1 Memorandum from Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant Administrator, to EPA Regional Administrators, " Designations for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards," April 1, 2003.

2 A list of the 2003 OMB metropolitan area definitions and associated information may be found at: http:// www. census. gov/ population/ www/ estimates/ metroarea. html. MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Additional Guidance On Defining Area Boundaries for PM 2.5 Designations FROM: Lydia N. Wegman, Director Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division ( C504 01)

TO: Air Division Directors, Regions I X This memorandum provides additional guidance for determining boundaries of PM 2.5 areas in the PM 2.5 designations process. Our April 2003 boundary guidance establishes the metropolitan area ( i. e. the larger of the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area ( CMSA) or Metropolitan Statistical Area ( MSA)) as the presumptive boundary for PM 2.5 nonattainment areas1. The boundaries of CMSAs and MSAs, which were delineated by the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) in 1999, include populated areas associated with core urban areas. Our April 2003 guidance recognized that OMB planned to publish revised urban area definitions sometime in 2003, but, because the specific release date was not known at that time, the guidance stated that the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) anticipated using the 1999 definitions for the PM 2.5 designation process.

OMB subsequently issued revised urban area definitions on June 6, 2003. The definitions established core based statistical areas ( CBSAs) ( or CBSAs, comprised of " metropolitan" and " micropolitan" areas), and combined statistical areas ( CSAs) ( or CSAs, comprised of two or more core based statistical areas) 2. While we are not requiring States and Tribes to use the recentlydefined CSA and CBSA as the presumptive boundaries for determining PM 2.5 nonattainment areas, we ask that in your review of State and Tribal recommendations that you assess all counties included in any relevant CSA or CBSA under the 2003 definitions, as well as any adjacent counties, using the 9 factors identified in the April 1, 2003 guidance. We believe this approach is appropriate because the new OMB definitions group together counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with a central core area, reflecting the latest technical  2

3 The Consolidated Appropriations Bill for FY 2004 ( Public Law 108 199), signed by the President on January 23, 2004, codifies the dates for State recommendations and final EPA action on PM 2.5 designations. information available about significant growth and commuting rates. While EPA is not requiring that States use the 2003 OMB boundary definitions as the presumptive boundaries, please ask that your respective States and Tribes fully document the basis for their recommendations, using the 9 factors identified in the April 2003 guidance.

All other information contained in the April boundary guidance continues to apply, and States and Tribes should continue to follow the guidance in making the boundary recommendations by February 15, 2004, as required in our guidance and the Consolidated Appropriations Bill for FY 2004.3 In addition, as we requested in the April 2003 guidance we encourage States and Tribes to make every effort to process the 4th quarter 2003 air quality data as quickly as possible so it can be taken into account in the February recommendations. Also, stated in the April 2003 guidance, EPA will make available on our website information submitted in connection with designation recommendations. Therefore, we request that each State and Tribe submit to EPA its designation recommendations, description of the proposed area boundaries, associated maps, and other supporting documentation in electronic format as well as in a hard copy format.

The Regional Offices should share this additional guidance with States and Tribes and work closely with them to resolve any issues related to the submittal of their area recommendations and supporting information. Staff in OAQPS are available to provide assistance and consultation throughout the designation process. Questions related to this memorandum may be directed to Larry Wallace of my staff at 919 541 0906 or Rich Damberg at 919 541 5592.

cc: Stephen D. Page, OAQPS Margo Oge, OTAQ Joe Paisie, OAQPS Kevin McLean, OGC Geoffrey Wilcox, OGC Air Program Managers, Regions I X


[Federal Register: July 31, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 38249-38250]
[DOCID:fr31jy09-115]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60385; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-26]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Amex LLC; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change To Charge a $500 Monthly Fee to Recipients of the
NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information Datafeed

July 24, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On June 5, 2009, the NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change
to charge a $500 monthly fee to recipients of the NYSE Amex Order
Imbalance Information datafeed. The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on June 24, 2009.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60122 (June 17,
2009), 74 FR 30184.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to charge a $500 monthly fee to recipients of
the NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information datafeed. NYSE Amex Order
Imbalance Information provides real-time order imbalances that
accumulate prior to the opening of trading on the Exchange and prior to
the close of trading on the Exchange. The Exchange provides this
information for issues that are likely to be of particular trading
interest at the opening or closing.
    Currently, the Exchange provides this datafeed at no cost. The
instant filing is submitted to establish a $500 monthly fee for receipt
of the NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information datafeed. This proposed
$500 monthly fee to recipients of the NYSE Amex Order Imbalance
Information datafeed applies whether the recipient receives the
datafeed directly from the Exchange or indirectly from an intermediary.
The fee entitles the datafeed recipient to make displays of that
information available to an unlimited number of subscribers for no
extra charge. The Exchange is not proposing to impose an end-user or
display service fee on those subscribers.
    The Exchange states that the $500 monthly fee would allow vendors
to redistribute NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information: (1) Without
having to differentiate between professional subscribers and
nonprofessional subscribers; (2) without having to account for the
extent of access to data; (3) without having to procure contracts with
its subscribers for the benefit of the Exchange; and (4) without having
to report the number of its subscribers.
    The Exchange believes that the fee enables the investment community
that has an interest in the receipt of order imbalance information to
contribute to the Exchange's operating costs in a manner that is
appropriate for this market data product.
    In setting the level of the NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information
Product fee, the Exchange states that it took into consideration
several factors, including:
    (1) The fees that other Exchanges are charging for similar services
\4\;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ New York Stock Exchange LLC imposes an access fee of $500
per month for its order imbalance datafeed. Nasdaq OMX includes
order imbalance information in its Nasdaq TotalView datafeed. Nasdaq
OMX imposes end-user charges on both professional and
nonprofessional subscribers that receive TotalView, as well as an
array of monthly distribution charges that are significantly higher
than the charge that NYSE Amex is proposing in this proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) consultation with some of the entities that the Exchange
anticipates will be the most likely to take advantage of the proposed
service;
    (3) the contribution of market data revenues that the Exchange
believes is appropriate for entities that provide market data to large
numbers of investors, which are the entities most likely to take
advantage of the proposed service; and
    (4) the contribution that revenues accruing from the proposed fee
will make to meet the overall costs of the Exchange's operations.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed NYSE Amex Order Imbalance
Information fee would reflect an equitable allocation of its overall
costs to users of its facilities.
    The Exchange believes that the level of the fee is consistent with
the approach set forth in the approval order issued by the Commission
related to ArcaBook fees.\5\ The Exchange submits that the NYSE Amex
Order Imbalance Information datafeed constitutes ``non-core data'';
i.e., the Exchange does not require a central processor to consolidate
and distribute the product to the public pursuant to joint-SRO plans.
Rather, the Exchange distributes this product voluntarily. In addition,
the Exchange believes that both types of the competitive forces that
the Commission described in the NYSE Arca Order are present: (i) The
Exchange has a compelling need to attract order flow; and (ii) the
product competes with a number of alternative products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-21) (``NYSE
Arca Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange states that it must compete vigorously for order flow
to maintain its share of trading volume. This requires the Exchange to
act reasonably in setting market data fees for non-core products such
as the NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information datafeed. The Exchange
hopes that NYSE Amex Order Imbalance datafeed will enable vendors to
distribute NYSE Amex order imbalance information widely among
investors, and thereby provide a means for promoting the Exchange's
visibility in the marketplace.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission has reviewed carefully the proposed rule change and
finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements
of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a
national securities exchange.\6\ In particular, the

Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with Section 6(b)(4)
of the Act,\7\ which requires that an exchange have rules that provide
for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other
charges among its members and other persons using its facilities and
the requirements under Section 6(b)(5) \8\ that the rules of an
exchange be 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, and not be designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the provisions of Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\9\ which
requires that the rules of an exchange not impose any burden on
competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes
of the Act. Finally, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change
is consistent with Rule 603(a) of Regulation NMS,\10\ adopted under
Section 11A(c)(1) of the Act, which requires an exclusive processor
that distributes information with respect to quotations for or
transactions in an NMS stock to do so on terms that are fair and
reasonable and that are not unreasonably discriminatory.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
    \10\ 17 CFR 242.603(a).
    \11\ NYSE Amex is an exclusive processor of NYSE Amex depth-of-
book data under Section 3(a)(22)(B) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.
78c(a)(22)(B), which defines an exclusive processor as, among other
things, an exchange that distributes information with respect to
quotations or transactions on an exclusive basis on its own behalf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under this proposal, the Exchange would charge a $500 monthly fee
to recipients of the NYSE Amex Order Imbalance Information datafeed.
The $500 monthly fee would allow vendors to redistribute NYSE Amex
Order Imbalance Information: (1) Without having to differentiate
between professional subscribers and nonprofessional subscribers; (2)
without having to account for the extent of access to data; (3) without
having to procure contracts with its subscribers for the benefit of the
Exchange; and (4) without having to report the number of its
subscribers.
    The Commission has reviewed the proposal using the approach set
forth in the NYSE Arca Order for non-core market data fees.\12\ In the
NYSE Arca Order, the Commission stated that ``when possible, reliance
on competitive forces is the most appropriate and effective means to
assess whether the terms for the distribution of non-core data are
equitable, fair and reasonable, and not unreasonably discriminatory.''
\13\ It noted that the ``existence of significant competition provides
a substantial basis for finding that the terms of an exchange's fee
proposal are equitable, fair, reasonable, and not unreasonably or
unfairly discriminatory.'' \14\ If an exchange ``was subject to
significant competitive forces in setting the terms of a proposal,''
the Commission will approve a proposal unless it determines that
``there is a substantial countervailing basis to find that the terms
nevertheless fail to meet an applicable requirement of the Exchange Act
or the rules thereunder.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-21). In the
NYSE Arca Order, the Commission describes in great detail the
competitive factors that apply to non-core market data products. The
Commission hereby incorporates by reference the data and analysis
from the NYSE Arca Order into this order.
    \13\ Id. at 74771.
    \14\ Id. at 74782.
    \15\ Id. at 74781.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are a variety of alternative sources of information that
impose significant competitive pressures on the NYSE Amex in setting
the terms for distributing its market data. The Commission believes
that the availability of those alternatives, as well as the NYSE Amex's
compelling need to attract order flow, imposed significant competitive
pressure on the NYSE Amex to act equitably, fairly, and reasonably in
setting the terms of its proposal. In addition, the Commission recently
determined that NYSE was subject to significant competitive forces in
setting fees for a substantially similar non-core market data product--
NYSE Order Imbalance Information datafeed.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59543 (March 9,
2009), 74 FR 11159 (March 16, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2008-132).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the NYSE Amex was subject to significant competitive forces
in setting the terms of the proposal, the Commission will approve the
proposal in the absence of a substantial countervailing basis to find
that its terms nevertheless fail to meet an applicable requirement of
the Act or the rules thereunder. An analysis of the proposal does not
provide such a basis.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\17\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-26) is hereby
approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18275 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73751-73752]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28209]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2527-004; ER12-1502-007; ER12-1504-007; ER15-
190-019; ER17-2-005; ER18-1343-012; ER20-1487-003.
    Applicants: Frontier Windpower II, LLC, Carolina Solar Power, LLC,
Frontier Windpower, LLC, Duke Energy Renewable Services, LLC, Cimarron
Windpower II, LLC, Ironwood Windpower, LLC, Caprock Solar I LLC.
    Description: Triennial Updated Market Power Analysis for the
Southwest Power Pool of the Duke SPP MBR Sellers.
    Filed Date: 12/20/21.
    Accession Number: 20211220-5269.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/18/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2434-002; ER19-2534-002.
    Applicants: Citizens Energy Corporation, Citizens Imperial Solar
LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Southwest Region
of Citizens Imperial Solar LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/20/21.
    Accession Number: 20211220-5266.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 2/18/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-2655-002.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: SPS-Llano-LGIA-Second Amnd-Supl
Filing-101-0.0.2 to be effective 1/20/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5101.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-2900-002.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Florida, LLC, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC,
Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Duke Energy Progress, LLC submits
tariff filing per 35.17(b): Errata Filing of Revisions to Joint OATT
(Network Contract Demand) to be effective 11/17/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-210-001.
    Applicants: ENGIE 2020 ProjectCo-NH1 LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Market-Base Rate
Schedule Submittal to be effective 12/26/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5124.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-692-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, SA No. 6264;
Queue No. V1-026 and V1-027 to be effective 11/19/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/20/21.
    Accession Number: 20211220-5241.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-693-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original NSA, Service
Agreement No. 6282; Queue No. AD2-160/AE2-253 to be effective 11/19/
2021.
    Filed Date: 12/20/21.
    Accession Number: 20211220-5246.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-694-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2021-12-21_SA 3421 MEC-
Heartland Divide Wind II 1st Rev GIA (J583) to be effective 12/7/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5027.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-695-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2021-12-21_SA 3473 Ameren
IL-Hickory Point Solar Energy 1st Rev GIA (J815) to be effective 12/8/
2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5032.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-696-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3877 WAPA & Central Power
Electric Coop Interconnection Agr to be effective 12/20/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-697-000.
    Applicants: The Connecticut Light and Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Related Facilities
Agreement--Revolution Wind, LLC to be effective 12/21/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5048.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-698-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation of Rate
Schedule No. 283 to be effective 11/29/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5079.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-699-000.
    Applicants: Valley Electric Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Annual TRBA Filing 2021 to
be effective 1/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5092.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-700-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Engineering and Procurement
Agreement--Copco No. 2 to be effective 2/19/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-701-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Termination of RS 748 BPA Constr
Agmt Green Springs BAA Move to be effective 3/15/2022.

