-facing market making units to operate as a DMM unit at the
Exchange without needing to change the manner by which they may
facilitate customer orders on a proprietary basis at an exchange.

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 Exchange respectfully requests accelerated effectiveness of
this proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act.\20\
The Exchange believes that there is good cause for the Commission to
accelerate effectiveness because the proposed rule change is consistent
with the goal of the 2014 Filing to exclude agency orders entered by a
member organization that operates a DMM unit from being subject to DMM
rules. The proposed rule change is designed to reflect how member
organizations represent agency orders and narrowly defines a class of
proprietary interest that is entered to facilitate customer orders from
being required to be subject to DMM rules. Moreover, the proposed
definition of ``customer-driven order'' is not novel, as is it based on
the existing definition of ``facilitated order'' set forth in
Supplementary Material .03 to Rule 5320 and Supplementary Material .03
to FINRA Rule 5320, which already describe how proprietary orders can
be entered to facilitate a customer order.

The Exchange believes that difference between the proposed Rule 98
definition of ``customer-driven order'' and the Rule 5320 definition of
``facilitated order'' is not material because, if a ``customer-driven
order'' under Rule 98 is not executed on a riskless principal basis, it
would still be subject to the requirements of Rule 5320 and would not
be eligible for the riskless principal exception.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange further believes that providing DMMs with the choice
of whether to designate customer-driven orders as DMM interest would
permit member organizations operating DMM units to facilitate customer-
based order flow at the Exchange without such orders being restricted
by DMM obligations, which may be contrary to customer instructions or
best execution obligations. The Exchange further believes that the
proposed rule change would apply DMM rules fairly because customer-
driven orders not designated as DMM interest, would not be subject to
the obligations, nor be eligible for the benefits, applicable to DMM
interest.
    Finally, the Exchange believes there is good cause to accelerate
effectiveness of this proposed rule change because it would promote
competition on the Exchange. As has been previously announced,
additional member organizations are seeking to become approved as
DMMs.\21\ The proposed rule change would facilitate the transition of
DMM responsibilities to new entrants that engage in customer-facing
market making, thereby promoting competition among member organizations
seeking to be approved as a DMM on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See ``Citadel Securities to become #1 Designated Market
Maker on NYSE,'' available at http://www.citadelsecurities.com/news/citadel-securities-become-1-designated-market-maker-nyse/ nyse/; and
``GTS to become Designated Market Maker on the New York Stock
Exchange,'' available at http://gtsx.com/in-the-news/details/gts-to-become-designated-market-maker-on-the-new-york-stock-exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:

A. by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or

B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2016-16 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-NYSE-2016-16. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2016-16 and should be
submitted on or before April 5, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-05753 Filed 3-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 31921]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11202]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94953; File No. S7-24-89]

Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for
Commission Action on the Fifty-Second Amendment to the Joint Self-
Regulatory Organization Plan Governing the Collection, Consolidation
and Dissemination of Quotation and Transaction Information for Nasdaq-
Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privileges
Basis

