[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 169 (Thursday, August 30, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44251-44252]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18767]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0684; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-18]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Jacksonville, IL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Jacksonville Municipal
Airport, Jacksonville, IL. The FAA is proposing this action as the
result of an airspace review caused by the decommissioning of the
Jacksonville VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) navigation aid, which
provided navigation information for the instrument procedures at this
airport, as part of the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) Program.
The geographic coordinates for the airport would also be updated to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautic database. This action is necessary
for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR)
operations at this airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 15, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2018-0684; Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-18, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11B at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Jacksonville Municipal Airport, Jacksonville, IL, to
support instrument flight rules operations at this airport.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2018-0684;
Airspace Docket No. 18-AGL-18.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective
September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by amending the Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 6.5-mile radius
(decreased from a 7-mile radius) at Jacksonville Municipal Airport,
Jacksonville, IL. The geographic coordinates of the airport would also
be updated to coincide with the FAA's aeronautic database.
    This action is necessary due to an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Jacksonville VOR, which provided navigation
information to the instrument

procedures at this airport, as part of the VOR MON Program.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11B,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and
effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AGL IL E5 Jacksonville, IL [Amended]

Jacksonville Municipal Airport, IL
    (Lat. 39[deg]46'29'' N, long. 90[deg]14'18'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of Jacksonville Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 23, 2018.
Walter Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-18767 Filed 8-29-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 46)]
[Notices]
[Page 12493-12495]
[DOCID:fr07mr08-138]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57418; File No. SR-Phlx-2008-14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Make Permanent a Pilot Program That Increases Position and Exercise
Limits on Equity Options

March 3, 2008.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 28, 2008, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``Exchange'' or ``Phlx'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. The Exchange has designated this proposal as non-
controversial under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change
effective upon filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange seeks to make permanent an existing pilot program (the
``Pilot Program''), the terms of which are set forth in Exchange Rule
1001 (Position Limits), which increases the standard position and
exercise limits for equity option contracts, including options on the
PowerShares QQQ Trust (``QQQQ''). The Pilot Program is scheduled to
expire March 1, 2008.\5\ The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.phlx.com), at the
Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56267 (August 15,
2007), 72 FR 47114 (August 22, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-58); 55285
(February 13, 2007), 72 FR 8053 (February 22, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-
10); 54387 (August 30, 2006), 71 FR 52842 (September 7, 2006) (SR-
Phlx-2006-48); 53388 (February 28, 2006), 71 FR 11458 (March 7,
2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-13); 52261 (August 15, 2005), 70 FR 49004
(August 22, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-51); and 51322 (March 4, 2005), 70
FR 12260 (March 11, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-17).

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

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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to make permanent the
Pilot Program, which is scheduled to expire March 1, 2008. The Exchange
proposes to amend Rule 1001, Position Limits, to permanently establish
the increased position limits of the Pilot Program. Exchange Rule 1002,
Exercise Limits (not proposed to be amended), establishes exercise
limits for the corresponding options at the same levels as the
corresponding security's position limits.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Rule 1002 states, in relevant part, ``[N]o member or member
organization shall exercise, for any account in which such member or
member organization has an interest or for the account of any
partner, officer, director or employee thereof or for the account of
any customer, a long position in any option contract of a class of
options dealt in on the Exchange (or, respecting an option not dealt
in on the Exchange, another exchange if the member or member
organization is not a member of that exchange) if as a result
thereof such member or member organization, or partner, officer,
director or employee thereof or customer, acting alone or in concert
with others, directly or indirectly, has or will have exercised
within any five (5) consecutive business days aggregate long
positions in that class (put or call) as set forth as the position
limit in Rule 1001, in the case of options on a stock or on an
Exchange-Traded Fund Share* * *.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standard Position and Exercise Limit
    The Pilot Program increases the standard position and exercise
limits for equity options traded on the Exchange and for options on the
Powershares QQQ Trust (``QQQQ''). The standardized position limits were
last increased nine years ago, on December 31, 1998.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40875 (December 31,
1998), 64 FR 1842 (January 12, 1999) (SR-Phlx-98-36).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Violations
    The Exchange believes that any findings of violations regarding
equity option position and exercise limits since the inception of the
Pilot Program were deemed inadvertent--due primarily to miscounting,
technical problems, or a misinterpretation of position limit
calculation methodologies. No such violations were deemed to be a
result of manipulative activities.
Growth in the Options Market
    Since the last increase in standardized position limits, there has
been a significant increase in the overall volume of exchange-traded
options. Part of this volume is attributable to a corresponding
increase in the number of overall market participants. This growth in
market participation has in turn brought about additional depth and
increased liquidity in exchange-traded options.
Manipulation
    Since the last increase in standardized position limits, and
throughout the duration of the Pilot Program, the Exchange has not
encountered any regulatory issues regarding the applicable position
limits, and states that there is a lack of evidence of market
manipulation schemes, which justifies making permanent the Pilot
Program.
    As the anniversary of listed options trading approaches its 35th
year, the Exchange believes that the existing surveillance procedures
and reporting requirements at the Exchange, at other options exchanges,
and at the several clearing firms are capable of properly identifying
unusual and/or illegal trading activity. The Exchange's surveillance
procedures include daily monitoring of market movements via automated
surveillance techniques to identify unusual activities in both options
and their underlying securities.
    Accordingly, the Exchange represents that its surveillance
procedures (which have been significantly enhanced since the last
standardized position limit increase in 1999) and reporting procedures,
in conjunction with the financial requirements and risk management
review procedures already in place at the clearing firms and the
Options Clearing Corporation, will serve to adequately address any
concerns the Commission may have respecting account(s) engaging in
manipulative schemes or assuming too high a level of risk exposure.
Financial Requirements
    The Exchange believes that the current financial requirements
imposed by the Exchange and by the Commission adequately address the
concerns that a member or its customer may try to maintain an
inordinately large unhedged position in an equity option.
Inability To Compete; Retreat to OTC Market
    The Exchange expects continued options volume growth as
opportunities for investors to participate in options markets increase
and evolve. The Exchange also believes that the non-pilot position and
exercise limits are restrictive, and returning to those limits will
hamper fair and effective competition between the listed options
markets and over-the-counter markets.
No Adverse Consequences From Past Increases
    Equity option position limits have been gradually expanded from
1,000 contracts in 1973 to the current level of 75,000 contracts for
the largest and most actively traded equity options. To date, there
have been no adverse effects on the markets as a result of these past
increases in the position limits for equity option contracts.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \8\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \9\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest,
by seeking to make permanent the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one that:
(1) Does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the
public interest; (2) does not impose any