    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5165.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-702-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT Sch. 12-
Appendices re: 2022 RTEP Annual Cost Allocations to be effective 1/1/
2022.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5175.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following PURPA
210(m)(3) filings:

    Docket Numbers: QM22-6-000.
    Applicants: South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Application of South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.
to Terminate Its Mandatory Purchase Obligation under the Public Utility
Regulatory Policies Act of 1978.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5143.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RR21-3-001.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: Joint Compliance Filing of The North American Electric
Reliability Corporation and Texas Reliability Entity, Inc. for Approval
of Amendment to the Bylaws of Texas Reliability Entity, Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/21/21.
    Accession Number: 20211221-5174.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/22.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 21, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-28209 Filed 12-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27226-27227]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11072]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0163; FRL-9348-2]

Aldicarb; Cancellation Order for Amendments To Terminate Uses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's order for the amendment to
terminate uses, voluntarily requested by the registrant and accepted by
the Agency, of products containing aldicarb, pursuant to section
6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), as amended. This cancellation order follows an October 7, 2010
Federal Register Notice of Receipt of Request from the registrant,
Bayer CropScience to voluntarily amend to terminate uses of the
product, TEMIK[supreg] Brand 15G, containing aldicarb on citrus and
potatoes effective immediately. The registrant also requested that EPA
amend to terminate the remaining pesticide uses of this product on
cotton, dry beans, peanuts, soybeans, sugar beets, and sweet potatoes,
effective as of December 31, 2014. These are not the last products
containing aldicarb registered for use in the United States. In the
October 7, 2010 notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order
implementing the amendments to terminate uses, unless the Agency
received substantive comments within the 30-day comment period that
would merit its further review of these requests, or unless the
registrant withdrew their requests. The Agency received comments on the
notice but none merited its further review of the requests. Further,
the registrant did not withdraw their requests. Accordingly, EPA hereby
issues in this notice a cancellation order granting the requested
amendments to terminate uses. Any distribution, sale, or use of the
products subject to this cancellation order is permitted only in
accordance with the terms of this order, including any existing stocks
provisions.

DATES: The amendments are effective May 9, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Bartow, Pesticide Re-evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0163.

Publicly available docket materials are available either in the
electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available
in hard copy, by appointment at One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. To schedule an appointment, call
(703) 305-5805.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    This notice announces the amendments to delete uses, as requested
by a registrant, of a product registered under section 3 of FIFRA. The
registration is listed in Table 1 of this unit.

                        Table 1--Aldicarb Product Registration Amendments To Delete Uses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       EPA Registration number               Product name                         Uses deleted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
264-333..............................  TEMIK[supreg] Brand 15G  Citrus, Potatoes, Cotton, Dry Beans, Peanuts,
                                                                 Soybeans, Sugar Beets, and Sweet Potatoes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 of this unit includes the name and address of record, as
well as the EPA company number for the registrant of the product in
Table 1 of this unit. The EPA company number corresponds to the first
part of the EPA registration number of the product listed above.

               Table 2--Registrant of the Amended Product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          EPA Company number                Company name and address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
264..................................  Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W.
                                        Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014,
                                        Research Triangle Park, NC
                                        27709.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Public Comments Received and Agency Response to
Comments

    The Agency received comments relating to alternatives and benefits
of aldicarb use. The Agency does not believe that the comments
submitted during the comment period merit further review or a denial of
the requests for voluntary use deletion.

IV. Cancellation Order

    Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(f), EPA hereby approves the requested
amendments to terminate uses of the aldicarb registration identified in
Table 1 of Unit II. Accordingly, the Agency hereby orders that the
product registration identified in Table 1 of Unit II are amended to
terminate the affected uses. The effective date of the citrus and
potatoes cancellations that are the subject of this notice is May 9,
2012. The effective date of the cotton, dry bean, peanut, soybean,
sugar beet, and sweet potato cancellations that are subject of this
notice is December 31, 2014. Any distribution, sale, or use of existing
stocks of the products identified in Table 1 of Unit II. in a manner
inconsistent with any of the provisions for disposition of existing
stocks set forth in Unit VI. will be a violation of FIFRA.

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

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide
product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations
be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses. FIFRA further
provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice
of receipt of any such request in the Federal Register. Thereafter,
following the public comment period, the EPA Administrator may approve
such a request. The notice of receipt for this action was published for
comment on October 7, 2010 (75 FR 62129) (FRL-8848-1). The comment
period closed on November 8, 2010.

VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
which are currently in the United States and which were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
action. The existing stocks provision for the product subject to this
order is as follows.
    Per a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental
Protection Agency and Bayer CropScience dated August 16, 2010, Bayer
may only sell existing stocks of any aldicarb end-use product labeled
for use on citrus and potatoes for export consistent with the
requirements of FIFRA section 17 or for purposes of proper disposal.
Existing stocks of aldicarb end-use product (TEMIK[supreg] Brand 15G)
that are labeled for use on citrus and potatoes may no longer be sold
by retailers or used on citrus and potatoes as of May 9, 2012.
    Bayer may only sell or distribute TEMIK[supreg] Brand 15G end-use
products permitting use on cotton, dry beans, peanut, soybean, sugar
beets, and sweet potatoes until December 31, 2014. After that date,
Bayer may only distribute such products intended for export consistent
with the requirements of FIFRA section 17 or for purposes of proper
disposal.
    Sale and distribution of TEMIK[supreg] Brand 15G labeled for use on
cotton, dry beans, peanut, soybean, sugar beets, and sweet potatoes by
any other party is permitted until December 31, 2016, and thereafter,
only for purposes of proper disposal or export consistent with the
requirements of FIFRA section 17.
    Existing stocks of TEMIK[supreg] Brand 15G labeled for use on
cotton, dry beans, peanut, soybean, sugar beets, and sweet potatoes may
be used until August 31, 2018, provided that such use is in all
respects consistent with the previously-approved label and labeling
accompanying the product.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: May 2, 2012.
 Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-11072 Filed 5-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10380-10384]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05216]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85317; File No. SR-PEARL-2019-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX
PEARL Fee Schedule

March 14, 2019.
    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 March 1, 2019, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX PEARL'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'') to modify certain of the Exchange's
system connectivity fees.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule regarding
connectivity to the Exchange. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
amend Sections 5a) and b) of the Fee Schedule to increase the network
connectivity fees for the 1 Gigabit (``Gb'') fiber connection, the 10Gb
fiber connection, and the 10Gb ultra-low latency (``ULL'') fiber
connection, which are charged to both Members \3\ and non-Members of
the Exchange for connectivity to the Exchange's primary/secondary
facility. The Exchange also proposes to increase the network
connectivity fees for the 1Gb and 10Gb fiber connections for
connectivity to the Exchange's disaster recovery facility. Each of
these connections are shared connections, and thus can be utilized to
access both the Exchange and the Exchange's affiliate, Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX Options''). These
proposed fee increases are collectively referred to herein as the
``Proposed Fee Increases.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization that
is registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of the
Exchange's Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an
``Electronic Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are
deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange initially filed the Proposed Fee Increases on July 31,
2018, designating the Proposed Fee Increases effective August 1,
2018.\4\ The First Proposed Rule Change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on August 13, 2018.\5\ The Commission received one
comment letter on the proposal.\6\ The Proposed Fee Increases remained
in effect until they were temporarily suspended pursuant to a
suspension order (the ``Suspension Order'') issued by the Commission on
September 17, 2018.\7\ The Suspension Order also instituted proceedings
to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83785 (August 7,
2018), 83 FR 40101 (August 13, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-16). (The
``First Proposed Rule Change'').
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ See Letter from Tyler Gellasch, Executive Director, The
Healthy Markets Association, to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated September 4, 2018 (``Healthy Markets Letter'').
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-84177 (September
17, 2018).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Healthy Markets Letter argued that the Exchange did not provide
sufficient information in its filing to support a finding that the
proposal is consistent with the Act. Specifically, the Healthy Markets
Letter objected to the Exchange's reliance on the fees of other
exchanges to demonstrate that its fee increases are consistent with the
Act. In addition, the Healthy Markets Letter argued that the Exchange
did not offer any details to support its basis for asserting that the
Proposed Fee Increases are consistent with the Act.
    On October 5, 2018, the Exchange withdrew the First Proposed Rule
Change.\9\ The Exchange refiled the Proposed Fee Increases on September
18, 2018, designating the Proposed Fee Increases immediately
effective.\10\ The Second Proposed Rule Change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on October 10, 2018.\11\ The Commission
received one comment