May 19, 2022.
    On November 5, 2021,\1\ certain participants in the Joint Self-
Regulatory Organization Plan Governing the Collection, Consolidation
and Dissemination of Quotation and Transaction Information for Nasdaq-
Listed Securities Traded on Exchanges on an Unlisted Trading Privileges
Basis (``Nasdaq/UTP Plan'' or ``Plan'') \2\ filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \3\ and
Rule 608 of Regulation National Market System (``NMS'') thereunder,\4\
a proposal (``Proposed Amendment'') to amend the Nasdaq/UTP Plan.\5\
The Proposed Amendment was published for comment in the Federal
Register on November 26, 2021.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Letter from Robert Books, Chair, UTP Operating
Committee, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission (Nov. 5,
2021).
    \2\ The Plan governs the collection, processing, and
dissemination on a consolidated basis of quotation information and
transaction reports in Eligible Securities for its Participants. The
Plan serves as the required transaction reporting plan for its
Participants, which is a prerequisite for their trading Eligible
Securities. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55647 (Apr. 19,
2007), 72 FR 20891 (Apr. 26, 2007).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C 78k-1.
    \4\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \5\ The Proposed Amendment was approved and executed by more
than the Plan's required two-thirds of the self-regulatory
organizations (``SROs'') that are participants of the UTP Plan. The
participants that approved and executed the amendment (the
``Participants'') are: Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc., Cboe BZX Exchange,
Inc., Cboe EDGA Exchange, Inc., Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc., Cboe
Exchange, Inc., Nasdaq ISE, LLC, Nasdaq PHLX, Inc., The Nasdaq Stock
Market LLC, New York Stock Exchange LLC, NYSE American LLC, NYSE
Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, Inc., and NYSE National, Inc.. The other
SROs that are participants in the UTP Plan are: Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc., The Investors' Exchange LLC, Long-Term
Stock Exchange, Inc., MEMX LLC, MIAX PEARL, LLC, and Nasdaq BX, Inc.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93618 (Nov. 19,
2021), 86 FR 67562 (Nov. 26, 2021) (``Notice''). Comments received
in response to the Notice are available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-24-89/s72489.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 24, 2022, the Commission instituted proceedings
pursuant to Rule 608(b)(2)(i) of Regulation NMS,\7\ to determine
whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed Amendment or to approve
the Proposed Amendment with any changes or subject to any conditions
the Commission deems necessary or appropriate after considering public
comment.\8\ Rule 608(b)(2)(i) of Regulation NMS provides that such
proceedings shall be concluded within 180 days of the date of the
publication of notice of the plan or amendment and that the time for
conclusion of such proceedings may be extended for up to 60 days (up to
240 days from the date of notice publication) if the Commission
determines that a longer period is appropriate and publishes the
reasons for such determination or the plan participants consent to a
longer period.\9\ The 180th day after publication of the Notice for the
Proposed Amendment is May 25, 2022. The Commission is extending this
180-day period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(2)(i).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94307 (Feb. 24,
2022), 87 FR 11787 (Mar. 2, 2022) (``OIP''). Comments received in
response to the OIP can be found on the Commission's website at
https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-24-89/s72489.htm.
    \9\ 17 CFR 242.608(b)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to conclude proceedings regarding the Proposed
Amendment so that it has sufficient time to consider the Proposed
Amendment and the comments received. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule
608(b)(2)(i) of Regulation NMS,\10\ the Commission designates July 24,
2022, as the date by which the Commission shall conclude the
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the Proposed
Amendment or to approve the Proposed Amendment with any changes or
subject to any conditions the Commission deems necessary or appropriate
(File No. S7-24-89).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(85).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-11202 Filed 5-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29698-29699]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12468]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2911-039]

Southeast Alaska Power Agency; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 Code of Federal Regulations Part 380, Commission staff
has reviewed the Southeast Alaska Power Agency's application for
amendment of license for the Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project (FERC
Project No. 2911) and has prepared an environmental assessment (EA).
The project is located on Falls Creek on Revillagigedo Island near
Ketchikan, Alaska. The project occupies federal lands administered by
the U.S. Forest Service within the Tongass National Forest.
    The EA contains Commission staff's analysis of the potential
environmental effects of adding spillway gates to the project dam,
raising the maximum elevation of the project impoundment by 15 feet,
inundating an additional 93 acres, and making structural modifications
to the dam and intake structure. The EA concludes that authorizing the
amendment, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would
not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect
the quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room, or it may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov using the e-Library link. Enter the docket
number (P-2911) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free at 1-866-208-3676 or<PHONE_NUMBER> (for TTY).
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubsription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    All comments must be filed within 30 days of the date of this
notice and should reference project no. 2911. The Commission strongly
encourages electronic filing. Please file comments 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. In lieu of electronic
filing, please send a paper copy to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    For further information, contact Steven Sachs by telephone at 202-
502-8666 or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: May 18, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12468 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 234 (Wednesday, December 5, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72252-72254]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29395]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1274; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-042-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Reims Aviation S.A. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Reims Aviation S.A. Model F406 airplanes. This proposed AD results from
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an
aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as improper material used in nose landing gear (NLG)
attachment brackets which could lead to failure of the NLG bracket with
consequent damage to the airplane while landing. We are issuing this
proposed AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 22,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Reims Aviation Industries, A[eacute]rodrome de Reims Prunay, 51360
Prunay, France; telephone + 33 3 26 48 46 65; fax + 33 3 26 49 18 57;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet:
www.geciaviation.com/en/f406.html. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert Mercado, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-1274;
Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-042-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each

substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD No.: 2012-0202, dated October 1, 2012 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    During the manufacturing process, RAI found that some of the
nose landing gear (NLG) attachment brackets, Part Number (P/N)
6013119-1, were made of aluminum alloy, instead of steel. The
results of the investigations showed that some of these aluminum
alloy brackets are likely to be installed on aeroplanes currently in
service.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
failure of the NLG attachment bracket and jamming of the NLG
extension/retraction mechanism, possibly resulting in a runway
excursion and consequent damage to the aeroplane and injury to the
occupants.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires inspection of
the NLG attachment bracket P/N 6013119-1 and, depending on findings,
replacement with a serviceable bracket made of steel.
    In addition, as some aluminum alloy P/N 6013119-1 NLG attachment
brackets may have been supplied as spares, this AD also requires
determination that the part is made of steel, prior to installation.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Reims Aviation S.A. has issued Service Bulletin No. F406-74, dated
September 26, 2012. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 7 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about .5 work-hour per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $42.50, or $297.50 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 3 work-hours and require parts costing $500, for a cost of
$755 per product. We have no way of determining the number of products
that may need these actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Reims Aviation S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2012-1274; Directorate
Identifier 2012-CE-042-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by January 22, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Reims Aviation S.A. F406 airplanes, all
serial numbers, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 32: Landing
Gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of improper material used in
nose landing gear (NLG) attachment brackets which could lead to
failure of the NLG bracket with consequent damage to the airplane
while landing. We are issuing this proposed AD to ensure the proper
NLG attachment bracket is installed.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions following the
instructions in Reims Aviation S.A. Service Bulletin No. F406-74,
dated September 26, 2012:
    (1) Within the next 25 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
effective date of this AD or within the next 30 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect the nose
landing gear (NLG) attachment brackets, part number (P/N) 6013119-1,
to verify if they are made of steel and not aluminum alloy.
    (2) If during the inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of
this AD, you find that a NLG attachment bracket made of aluminum
alloy is installed, before further flight, replace with an airworthy
steel NLG attachment bracket, P/N 6013119-1.
    (3) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install any NLG
attachment bracket P/N 6013119-1 that has not been confirmed to be
made of steel.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Albert Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, a federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person
is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information
subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless
that collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 5 minutes per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2012-0202, dated October 1, 2012; and Reims Aviation S.A. Service
Bulletin No. F406-74, dated September 26, 2012, for related
information. For service information related to this AD, contact
Reims Aviation Industries, A[eacute]rodrome de Reims Prunay, 51360
Prunay, France; telephone + 33 3 26 48 46 65; fax + 33 3 26 49 18
57; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet:
www.geciaviation.com/en/f406.html. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 29, 2012.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-29395 Filed 12-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Elkhart County Wind Rose Analysis  2002 Wind Speed and Wind Direction on 4 Highest 8 hour Ozone Days Maximum 8 hour ozone concentration of 103 ppb Maximum 8 hour ozone concentration of 102 ppb Maximum 8 hour ozone concentration of 111 ppb Maximum 8 hour Ozone concentration of 99 ppb


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58201-58202]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23667]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2019-0148]

Notice of Rights and Protections Available Under the Federal
Antidiscrimination and Whistleblower Protection Laws

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation.

ACTION: No FEAR Act notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice implements Title II of the Notification and
Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No
FEAR Act of 2002). It is the annual obligation for Federal agencies to
notify all employees, former employees, and applicants for Federal
employment of the rights and protections available to them under the
Federal Anti-discrimination and Whistleblower Protection Laws.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yvette Rivera, Associate Director of
the Equity and Access Division (S-32), Departmental Office of Civil
Rights, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W78-306, Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-
5131 or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may retrieve this document online through the Federal Document
Management System at http://www.regulations.gov. Electronic retrieval
instructions are available under the help section of the website.

No FEAR Act Notice

    On May 15, 2002, Congress enacted the ``Notification and Federal
Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002,'' now
recognized as the No FEAR Act (Pub. L. 107-174). One purpose of the Act
is to ``require that Federal agencies be accountable for violations of
antidiscrimination and

whistleblower protection laws.'' (Pub. L. 107-174, Summary). In support
of this purpose, Congress found that ``agencies cannot be run
effectively if those agencies practice or tolerate discrimination''
(Pub. L. 107-174, Title I, General Provisions, section 101(1)). The Act
also requires the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) to
provide this Notice to all USDOT employees, former USDOT employees, and
applicants for USDOT employment. This Notice informs such individuals
of the rights and protections available under Federal
antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws.