significant burden on competition; and (3) does not become operative
for 30 days from the date of filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest. Therefore, the foregoing rule change has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\11\ The Exchange notes
that the proposed rule change is based on a similar proposal recently
approved by the Commission.\12\ The Exchange has asked the Commission
to waive the operative delay to permit the proposed rule change to
become operative prior to the 30th day after filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of 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 fulfilled this requirement.
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57352 (February 19,
2008), 73 FR 10076 (February 25, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2008-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Pilot Program was scheduled to expire on March 1, 2008. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay of the
Exchange's proposal is consistent with the protection of investors and
the public interest because it will allow the position and exercise
limits to remain at consistent levels during the transition from the
Pilot Program to permanent status.\13\ Therefore, the Commission
designates the proposal to be operative upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate the 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.

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-Phlx-2008-14 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2008-14. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such 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-Phlx-2008-14 and should be
submitted on or before March 28, 2008.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-4517 Filed 3-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 111 (Friday, June 9, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37907-37908]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12394]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0015]

Crawler, Locomotive, and Truck Cranes Standard; Extension of the
Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information
Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in its Standard on
Crawler, Locomotive, and Truck Cranes.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
August 8, 2023.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some
information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to
read or download through the website. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection through the OSHA
Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY
(877) 889-5627) for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2010-0015) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). OSHA will place all comments, including any personal
information, in the public docket, which may be made available online.
Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal
information such as social security numbers and birthdates.
    For further information on submitting comments, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the section of this notice titled
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and
OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The Standard specifies several paperwork requirements. The
following sections describe who uses the information collected under
each requirement, as well as how they use it. The purpose of each of
these requirements is to prevent workers from using unsafe cranes and
ropes, thereby reducing their risk of death or serious injury caused by
a crane or rope failure during material handling.

(A) Inspection of and Certification Records for Cranes (Sec.
1910.180(d)(4), (6))

    Paragraph 1910.180(d) specifies that employers must prepare a
written record to certify that the monthly inspection of critical items
in use on cranes (such as brakes, crane hooks, and ropes) has been
performed. The certification record must include the inspection date,
the signature of the person who conducted the inspection, and the
serial number (or other identifier) of the inspected crane. Employers
must keep the certificate readily available. The certification record
provides employers, workers, and OSHA compliance officers with
assurance that critical items on cranes have been inspected, and that
the equipment is in good operating condition so that the crane and rope
will not fail during material handling. These records also enable OSHA
to determine that an employer is complying with the Standard.

(B) Rated Load Tests (Sec.  1910.180(e)(2))

    This provision requires employers to make available written reports
of load-rating tests showing test procedures and confirming the
adequacy of repairs or alterations, and to make readily available any
rerating test reports. These reports inform the employer, workers, and
OSHA compliance officers of a crane's lifting limitations, and provide
information to crane operators to prevent them from exceeding these
limits and thereby causing crane failure.

(C) Inspection and Certification Records for Ropes (Sec.
1910.180(g)(1), (g)(2)(ii))

    Paragraph (g)(1) requires employers to thoroughly inspect any rope
in use at least once a month. The authorized person conducting the
inspection must observe any deterioration resulting in appreciable loss
of original strength and determine whether or not the condition is
hazardous. Before reusing a rope that has not been used for at least a
month because the crane housing the rope is shut down or in storage,
paragraph (g)(2)(ii) specifies that employers must have an appointed or
authorized person inspect the rope for all types of deterioration.
Employers must prepare a certification record for the inspections
required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2)(ii). These certification
records must include the inspection date, the signature of the person
conducting the inspection, and the identifier for the inspected rope;
paragraph (g)(1) states that employers must keep the certificates ``on
file where readily available,'' while paragraph (g)(2)(ii) requires
that certificates ``be . . . kept readily available.'' The
certification records assure employers, workers, and OSHA that the
inspected ropes are in good condition.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the agency's functions to
protect workers, including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection, and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Standard on Crawler,
Locomotive, and Truck Cranes. The agency is requesting a burden hour
adjustment decrease of 1,872 hours, from 30,511 hours to 28,639 hours.
This decrease is due to the decrease in operational cranes used for
general industry purposes.
    OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend
the approval of the information collection requirements.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Crawler, Locomotive, and Truck Cranes Standard.
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0221.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 3,399.
    Number of Responses: 78,584.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Varies.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 29,639.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); if your comments, including
attachments, are not longer than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA
Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>. or (3) by hard copy. All comments,
attachments, and other material must identify the agency name and the
OSHA docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2010-0015). You may supplement
electronic submissions by uploading document files electronically.
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the website's ``User Tips'' link.
    Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY (877) 889-
5627) for information about materials not available from the website,
and for assistance in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020
(85 FR 58393).