letter on the proposal.\12\ The Proposed Fee Increases remained in
effect until they were temporarily suspended pursuant to a suspension
order (the ``Second Suspension Order'') issued by the Commission on
October 3, 2018.\13\ The Second Suspension Order also instituted
proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the Second
Proposed Rule Change.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84397 (October 10,
2018), 83 FR 52272 (October 16, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-16).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84358 (October 3,
2018), 83 FR 51022 (October 10, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-19). (The
``Second Proposed Rule Change'').
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ See Letter from Theodore R. Lazo, Managing Director and
Associate General Counsel, and Ellen Greene, Managing Director
Financial Services Operations, The Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association (``SIFMA''), to Brent J. Fields, Secretary,
Commission, dated October 15, 2018 (``SIFMA Letter'').
    \13\ See supra note 10.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIFMA Letter argued that the Exchange did not provide
sufficient information in its filing to support a finding that the
proposal should be approved by the Commission after further review of
the proposed fee increases. Specifically, the SIFMA Letter objected to
the Exchange's reliance on the fees of other exchanges to justify its
own fee increases. In addition, the SIFMA Letter argued that the
Exchange did not offer any details to support its basis for asserting
that the Proposed Fee Increases are reasonable. On November 23, 2018,
the Exchange withdrew the Second Proposed Rule Change.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84651 (November 26,
2018), 83 FR 61687 (November 30, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is now re-filing the Proposed Fee Increases, and is
also providing new information, including providing additional detail
about the market participants impacted by the Proposed Fee Increases,
as well as the additional costs incurred by the Exchange associated
with providing the connectivity alternatives, in order to provide more
transparency and support relating to the Exchange's belief that the
Proposed Fee Increases are reasonable, equitable, and non-
discriminatory, and to provide sufficient information for the
Commission to determine that the Proposed Fee Increases are consistent
with the Act. The proposed rule change is immediately effective upon
filing with the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.
    The Exchange currently offers various bandwidth alternatives for
connectivity to the Exchange to its primary and secondary facilities,
consisting of a 1Gb fiber connection, a 10Gb fiber connection, and a
10Gb ULL fiber connection. The 10Gb ULL offering uses an ultra-low
latency switch, which provides faster processing of messages sent to it
in comparison to the switch used for the other types of connectivity.
The Exchange currently assesses the following monthly network
connectivity fees to both Members and non-Members for connectivity to
the Exchange's primary/secondary facility: (a) $1,100 for the 1Gb
connection; (b) $5,500 for the 10Gb connection; and (c) $8,500 for the
10Gb ULL connection. The Exchange also assesses to both Members and
non-Members a monthly per connection network connectivity fee of $500
for each 1Gb connection to the disaster recovery facility and a monthly
per connection network connectivity fee of $2,500 for each 10Gb
connection to the disaster recovery facility.
    The Exchange's MIAX Express Network Interconnect (``MENI'') can be
configured to provide Members and non-Members of the Exchange network
connectivity to the trading platforms, market data systems, test
systems, and disaster recovery facilities of both the Exchange and its
affiliate, MIAX Options, via a single, shared connection. Members and
non-Members utilizing the MENI to connect to the trading platforms,
market data systems, test systems and disaster recovery facilities of
the Exchange and MIAX Options via a single, shared connection are
assessed only one monthly network connectivity fee per connection,
regardless of the trading platforms, market data systems, test systems,
and disaster recovery facilities accessed via such connection.
    The Exchange proposes to increase the monthly network connectivity
fees for such connections for both Members and non-Members. The network
connectivity fees for connectivity to the Exchange's primary/secondary
facility will be increased as follows: (a) From $1,100 to $1,400 for
the 1Gb connection; (b) from $5,500 to $6,100 for the 10Gb connection;
and (c) from $8,500 to $9,300 for the 10Gb ULL connection. The network
connectivity fees for connectivity to the Exchange's disaster recovery
facility will be increased as follows: (a) from $500 to $550 for the
1Gb connection; and (b) from $2,500 to $2,750 for the 10Gb connection.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \16\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \17\ in
particular, in that it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among Exchange Members and
issuers and other persons using any facility or system which the
Exchange operates or controls. The Exchange also believes the proposal
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \18\ 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 and is not designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customer, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, in that the Proposed Fee Changes are fair,
equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory, because the fees for the
connectivity alternatives available on the Exchange, as proposed to be
increased, are competitive and market-driven. The U.S. options markets
are highly competitive (there are currently 16 options markets) and a
reliance on competitive markets is an appropriate means to ensure
equitable and reasonable prices.
    The Exchange acknowledges that there is no regulatory requirement
that any market participant connect to the Exchange, or that any
participant connect at any specific connection speed. The rule
structure for options exchanges are, in fact, fundamentally different
from those of equities exchanges. The Exchange further recognizes that
the decision of whether to connect to the Exchange is separate and
distinct from the decision of whether and how to trade on the Exchange.
The Exchange acknowledges that many firms may choose to connect to the
Exchange, but ultimately not trade on it.
    The Exchange \19\ and MIAX Options \20\ are comprised of 41
distinct Members between the two exchanges, excluding any additional
affiliates of such Members that are also Members of MIAX PEARL, MIAX
Options, or both. Of those 41 distinct Members, 33 Members have
purchased the 1Gb, 10Gb, 10Gb ULL connections or some combination of
multiple various connections. Furthermore, every Member who has
purchased at least one connection also trades on the Exchange, MIAX
Options, or both, with the exception of one new Member who is currently
in the on-boarding process. The 8 remaining Members who have not