Antidiscrimination Laws

    A Federal agency cannot discriminate against an employee or
applicant with respect to the terms, conditions, or privileges of
employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age,
disability, marital status, genetic information, or political
affiliation. One or more of the following statutes prohibit
discrimination on these bases: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(1), 29 U.S.C. 631, 29
U.S.C. 633a, 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 29 U.S.C. 791, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16 and
2000ff.
    If you believe you have experienced unlawful discrimination on the
bases of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, genetic
information, and/or disability, you must contact an Equal Employment
Opportunity (EEO) counselor within 45 calendar days of the alleged
discriminatory action, or in the case of a personnel action, within 45
calendar days of the effective date of the action. A directory of EEO
officers is available on the Departmental Office of Civil Rights
website at http://www.transportation.gov/civil-rights, under the
``Contact Us'' tab. You will be offered the opportunity to resolve the
matter informally; if you are unable to resolve the matter informally,
you can file a formal complaint of discrimination with USDOT (See,
e.g., 29 CFR part 1614).
    If you believe you experienced unlawful discrimination based on
age, you must either contact an EEO counselor as noted above, or file a
civil action in a United States district court under the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act, against the head of an alleged
discriminating agency. If you choose to file a civil action, you must
give notice of intent to sue to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory action,
and not less than 30 days before filing a civil action. You may file
such notice in writing with the EEOC via mail at P.O. Box 77960,
Washington, DC 20013, the EEOC website https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/charge.cfm, personal delivery, or facsimile.
    If you are alleging discrimination based on marital status or
political affiliation, you may file a written discrimination complaint
with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Form OSC-11 is available
online at the OSC website http://www.osc.gov, under the tab to file a
complaint. Additionally, you can download the form from http://www.osc.gov/Pages/Resources-OSCForms.aspx. Complete Form OSC-11 and
mail it to the Complaints Examining Unit, U.S. Office of Special
Counsel at 1730 M Street NW, Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505. You
also have the option to call the Complaints Examining Unit at (800)
872-9855 for additional assistance. In the alternative (or in some
cases, in addition), you may pursue a discrimination complaint by
filing a grievance through the USDOT administrative or negotiated
grievance procedures, if such procedures apply and are available.
    If you are alleging compensation discrimination pursuant to the
Equal Pay Act, and wish to pursue your allegations through the
administrative process, you must contact an EEO counselor within 45
calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action, as such complaints
are processed under EEOC's regulations at 29 CFR part 1614.
Alternatively, you may file a civil action in a court of competent
jurisdiction within two years, or if the violation is willful, three
years of the date of the alleged violation, regardless of whether you
pursued any administrative complaint processing. The filing of a
complaint or appeal pursuant to 29 CFR part 1614 shall not toll the
time for filing a civil action.

Whistleblower Protection Laws

    A USDOT employee with authority to take, direct others to take,
recommend, or approve any personnel action must not use that authority
to take, or fail to take, or threaten to take a personnel action
against an employee or applicant because of a disclosure of information
by that individual that is reasonably believed to evidence violations
of law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds;
an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public
health or safety, unless the disclosure of such information is
specifically prohibited by law and such information is specifically
required by Executive Order to be kept secret in the interest of
national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs.
    Retaliation against a USDOT employee or applicant for making a
protected disclosure is prohibited (5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8)). If you
believe you are a victim of whistleblower retaliation, you may file a
written complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel at 1730 M
Street NW, Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505 using Form OSC-11.
Alternatively, you may file online through the OSC website at http://www.osc.gov.

Disciplinary Actions

    Under existing laws, USDOT retains the right, where appropriate, to
discipline a USDOT employee who engages in conduct that is inconsistent
with Federal Antidiscrimination and Whistleblower Protection laws up to
and including removal from Federal service. If OSC initiates an
investigation under 5 U.S.C. 1214, USDOT must seek approval from the
Special Counsel to discipline employees for, among other activities,
engaging in prohibited retaliation (5 U.S.C. 1214). Nothing in the No
FEAR Act alters existing laws, or permits an agency to take unfounded
disciplinary action against a USDOT employee, or to violate the
procedural rights of a USDOT employee accused of discrimination.

Additional Information

    For more information regarding the No FEAR Act regulations, refer
to 5 CFR part 724, as well as the appropriate office(s) within your
agency (e.g., EEO/civil rights offices, human resources offices, or
legal offices). You can find additional information regarding Federal
antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection, and retaliation laws at
the EEOC website at http://www.eeoc.gov and the OSC website at http://www.osc.gov.

Existing Rights Unchanged

    Pursuant to section 205 of the No FEAR Act, neither the Act nor
this notice creates, expands, or reduces any rights otherwise available
to any employee, former employee, or applicant under the laws of the
United States, including the provisions of law specified in 5 U.S.C.
2302(d).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 24, 2019.
Charles E. James, Sr.,
Director, Departmental Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of
Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2019-23667 Filed 10-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P