    Signed at Washington, DC.
James S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2023-12394 Filed 6-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44177-44179]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18366]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 514

[Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0447]

Antimicrobial Animal Drug Sales and Distribution Reporting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is soliciting
comments regarding potential changes to its regulations relating to
records and reports for approved new animal drugs. FDA is considering
revisions to this regulation to incorporate the requirements of section
105 of the Animal Drug User Fee Amendments of 2008 (ADUFA 105). As part
of that process, FDA is reviewing other reporting requirements
applicable to antimicrobial new animal drug sponsors to determine
whether additional information should be reported. Collecting data on
antimicrobial drugs used in food-producing animals will assist FDA in
tracking antimicrobial use trends and examining how such trends may
relate to antimicrobial resistance.

DATES: Submit electronic or written comments by September 25, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2012-
N-0447, by any of the following methods:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0447 for this rulemaking. All comments
received may be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided. For additional information
on submitting comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neal Bataller, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-210), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 512(l) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(l)) requires sponsors of approved or
conditionally approved new animal drug applications to establish and
maintain records and make such reports of data relating to experience
with uses and other data or information received or obtained by the
sponsor with respect to such animal drugs as required by regulation or
order. FDA's regulation relating to records and reports for approved
new animal drugs is found at 21 CFR 514.80. This regulation requires an
animal drug sponsor to submit a number of different reports, including
periodic drug experience reports, which must contain, among other
things, drug distribution data showing the amount of the drug
distributed domestically and the amount exported.
    In 2008, ADUFA 105 directed the Agency to collect additional data
and information about approved antimicrobial new animal drugs by
amending section 512(l) of the FD&C Act to include new reporting
requirements for sponsors of approved antimicrobial new animal drugs.
Under section 512(l) of the FD&C Act, as amended by ADUFA 105,
antimicrobial new animal drug sponsors must now also submit to FDA on
an annual basis a report specifying the amount of each antimicrobial
active ingredient in the sponsor's drug that is sold or distributed for
use in food-producing animals. Specifically, sponsors are required to
report the amount of each antimicrobial active ingredient as follows:
(1) By container size, strength, and dosage form; (2) by quantities
distributed domestically and quantities exported; and (3) for each
dosage form, a listing of the target animals, indications, and
production classes that are specified on the approved label of the
product. Currently, sponsors of antimicrobial drugs that are approved
and labeled for multiple animal species, including both food-producing
and nonfood-producing animals, do not report sales and distribution
information for each individual animal species. Only total product
sales information is reported. The information must be reported for the
preceding calendar year, and include separate information for each
month of the calendar year, and be submitted to FDA each year by no
later than March 31. ADUFA 105 also requires FDA to publish an annual
summary report of the antimicrobial drug sales and distribution data it
receives.
    The sales and distribution information that is currently being
collected from antimicrobial new animal drug sponsors in accordance
with ADUFA 105 is important in supporting efforts such as the National
Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS), a surveillance
program that tracks trends related to antimicrobial resistance in food-
producing animals and humans.
    A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report addressing
antibiotic resistance concluded that sales and distribution information
as currently collected by FDA does not provide sufficient data needed
to analyze trends in antimicrobial resistance, such as information on
actual drug use in specific food-producing animal species (Ref. 1).
Having improved data would enable the Agency to better correlate
resistance data in NARMS with drug exposure, thereby providing improved
information for science-based decisionmaking in the approval and
monitoring of safe and effective antimicrobial drugs. In addition, such
information would further enhance FDA's ongoing activities related to
antimicrobial resistance and is consistent with the recommendations in
guidance recently issued by this Agency addressing the judicious use of
medically important antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals (Ref.
2).

II. Agency Request for Comments

A. Sales and Distribution Data by Species

    FDA is considering revisions to the requirements in this Agency's
regulation at Sec.  514.80 to incorporate the requirements of ADUFA 105
and, as part of that process, is reviewing other reporting requirements
applicable to antimicrobial new animal drug sponsors to determine
whether additional information should be reported. FDA is soliciting
public comment on whether, consistent with its authority under section
512(l) of the FD&C Act to collect information relating to approved new
animal drugs, it should amend its regulations to require the submission
of additional sales and distribution information including, for
antimicrobial animal drug products that are approved and labeled for
more than one food-producing animal species, an estimate of the amount
of each active antimicrobial ingredient sold or distributed for use in
each approved food-producing animal species. Specifically, comments
should address how sponsors can both practically and accurately provide
separate sales and distribution information for each species.

B. FDA's Annual Summary Report

    ADUFA 105 directs FDA to issue on an annual basis a summary report
of the sales and distribution data collected from sponsors of
antimicrobial new animal drugs and further provides that such data must
be reported by antimicrobial class. ADUFA 105 also directs FDA to
independently report only those antimicrobial drug classes with three
or more distinct sponsors, so as to protect confidential business
information. Within these statutory parameters, FDA is seeking public
comment on how best to compile and present this summary information.

C. Alternative Methods for Obtaining Antimicrobial Use Data

    FDA is seeking public comment on alternative methods available to
the Agency for obtaining additional data and information about the
extent of antimicrobial drug use in food-producing animals.
Specifically, the Agency is requesting public input on alternative
methods for assessing antimicrobial use the Agency can employ within
its existing authority that may further support the analysis of factors
related to the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance in
connection with the use of medically important antibiotics in food-
producing animals.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    This advanced notice of proposed rulemaking is issued under section
512 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b) and under the authority of the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs.

IV. References

    The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
(FDA has verified the Web site address, but we are not responsible for
any subsequent changes to the Web site after this document publishes in
the Federal Register.)