purchased any connectivity to the Exchange are still able to trade on
the Exchange indirectly through other Members or non-Member service
bureaus that are connected. These 8 Members who have not purchased
connectivity are not forced or compelled to purchase connectivity, and
they retain all of the other benefits of Membership with the Exchange.
Accordingly, Members have the choice to purchase connectivity and are
not compelled to do so in any way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ MIAX PEARL has 36 distinct Members, excluding affiliated
entities. See MIAX PEARL Exchange Member Directory, available at
https://www.miaxoptions.com/exchange-members/pearl.
    \20\ MIAX Options has 38 distinct Members, excluding affiliated
entities. See MIAX Options Exchange Member Directory, available at
https://www.miaxoptions.com/exchange-members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to options trading, the Exchange had only 4.82% market
share of the U.S. options industry in Equity/ETF classes according to
the OCC in 2018.\21\ For all of 2018, the Exchange's affiliate, MIAX
Options had only 4.39% market share of the U.S. options industry in
Equity/ETF classes according to the OCC.\22\ The Exchange is aware of
no evidence that a combined market share of less than 10% provides the
Exchange with anti-competitive pricing power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Exchange Market Share of Equity Products--2018, The
Options Clearing Corporation, available at https://www.theocc.com/webapps/exchange-volume.
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Separately, the Exchange is not aware of any reason why market
participants could not simply drop their connections and cease being
Members of the Exchange if the Exchange were to establish unreasonable
and uncompetitive price increases for its connectivity alternatives. No
options market participant is required by rule, regulation, or
competitive forces to be a Member of the Exchange. Several market
participants choose not to be Members of the Exchange and choose not to
access the Exchange, and several market participants also access the
Exchange indirectly through another market participant. To illustrate,
the Exchange has only 41 Members (including all such Members' affiliate
Members). However, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') has over 200
members,\23\ Nasdaq ISE, LLC has approximately 100 members,\24\ and
NYSE American LLC has over 80 members.\25\ If all market participants
were required to be Members of the Exchange and connect directly to the
Exchange, the Exchange would have over 200 Members, in line with Cboe's
total membership. But it does not. The Exchange only has 41 Members
(inclusive of Members' affiliates).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Form 1/A, filed August 30, 2018 (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/1800/18002831.pdf); Form 1/A, filed August 30,
2018 (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/1800/18002833.pdf);
Form 1/A, filed July 24, 2018 (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/1800/18002781.pdf); Form 1/A, filed August 30, 2018 (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1473845/999999999718007832/9999999997-18-007832-index.htm).
    \24\ See Form 1/A, filed July 1, 2016 (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/vprr/1601/16019243.pdf).
    \25\ See https://www.nyse.com/markets/american-options/membership#directory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange finds it compelling that all of the Exchange's
existing Members continued to purchase the Exchange's connectivity
services during the period for which the Proposed Fee Increases took
effect in August 2018. In particular, the Exchange believes that the
Proposed Fee Increases are reasonable because the Exchange did not lose
any Members (or the number of connections each Member purchased) or
non-Member connections due to the Exchange increasing its connectivity
fees through the First Proposed Rule Change, which fee increase became
effective August 1, 2018. For example, in July 2018, fourteen (14)
Members purchased 1Gb connections, ten (10) Members purchased 10Gb
connections, and fifteen (15) Members purchased 10Gb ULL connections.
(The Exchange notes that 1Gb connections are purchased primarily by EEM
Members; 10Gb ULL connections are purchased primarily by higher volume
Market Makers quoting all products across both MIAX PEARL and MIAX
Options; and 10Gb connections are purchased by higher volume EEMs and
lower volume Market Makers.) The vast majority of those Members
purchased multiple such connections with the actual number of
connections depending on the Member's throughput requirements based on
the volume of their quote/order traffic associated with their business
model. After the fee increase, beginning August 1, 2018, the same
number of Members purchased the same number of connections.\26\
Furthermore, the total number of connections did not decrease from July
to August 2018, and in fact one Member even purchased two (2)
additional 10Gb ULL connections in August 2018, after the fee increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The Exchange notes that one Member downgraded one
connection in July, however such downgrade was done well ahead of
notice of the Proposed Fee Increase and was the result of a change
to the Member's business operation that was completely independent
of, and unrelated to, the Proposed Fee Increases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, in July 2018, four (4) non-Members purchased 1Gb connections,
two (2) non-Members purchased 10Gb connections, and one (1) non-Member
purchased 10Gb ULL connections. After the fee increase, beginning
August 1, 2018, the same non-Members purchased the same number of
connections across all available alternatives and two (2) additional
non-Members purchased three (3) more connections after the fee
increase. These non-Members freely purchased their connectivity with
the Exchange in order to offer trading services to other firms and
customers, as well as access to the market data services that their
connections to the Exchange provide them, but they are not required or
compelled to purchase any of the Exchange's connectivity options.
    Of those Members and non-Members that bought multiple connections,
no firm dropped any connections beginning August 1, 2018, when the
Exchange increased its fees. Nor did the Exchange lose any Members.
Furthermore, the Exchange did not receive any comment letters or
official complaints from any Member or non-Member purchaser of
connectivity regarding the increased fees regarding how the fee
increase was unreasonable, unduly burdensome, or would negatively
impact their competitiveness amongst other market participants.
Therefore, the Exchange believes that the Proposed Fee Increases are
fair, equitable, and non-discriminatory, as the fees are competitive.
    The Exchange believes that the Proposed Fee Increases are equitably
allocated among Members and non-Members, as evidenced by the fact that
the fee increases are allocated across all connectivity alternatives,
and there is not a disproportionate number of Members purchasing any
alternative--fourteen (14) Members purchased 1Gb connections, ten (10)
Members purchased 10Gb connections, fifteen (15) Members purchased 10Gb
ULL connections, four (4) non-Members purchased 1Gb connections, two
(2) non-Members purchased 10Gb connections, and one (1) non-Member
purchased 10Gb ULL connections. The Exchange recognizes that the
relative fee increases are 27% for the 1Gb connection, 10.9% for the
10Gb connection, and 9.4% for the 10Gb ULL connection, but the Exchange
believes that percentage increase differentiation is appropriate, given
the different levels of service provided and the largest percentage
increase being associated with the lowest cost connection.
    Second, the Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act because the Proposed Fee Increases allow the
Exchange to recover a portion (less than all) of the increased costs
incurred by the Exchange associated with providing and maintaining the
necessary hardware and other infrastructure to support this technology
since Exchange launched operations in February 2017. Put simply, the
costs of the Exchange to provide these services have increased