    1. U.S. General Accounting Office, ``Antibiotic Resistance:
Agencies Have Made Limited Progress Addressing Antibiotic Use in
Animals,'' GAO-11-801, Washington, DC, General Accounting Office,
2011 (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11801.pdf).
    2. Guidance for Industry 209, entitled ``The Judicious
Use of Medically Important Antimicrobial Drugs in Food-Producing
Animals'' (http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/default.htm).

    Dated: June 29, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-18366 Filed 7-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on August 16, 2002

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2000-8226

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

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

Application of   Delta Air Lines, Inc.   filed  6/27/02   to:

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

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail
between any point or points in the United States and any point or points
in Cyprus, and to integrate this authority with all other Delta services
authorized by existing certificates and exemptions granted by the
Department, to the extent permitted by international agreements.  Delta
intends to use this authority to operate service under a code-share
arrangement with Czech Airlines.

Applicant rep:  Robert E. Cohn<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst:  Sylvia L.
Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted, subject to conditions (see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   August 16, 2002,  through
 August 16, 2004

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX   The authority granted is consistent with the overall state of
aviation relations between the United States and Cyprus.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

XX  Holder’s Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity

		XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

XX  Statement of Authorization dated February 27, 2001, authorizing
Delta/Czech Airlines                             code-share operations,
and conditions therein.

________________________________________________________________________
__________________

Conditions:  The route integration authority granted is subject to the
condition that such operations are consistent with the applicable
bilateral aviation agreements.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of
the route integration authority requested should be construed as
conferring upon Delta additional rights (including fifth-freedom
intermediate and/or beyond rights) to serve markets where U.S. carrier
entry is limited unless Delta first notifies the Department of Delta’s
intent to serve such a market and unless and until the Department has
completed any necessary carrier selection procedures to determine which
carrier(s) should be authorized to exercise such rights; and (b) should
there be a request by any carrier to use the limited-entry route rights
that are included in Delta’s authority by virtue of the route
integration authority granted here, but that are not then being used by
Delta, the holding of such authority by route integration will not be
considered as providing any preference for Delta’s in a competitive
carrier selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be
entitled to use the authority at issue.

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

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

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

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

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_ aviation.asp

APPENDIX A

U.S. CARRIER

Standard Exemption Conditions

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

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

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

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

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

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

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations, including all FAA requirements concerning
security; and

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

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

 PAGE

 PAGE   3


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 240 (Friday, December 13, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68258-68263]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26836]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87686; File No. SR-NYSECHX-2019-23]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Chicago, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending the
Fee Schedule of NYSE Chicago, Inc. Related to Co-Location Services

December 9, 2019.
    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 November 25, 2019, the NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE
Chicago'' 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 the Fee Schedule of NYSE Chicago,
Inc. (the ``Fee Schedule'') related to co-location services to
eliminate (a) a connectivity option whose manufacturer will no longer
support a key component of the network hardware, and (b) services that
are no longer utilized by Users. The proposed rule change is available
on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule related to co-
location \4\ services offered by the Exchange to eliminate (a) a
connectivity option whose manufacturer will no longer support a key
component of the network hardware, and (b) services that are no longer
utilized by Users.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in October 2019. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 87408 (October 28, 2019), 84 FR 58778 (November 1, 2019)
(SR-NYSECHX-2019-27) (``Co-location Notice''). The Exchange operates
a data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the ``data center'') from which
it provides co-location services to Users.
    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. See id. at note 6. As specified in the Fee
Schedule, a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-
location service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-
location fees for the same co-location service charged by the
Exchange's affiliates the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''),
NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American''), NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE
Arca''), and NYSE National, Inc. (``NYSE National'' and together,
the ``Affiliate SROs''). See id. at 58779.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Change
LCN 10 Gb Circuit
    Among other connectivity options, Users are able to connect to the
Exchange over the Liquidity Center Network (``LCN''), a local area
network available in the data center.\6\ LCN access is available at 1,
10 and 40 Gb bandwidth capacities. Currently, Users have two 10 Gb
options for LCN access:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The other local area network is the internet protocol
(``IP'') network. See Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at 58780.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     LCN 10 Gb, which has been in place since 2010,\7\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62960 (September
21, 2010), 75 FR 59310 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-56); 62961
(September 21, 2010), 75 FR 59299 (September 27, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-
2010-80); and 63275 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR 70048 (November 16,
2010) (SR-NYSEArca-2010-100). In July 2018, the Exchange and its
direct parent company were acquired by NYSE Group, Inc. As a result,
the Exchange and the Affiliate SROs are direct or indirect
subsidiaries of NYSE Group, Inc. and, indirectly, Intercontinental
Exchange, Inc. See Exchange Act Release No. 83635 (July 13, 2018),
83 FR 34182 (July 19, 2018) (SR-CHX-2018-004); see also Exchange Act
Release No. 83303 (May 22, 2018), 83 FR 24517 (May 29, 2018) (SR-
CHX-2018-004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     LCN 10 Gb LX, which was introduced in 2013.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 70888 (November 15,
2013), 78 FR 69907 (November 21, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-73); 70979
(December 4, 2013), 78 FR 74200 (December 10, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-
77); 70886 (November 15, 2013), 78 FR 69904 (November 21, 2013) (SR-
NYSEMKT-2013-92); 70982 (December 4, 2013), 78 FR 74197 (December
10, 2013) (SR-NYSEMKT-2013-97); 70887 (November 15, 2013), 78 FR
69897 (November 21, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-123); and 70981
(December 4, 2013), 78 FR 74203 (December 10, 2013) (SR-NYSEARCA-
2013-131).