considerably over this time, as more fully-detailed and quantified
below. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and appropriate to
increase its fees charged for use of its connectivity to partially
offset the increased costs the Exchange incurred during this time
associated with maintaining and enhancing a state-of-the-art exchange
network infrastructure in the U.S. options industry.
    In particular, the Exchange's increased costs associated with
supporting its network are due to several factors, including increased
costs associated with maintaining and expanding a team of highly-
skilled network engineers (the Exchange also hired additional network
engineering staff in 2017 and 2018), increasing fees charged by the
Exchange's third-party data center operator, and costs associated with
projects and initiatives designed to improve overall network
performance and stability, through the Exchange's R&D efforts.
    In order to provide more detail and to quantify the Exchange's
increased costs, the Exchange notes that increased costs are associated
with the infrastructure and increased headcount to fully-support the
advances in infrastructure and expansion of network level services,
including customer monitoring, alerting and reporting. Additional
technology expenses were incurred related to the expanding its
Information Security services, monitoring and remediation, as well as
Regulation SCI mandated processes associated with network technology.
All of these additional expenses have been incurred by the Exchange
since became operational in February 2017. Examples include an
approximate 70% increase in technology-related personnel costs in
infrastructure, due to expansion of services/support; an approximate
10% increase in datacenter costs due to price increases and footprint
expansion; an approximate 5% increase in vendor-supplied dark fiber due
to price increases and expanded capabilities; and a 30% increase in
market data connectivity fees. The Exchange also incurred significant
capital expenditures over this same period to upgrade and enhance the
underlying technology components, as more fully-detailed below.
    Further, because the costs of operating a data center are
significant and not economically feasible for the Exchange, the
Exchange does not operate its own data centers, and instead contracts
with a third-party data center provider. The Exchange notes that
larger, dominant exchange operators own/operate their data centers,
which offers them greater control over their data center costs. Because
those exchanges own and operate their data centers as profit centers,
the Exchange is subject to additional costs. As a result, the Exchange
is subject to fee increases from its data center provider, which the
Exchange experienced in 2017 and 2018 of approximately 10%, as cited
above.
    Further, the Exchange invests significant resources in network R&D
to improve the overall performance and stability of its network. For
example, the Exchange has a number of network monitoring tools (some of
which were developed in-house, and some of which are licensed from
third-parties), that continually monitor, detect, and report network
performance, many of which serve as significant value-adds to the
Exchange's Members and enable the Exchange to provide a high level of
customer service. These tools detect and report performance issues, and
thus enable the Exchange to proactively notify a Member (and the SIPs)
when the Exchange detects a problem with a Member's connectivity. The
costs associated with the maintenance and improvement of existing tools
and the development of new tools resulted in significant increased cost
to the Exchange since February 2017.
    Certain recently developed network aggregation and monitoring tools
provide the Exchange with the ability to measure network traffic with a
much more granular level of variability. This is important as Exchange
Members demand a higher level of network determinism and the ability to
measure variability in terms of single digit nanoseconds. Also, the
Exchange routinely conducts R&D projects to improve the performance of
the network's hardware infrastructure. As an example, in the last year,
the Exchange's R&D efforts resulted in a performance improvement,
requiring the purchase of new equipment to support that improvement,
and thus resulting in increased costs in the hundreds of thousands of
dollars range. In sum, the costs associated with maintaining and
enhancing a state-of-the-art exchange network infrastructure in the
U.S. options industry is a significant expense for the Exchange that
continues to increase, and thus the Exchange believes that it is
reasonable to offset a portion of those increased costs by increasing
its network connectivity fees, as proposed herein. Overall, the
Proposed Fee Increases are projected to offset only a portion of the
Exchange's increased network connectivity costs that were incurred by
the Exchange since it launched operations in February 2017.
    The Exchange notes that other exchanges have similar connectivity
alternatives for their participants, including similar low-latency
connectivity. For example, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx''), NYSE Arca, Inc.
(``Arca''), NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'') and Nasdaq ISE, LLC
(``ISE'') all offer a 1Gb, 10Gb and 10Gb low latency ethernet
connectivity alternatives to each of their participants.\27\ The
Exchange further notes that Phlx, ISE, Arca and NYSE American each
charge higher rates for such similar connectivity to primary and
secondary facilities.\28\ Additionally, the Exchange's proposed
connectivity fees to its disaster recovery facility are within the
range of the fees charged by other exchanges for similar connectivity
alternatives.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Phlx and ISE Rules, General Equity and Options Rules,
General 8, Section 1(b). Phlx and ISE each charge a monthly fee of
$2,500 for each 1Gb connection, $10,000 for each 10Gb connection and
$15,000 for each 10Gb Ultra connection, which the equivalent of the
Exchange's 10Gb ULL connection. See also NYSE American Fee Schedule,
Section V.B, and Arca Fees and Charges, Co-Location Fees. NYSE
American and Arca each charge a monthly fee of $5,000 for each 1Gb
circuit, $14,000 for each 10Gb circuit and $22,000 for each 10Gb LX
circuit, which the equivalent of the Exchange's 10Gb ULL connection.
    \28\ Id.
    \29\ See Nasdaq ISE, Options Rules, Options 7, Pricing Schedule,
Section 11.D. (charging $3,000 for disaster recovery testing &
relocation services); see also Cboe Exchange, Inc. (``Cboe'') Fees
Schedule, p. 14, Cboe Command Connectivity Charges (charging a
monthly fee of $2,000 for a 1Gb disaster recovery network access
port and a monthly fee of $6,000 for a 10Gb disaster recovery
network access port).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    MIAX PEARL does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In particular, the Exchange has
received no official complaints from Members or others who connect to
it that its fees or the Proposed Fee Increases are negatively impacting
or would negatively impact their abilities to compete with other market
participants. Further, the Exchange is unaware of any assertion that
its existing fee levels or the Proposed Fee Increases would somehow
unduly impair its competition with other options exchanges. To the
contrary, if the fees charged are deemed too high by market
participants, they can simply disconnect.
    While the Exchange recognizes the distinction between connecting to
an exchange and trading at the exchange, the Exchange notes that it
operates in a highly competitive options market in

which market participants can readily connect and trade with venues
they desire. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
adjust its fees to remain competitive with other exchanges. The
Exchange believes that the proposed changes reflect this competitive
environment.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\30\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \31\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-PEARL-2019-08 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-PEARL-2019-08. 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-PEARL-2019-08 and should be submitted on
or before April 10, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-05216 Filed 3-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49272-49274]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19521]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001]