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

    The LCN 10 Gb LX has a lower latency than the LCN 10 Gb connection,
and has latency levels substantially similar to those of the LCN 40 Gb
connection.\9\ Between the two 10 Gb LCN alternatives, the vast
majority (80%) of User connections are the newer LCN 10Gb LX
connections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 78 FR 69907, supra note 8, at 69907.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to cease offering the LCN 10 Gb connection.
The Exchange does not propose the current change lightly: It recognizes
that removing the LCN 10 Gb connection from its Fee Schedule would
eliminate a connectivity option previously available to Users. For the
reasons discussed below, however, the Exchange has concluded that the
proposed change is necessary because it believes that if it does not
eliminate the LCN 10 Gb connections, the Exchange's ability to provide
support or supplies to Users with LCN 10 Gb connections would be
compromised.
    For each LCN connection, the network hardware relies on a switch,
which acts as the ``gatekeeper'' for a User's inbound messaging (e.g.,
orders and quotes) sent to the Exchange's trading and execution system
and the Exchange's outbound messaging (e.g., market data and drop
copies) within the data center.\10\ Switches are manufactured and sold
to the Exchange by third parties. Currently, the LCN 1 Gb and LCN 10 Gb
connections use one type of switch (the ``First Switch'') and the LCN
10 Gb LX and LCN 40 Gb connections use a second type of switch (the
``Second Switch'').\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See id. at 69908.
    \11\ See id. at note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The manufacturer of the First Switch made an ``end of life''
(``EOL'') announcement notifying customers that the First Switch is
being discontinued. The manufacturer stated that it is phasing out the
provision of replacement parts and support for the First Switch. Per
its EOL notice, it has ceased offering the First Switch, and, as of
January 1, 2020: \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``JTAC Technical Bulletin,'' at https://kb.juniper.net/resources/sites/CUSTOMERSERVICE/content/live/TECHNICAL_BULLETINS/16000/TSB16960/en_US/TSB16960.pdf. See also ``Juniper Networks
Product End-of-Life,'' at https://support.juniper.net/support/pdf/eol/990833.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     It has no commitment to furnish software engineering level
support for the operating system software licensed for the First
Switch. No further service or maintenance releases or patches will be
created to support the First Switch.
     It has no commitment to perform hardware engineering level
support, including hardware modifications and failure analysis, for
hardware defects.
    As a consequence, the Exchange will not be able to provide Users
with new LCN 10 Gb connections or give the present level of support to
existing ones, and so it proposes to discontinue the service and remove
it from the Fee Schedule.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Fee Schedule provides that a User that purchased five
10 Gb LCN connections would be charged the initial fee for a sixth
10 Gb LCN connection but would not be charged the monthly fee that
would otherwise be applicable. Currently, no Users qualify for the
discount. As part of the proposed change, the provision would be
deleted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange plans to implement the change during the first half of
2020.\14\ It will announce the implementation date through a customer
notice. After the implementation date, the Exchange will not accept new
orders for LCN 10 Gb connections.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Also during the first half of 2020, the Exchange expects to
update the network hardware of the LCN 10 Gb LX and LCN 40 Gb
connections by replacing the Second Switch with a new switch (the
``New Switch''). The Exchange plans to update the LCN 1 Gb network
hardware with the New Switch as well, which would allow the Exchange
to continue to offer the LCN 1 Gb circuit despite the EOL of the
First Switch. Because the New Switch, like the Second Switch, will
provide a lower-latency connection, the Exchange expects that the
latency of the LCN 1 Gb will decrease.
    The Exchange does not propose to make a similar change to the
LCN 10 Gb network hardware because, if it did, there would be no
difference between the LCN 10 Gb and the LCN 10 Gb LX connection:
They would have the same bandwidth and latency levels. However, the
two services cannot have the same latency. Rather, the LCN 10 Gb LX
has a lower latency than the LCN 10 Gb connection. See, e.g., 78 FR
69907, supra note 8, at 69907. Its latency levels are similar to
those of the LCN 40 Gb connection, and the same fees are assessed
for both services. See 78 FR 74200, supra note 8, at 74201-74202. In
addition, the Exchange does not believe that it would be reasonable
or equitable to charge different fees for equivalent services. See
id.
    \15\ The Exchange believes that it has enough First Switches to
fulfil any orders it may receive prior to the implementation date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To provide time for Users that have LCN 10 Gb connections
(``Current Users'') to implement any changes, the Exchange proposes to
give them a six month grace period, starting on the implementation
date. After the grace period ends, any remaining LCN 10 Gb connections
will be terminated. The Exchange also proposes to waive any change fees
\16\ and non-recurring charges \17\ that a Current User would otherwise
incur as a result of the proposed change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The Exchange charges a User a ``Change Fee'' if the User
requests a change to one or more existing co-location services that
the Exchange has already established or completed for the User. See
Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at 58785.
    \17\ Co-location connectivity services have a non-recurring
initial charge. For example, the LCN 10 Gb LX has a $15,000 initial
charge per connection. See id. at 58783.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bundled Network Access
    The Exchange currently offers a pair of ``bundled'' connectivity
options (``Bundled Network Access'') at 1 and 10 Gb bandwidths,\18\ but
no User is utilizing one. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to
discontinue the Bundled Network Access options and remove references to
the related pricing from the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The change would be consistent with previous practice: In 2014 and
2016 previously existing bundled network access connectivity options
were discontinued, as they were no longer utilized by Users.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 77975 (June 2,
2016), 81 FR 36973 (June 8, 2016) (SR-NYSE-2016-39); 72721 (July 30,
2014), 79 FR 45562 (August 5, 2014) (SR-NYSE-2014-37); 77973 (June
2, 2016), 81 FR 36975 (June 8, 2016) (SR-NYSEMKT-2016-57); 72719
(July 30, 2014), 79 FR 45502 (August 5, 2014) (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-61;
77977 (June 2, 2016), 81 FR 36981 (June 8, 2016) (SR-NYSEArca-2016-
77; and 72720 (July 30, 2014), 79 FR 45577 (August 5, 2014) (SR-
NYSEArca-2014-81).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Application and Impact of the Proposed Change
    The proposed change would not apply differently to distinct types
or sizes of market participants. Rather, it would apply to all Users
equally. As is currently the case, the purchase of any colocation
service is completely voluntary and the Fee Schedule is applied
uniformly to all Users.
LCN 10 Gb
    As a consequence of the manufacturer's declaration of EOL for the
First Switch, the Exchange will not be able to provide Users with new
LCN 10 Gb connections or give the present level of support to the nine
Current Users' existing LCN 10 Gb connections. Accordingly, after the
implementation date, the Exchange will not accept new orders for LCN 10
Gb connections and, after the grace period, it will terminate any
remaining LCN 10 Gb connections. The Exchange also proposes to waive
any change fees and non-recurring charges that a Current User would
otherwise incur as a result of the proposed change.
    The Current Users have several options available to them upon
termination of the LCN 10 GB connections:
     A Current User may move to the faster LCN 10 Gb LX
connection. The change would increase the User's

monthly recurring charge from $14,000 to $22,000, but the User would
benefit from a faster connection while maintaining the same amount of
bandwidth and system redundancy.
     A Current User may move to the slower IP Network, which
offers a 10 Gb circuit alternative. The change would lower the User's
monthly recurring charge from $14,000 to $11,000. The connection would
have greater latency, but the User would maintain the same bandwidth
and resiliency.
     A Current User may opt to re-tailor its system to reduce
the number of LCN connections it has. For example, a Current User with
two LCN 10 Gb connections could consolidate them into one LCN 40 Gb
connection. The change would decrease the User's monthly recurring
charge from $28,000 to $22,000 while allowing it to benefit from a
faster connection and increased bandwidth, although it would reduce the
redundancy of its connection.
     A Current User may opt to become a ``Hosted Customer'' by
being hosted by another User (a ``Hosting User''), or to cross connect
to another User within co-location, either of which would likely
decrease its monthly connectivity costs and available bandwidth.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at 58782-58783. The
Exchange does not have visibility into what other Users, including
Hosting Users, charge or the bandwidth they offer, but to the best
of its knowledge no Hosting User offers its hosted customers a 10 Gb
connection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange expects to work with the Current Users to implement
the change.
Bundled Network Access
    As no Users utilize a Bundled Network Access option, no Users will
be impacted by the proposed change.
Competitive Environment
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges and other vendors (e.g., Hosting Users) offer co-location
services as a means to facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their operations. 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.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

General
    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i)
neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to
submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is
a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof
(e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of
the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary
and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; \22\ and
(iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location
service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only
to the Exchange or to the Exchange and one or more of the Affiliate
SROs.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is
co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users
do not receive any market data or data service product that is not
available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location
services normally would expect reduced latencies, as compared to
Users that are not co-located, in sending orders to, and receiving
market data from, the Exchange.
    \23\ See Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at 58790. Each
Affiliate SRO has submitted substantially the same proposed rule
change to propose the changes described herein. See SR-NYSE-2019-66,
SR-NYSEAmer-2019-52, SR-NYSEArca-2019-85, and SR-NYSENAT-2019-29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and the
Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\24\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\25\ 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. In addition, it is designed 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 mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
for the following reasons.
    As a consequence of the manufacturer's declaration of the First
Switch's EOL, the Exchange believes that, if it did not eliminate the
LCN 10 Gb connections, it would be unable to provide the current level
of support to Users that have such connections. More specifically,
pursuant to its EOL, the manufacturer is ceasing to offer the First
Switch and terminating its software and hardware engineering level
support. As a result, when the inevitable hardware or software issues
involving the First Switch arose, the Exchange would not have the
manufacturer resources available to solve connectivity issues or
replace switches, and Users' connections to the Exchange could be
compromised or wholly cut off. At the same time, if a User requested a
new or replacement LCN 10 Gb connection, the Exchange would not be able
to obtain one. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that it is reasonable
to eliminate the LCN 10 Gb connectivity option.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change will facilitate its
compliance with the requirements of Regulation Systems Compliance and
Integrity (``SCI'').\26\ The LCN is an SCI system \27\ of the Exchange,
which is itself an SCI entity. Accordingly, the Exchange is obligated
to have reasonable policies and procedures in place to ensure the LCN
has a level of capacity, integrity, resiliency, availability and
security, adequate to maintain the Exchange's operational capability
and promote the maintenance of fair and orderly markets.\28\ Because
the manufacturer is ceasing to offer the First Switch, if the Exchange
is unable to eliminate the LCN 10 Gb connectivity

option its reasonable policies and procedures would need to contemplate
being unable to resolve connectivity issues related to First Switches
or even replace them. Regulation SCI also obligates SCI entities such
as the Exchange to take corrective action upon the occurrence of an SCI
event to mitigate potential harm to investors and market integrity. The
Exchange's ability to take such action promptly and effectively, if
needed, with respect to the LCN 10 Gb connection would be severely
limited by its inability to seek support from the manufacturer should
issues arise with the First Switch. Accordingly, the Exchange believes
that, in light of the EOL of the First Switch, the proposed change to
eliminate the LCN 10 Gb connectivity option is a reasonable solution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 242.1000 through 242.1007; see also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 73639, 79 FR 72251 (December 5, 2015)
(adopting Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity).
    \27\ ``SCI systems'' means ``all computer, network, electronic,
technical, automated, or similar systems of, or operated by or on
behalf of, an SCI entity that, with respect to securities, directly
support trading, clearance and settlement, order routing, market
data, market regulation, or market surveillance.'' 17 CFR 242.1000.
    \28\ 79 FR 72251, supra note 26, at 72256-72257.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the situation is analogous to when an SCI
entity determines to utilize a third party to operate an SCI system on
its behalf. As the Commission has noted, in such case, the SCI entity
``is responsible for having in place processes and requirements to
ensure that it is able to satisfy the requirements of Regulation SCI
for systems operated on behalf of the SCI entity by a third party.''
\29\ Likewise, ``if an SCI entity is uncertain of its ability to manage
a third-party relationship (whether through due diligence, contract
terms, monitoring, or other methods) to satisfy the requirements of
Regulation SCI, then it would need to reassess its decision to
outsource the applicable system to such third party.'' \30\ In the
present case, the third party that provides the First Switch, an
important part of the network hardware for the LCN 10 Gb connection,
has declared its intention to discontinue both production of and
technical support for the First Switch. Given that, the Exchange has
assessed its ability to manage the LCN 10 Gb connection going forward,
and has concluded that it cannot continue to offer a product that
relies on the First Switch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Id. at 72276.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that providing Current Users with a six month
grace period and waiving any applicable change fees and non-recurring
charges would be reasonable because Current Users would be terminating
their LCN 10 Gb connections at the Exchange's request. The grace period
would provide a Current User with time to terminate its LCN 10 Gb
connection, move to an LCN 10 Gb LX connection, move to a 10 Gb IP
network connection, re-tailor its system to reduce the number of
connections, become a Hosted Customer, cross-connect to another User,
or otherwise adjust for the change. The fee waivers would help to
alleviate the burden of the change on the Current Users.
    With respect to the Bundled Network Access, the Exchange believes
that the proposed change is reasonable because it would permit the
Exchange to streamline the offerings available to Users in the data
center by eliminating services that Users no longer utilize and, by
removing references to related pricing from the Fee Schedule, make the
Fee Schedule easier to read, understand and administer. In addition,
removing services that Users do not utilize from the co-location
offerings would contribute to a more efficient process for managing the
various services offered to Users, which would improve the utilization
of the data center resources, both with respect to personnel and
infrastructure, including hardware and software.
The Proposed Rule Change Is Equitable
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable
allocation of its fees and credits for the following reasons.
    The Exchange believes that providing Current Users with a six month
grace period and waiving any applicable change fees and non-recurring
charges would be equitable because Current Users would be terminating
their LCN 10 Gb connections at the Exchange's request. The grace period
would provide a Current User with time to terminate its LCN 10 Gb
connection, move to an LCN 10 Gb LX connection, move to a 10 Gb IP
network connection, re-tailor its system to reduce the number of
connections, become a Hosted Customer, cross-connect to another User,
or otherwise adjust for the change.
    The fee waivers would help to alleviate the burden of the change on
the Current Users. With respect to the Bundled Network Access, the
Exchange believes that the proposed change is reasonable because it
would permit the Exchange to streamline the offerings available to
Users in the data center by eliminating services that Users no longer
utilize and, by removing references to related pricing from the Fee
Schedule, make the Fee Schedule easier to read, understand and
administer.
The Proposed Rule Change Would Protect Investors and the Public
Interest
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would perfect
the mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system
and, in general, protect investors and the public interest for the
following reasons.
    It would be against the protection of investors and the public
interest if the Exchange were to continue to offer an older
connectivity option that it could not support at current levels, or if,
as a consequence of the EOL, Users' connectivity was compromised or
they were wholly unable to use it to connect to the Exchange. As noted
above, as a consequence of the manufacturer's declaration of the First
Switch's EOL, if the Exchange did not eliminate the LCN 10 Gb
connections, the Exchange believes it would be unable to provide the
current level of support to Users that have such connections. When the
inevitable hardware or software issues involving the First Switch
arose, the Exchange would not have the manufacturer resources available
to solve connectivity issues or replace switches, and Users'
connections to the Exchange could be compromised or wholly cut off. At
the same time, if a User requested a new or replacement LCN 10 Gb
connection, the Exchange would not be able to obtain one.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change will protect
investors and the public interest because it will facilitate the
Exchange's compliance with the requirements of Regulation SCI. The
Exchange is obligated to have reasonable policies and procedures in
place to ensure the LCN, as an SCI system, has a level of capacity,
integrity, resiliency, availability and security, adequate to maintain
the Exchange's operational capability and promote the maintenance of
fair and orderly markets.\31\ Because the manufacturer is ceasing to
offer the First Switch, if the Exchange is unable to eliminate the LCN
10 Gb connectivity option its reasonable policies and procedures would
need to contemplate being unable to resolve connectivity issues related
to First Switches or even replace them. Regulation SCI also obligates
SCI entities such as the Exchange to take corrective action upon the
occurrence of an SCI event to mitigate potential harm to investors and
market integrity. The Exchange's ability to take such action promptly
and effectively, if needed, with respect to the LCN 10 Gb connection
would be severely limited by its inability to seek support from the
manufacturer should issues arise with the First Switch. Not being able
to resolve connectivity issues related to First Switches or even
replace them would make the Exchange's compliance with Regulation SCI
suboptimal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Id.

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

    With respect to the Bundled Network Access, the Exchange believes
that the proposed change would protect investors and the public
interest because it would permit the Exchange to streamline the
offerings available to Users in the data center by eliminating services
that Users no longer utilize and, by removing references to related
pricing from the Fee Schedule, make the Fee Schedule easier to read,
understand and administer.
The Proposed Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change is not unfairly
discriminatory for the following reasons.
    The proposed change would not apply differently to distinct types
or sizes of market participants. Rather, it would apply to all Users
equally. As a consequence of the manufacturer's declaration of EOL for
the First Switch, the Exchange will not be able to provide any Users
with new LCN 10 Gb connections or give the present level of support to
Current Users' existing ones. In addition, no Users would be able to
purchase the Bundled Network Access. The Exchange believes that,
because no Users utilize such services, it would be equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to discontinue the services.
    At the same time, Users would continue to have the choice of
purchasing an LCN 1 Gb, LCN 10 Gb LX, LCN 40 Gb or IP network
connection or any of the other connectivity options available. Use of
any co-location service is completely voluntary, and each market
participant is able to determine whether to use co-location services
based on the requirements of its business operations.
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    For these 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,\32\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed change would place
any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate. The proposed change would not apply differently to
distinct types or sizes of market participants. Rather, it would apply
to all Users equally: No Users would be able to purchase a LCN 10 Gb
connection or Bundled Network Access.
    The Exchange does not propose the current change lightly: It
recognizes that removing the LCN 10 Gb connection from its Fee Schedule
would eliminate a connectivity option previously available to Users. As
a consequence of the change, nine Current Users would be required to
terminate their LCN 10 Gb connections and either move to LCN 10 Gb LX
connections, move to 10 Gb IP network connections, re-tailor their
systems to reduce the number of connections, become Hosted Customers,
cross-connect to other Users, or otherwise adjust for the change.
    Nonetheless, the Exchange believes that the change is necessary and
appropriate because, as a consequence of the manufacturer's declaration
of the First Switch's EOL, if the Exchange did not eliminate the LCN 10
Gb connections, the Exchange's ability to provide support or supplies
to Users that have such connections would be compromised. Not being
able to resolve connectivity issues related to First Switches or even
replace them would make the Exchange's compliance with Regulation SCI
suboptimal. When the inevitable hardware or software issues involving
the First Switch arose, the Exchange would not have the manufacturer
resources available to solve connectivity issues or replace switches.
Users' connections to the Exchange could be compromised or wholly cut
off. At the same time, if a User requested a new or replacement LCN 10
Gb connection, the Exchange would not be able to obtain one. It would
be contrary to the protection of investors and the public interest if
the Exchange were to continue to offer a connectivity option that it
could not support, or if Users were compromised or wholly unable to use
their connectivity to connect to the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that providing Current Users with a six month
grace period and waiving any applicable change fees and non-recurring
charges would not place any burden on intramarket competition that is
not necessary or appropriate because Current Users would be terminating
their LCN 10 Gb connections at the Exchange's request. The grace period
would provide a Current User with time to terminate its LCN 10 Gb
connections and adjust for the change, while the fee waivers would help
to alleviate the burden of the change.
    With respect to the Bundled Network Access, the Exchange believes
that the proposed change would not place any burden on intramarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate, as currently no Users
utilize the service, and so no Users would be affected. The change
would permit the Exchange to streamline the offerings available to
Users in the data center and, by removing references to related pricing
from the Fee Schedule, make the Fee Schedule easier to read, understand
and administer. In addition, removing services that Users do not
utilize from the co-location offerings would contribute to a more
efficient process for managing the various services offered to Users,
which would improve the utilization of the data center resources, both
with respect to personnel and infrastructure, including hardware and
software.
    Users would continue to have the choice of purchasing an LCN 1 Gb,
LCN 10 Gb LX, LCN 40 Gb or IP network connection or any of the other
connectivity options available. Use of any co-location service is
completely voluntary, and each market participant is able to determine
whether to use co-location services based on the requirements of its
business operations.
Intermarket Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed fee would impose
any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges and other vendors (i.e., Hosting Users) offer co-location
services as a means to facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their operations. Accordingly, fees charged
for co-location services are constrained by the active competition for
the order flow of, and other business from, such market participants.
    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.'' \33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Exchange recognizes that removing the LCN 10 Gb
connection from its Fee Schedule would eliminate a connectivity option
previously available to Users. Indeed, the proposed change may
negatively impact the Exchange's revenues, since Current Users may opt
to re-tailor their systems to reduce the number of connections, move to
10 Gb IP network connections, re-tailor become Hosted Customers, or
cross-connect to another User. Such choices, any of which would reduce
revenue, may be more attractive to Users as a consequence of the
change.
    Nonetheless, the Exchange believes that the change is necessary and
appropriate because, as a consequence of the manufacturer's declaration
of the First Switch's EOL, if the Exchange did not eliminate the LCN 10
Gb connections, the Exchange's ability to provide support or supplies
to Users that have such connections would be compromised. Not being
able to resolve connectivity issues related to First Switches or even
replace them would make the Exchange's compliance with Regulation SCI
suboptimal. When the inevitable hardware or software issues involving
the First Switch arose, the Exchange would not have the manufacturer
resources available to solve connectivity issues or replace switches.
Users' connections to the Exchange could be compromised or wholly cut
off. At the same time, if a User requested a new or replacement LCN 10
Gb connection, the Exchange would not be able to obtain one. It would
be contrary to the protection of investors and the public interest if
the Exchange were to continue to offer a connectivity option that it
could not support, or if Users were compromised or wholly unable to use
their connectivity to connect to the Exchange.
    For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.

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 has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \34\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\35\
Because the 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 prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \35\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \36\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of 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 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) \37\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 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-NYSECHX-2019-23 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-NYSECHX-2019-23. 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-NYSECHX-2019-23 and should be submitted
on or before January 3, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-26836 Filed 12-12-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P