Circulatory System Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory
Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will
be open to the public.
    Name of Committee: Circulatory System Devices Panel of the Medical
Devices Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on September 11 and 12,
2013, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    Location: Hilton Washington DC North/Gaithersburg, Montgomery Room,
620 Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD 20877. The hotel telephone number is
301-977-8900.
    Contact Person: Jamie Waterhouse, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory Committee Information
Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC area). A
notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that
impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always
be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you
should always check the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate
advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee
information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to
the meeting.
    Agenda: On September 11, 2013, during session I, the committee will
discuss and make recommendations regarding the proposed classification
of external cardiac compressor (ECC) devices, one of the remaining
preamendments class III devices regulated under the section 510(k) of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C.
360(k)) (510(k)) pathway. ECCs, also known as chest compressors, assist
in the act of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The devices in this
classification are divided into two types: (1) Devices that provide
automatic chest compressions at a fixed compression rate and depth
(automated ECCs), which are placed directly on the patient's chest and
are powered manually, pneumatically, or electrically and (2) devices
that aid the emergency medical professional in delivering manual
compressions at a compression depth and rate that are consistent with
current guidelines (CPR Aids). These devices are placed beneath the
hands of the emergency medical professional or in the vicinity of the
cardiac arrest victim and provide audio and/or visual feedback to
assist emergency personnel in following the recommended steps for CPR
and maintaining the recommended rate and depth of compressions for the
duration of CPR.
    On January 8, 2013 (78 FR 1162), FDA issued a proposed order which,
if made final, would make the class III ECC devices class II subject to
special controls and, except as noted below, premarket notification
(510(k)). The CPR aid device is proposed to be exempt from section
510(k) of the FD&C Act if it is a prescription use device that provides
feedback to the rescuer consistent with the current American Heart
Association guidelines for CPR and in compliance with the special
controls, subject to the limitations of exemptions in 21 CFR 870.9. The
regulatory history of ECC devices has been discussed as part of the
proposed rule (77 FR 36951, June 20, 2012).
    The discussion at the panel meeting will involve making
recommendations regarding regulatory classification to either reconfirm
to class III (subject to premarket approval application (PMA)) or
reclassify to class I or class II. The committee will further be asked
to comment on whether general and/or special controls are adequate to
assure the safety and effectiveness of the device and whether, if
reclassified to class II, these devices should be exempt from premarket
notification requirements.
    On September 11, 2013, during session II, the committee will
discuss and make recommendations regarding classification of external
pacemaker pulse generators (EPPGs), one of the remaining preamendments
class III devices regulated under the 510(k) pathway. An EPPG is a
device that has a power supply and electronic circuits that produce a
periodic electrical pulse to stimulate the heart. This device, which is
used outside the body, is used as a temporary substitute for the
heart's intrinsic pacing system until a permanent pacemaker can be
implanted, or to control irregular heartbeats in patients following
cardiac surgery or a myocardial infarction. The device may have
adjustments for impulse strength, duration, R-wave sensitivity, and
other pacing variables.
    On October 17, 2011 (76 FR 64224), FDA issued a proposed rule
which, if made final, would make the class III external pacemaker pulse
generator devices class II subject to premarket notification (510(k))
and special controls. The regulatory history of external pacemaker
pulse generator devices has been discussed as part of the proposed rule
(77 FR 36951).
    The discussion at the panel meeting will involve making
recommendations regarding regulatory classification to either reconfirm
to class III (subject to PMA) or reclassify to class II and comment on
whether special controls are adequate to assure the safety and
effectiveness of this device.
    Also during session II, FDA will be seeking feedback from the
committee regarding classification of triple chamber pacing system
analyzers (PSAs) with external pacing capability, a postamendments
device classified through the premarket approval process as class III.
A triple chamber PSA is intended to be used during the implant
procedure of pacemakers and defibrillators, including biventricular
devices, to evaluate the placement and integrity of pacing leads for
determination of appropriate pacing parameters for the implanted
device. The device provides pacing and sensing in up to three chambers
during the implant procedure. The discussion at the panel meeting will
involve making recommendations regarding regulatory classification to
either reconfirm to class III (subject to PMA) or reclassify to class
II and comment on whether special controls are adequate to assure the
safety and effectiveness of this device.
    On September 12, 2013, the committee will discuss and make
recommendations regarding the proposed classification of membrane lung
for long-term pulmonary support systems, one of the remaining
preamendments class III devices regulated under the 510(k) pathway. A
membrane lung for long-term pulmonary support refers to the oxygenator
component of an extracorporeal circuit used during long-term
procedures, commonly referred to as an ECMO. An ECMO procedure provides
assisted extracorporeal circulation and physiologic gas exchange of a
patient's blood when an acute (reversible) condition prevents the
patient's own body from providing the physiologic gas exchange needed
to sustain life. The circuit is comprised of multiple device types,
including, but not limited to, an oxygenator, blood pump, cannulae,
heat exchanger, tubing, filters, monitors/detectors, and other
accessories; the circuit components and configuration (e.g.,
arteriovenous, veno-venous) may differ based on the needs of the
individual patient or the condition being treated. ECMO is intended for
patients with acute reversible respiratory or cardiac failure,

unresponsive to optimal ventilation and/or pharmacologic management.
    On January 8, 2013 (78 FR 1158), FDA issued a proposed order which,
if made final, would make the class III ECMO devices class II subject
to premarket notification (510(k)) and special controls. The regulatory
history of ECMO devices has been discussed as part of the proposed rule
(78 FR 1158).
    The discussion at the panel meeting will involve making
recommendations regarding regulatory classification to either reconfirm
to class III (subject to PMA) or reclassify to class II and comment on
whether special controls are adequate to assure the safety and
effectiveness of this device.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
August 28, 2013. On September 11, 2013, oral presentations from the
public will be scheduled between approximately 9:30 a.m. and 10 a.m.
for session I and between 2 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. for session II. On
September 12, 2013, oral presentations from the public will be
scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals
interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the
contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of
the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses
of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time
requested to make their presentation on or before August 20, 2013. Time
allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of
registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably
accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may
conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open
public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested
persons regarding their request to speak by August 22, 2013.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact AnnMarie Williams,
Conference Management Staff, at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or 301-
796-5966, at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: August 7, 2013.
Jill Hartzler Warner,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-19521 Filed 8-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10861-10862]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04129]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71586; File No. SR-Topaz-2014-06]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Topaz Exchange, LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
the Amendment of Topaz Exchange, LLC's Constitution, Certificate of
Formation, Limited Liability Company Agreement, Rules and Schedule of
Fees To Change the Name of the Exchange to ISE Gemini, LLC

February 20, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on February 10, 2014, Topaz Exchange, LLC (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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Constitution, Certificate of
Formation, LLC Agreement, Rules and Schedule of Fees to change the name
of the Exchange to ISE Gemini, LLC. The Exchange is also proposing one
other technical change to its LLC Agreement for clarification purposes.
The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Commission's
Public Reference Room and on the Exchange's Internet Web site at http://www.ise.com.

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 self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries,
set forth in Sections A, B and C below, of the most significant aspects
of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Constitution, Certificate of
Formation, LLC Agreement, Rules and Schedule of Fees, in each case, to
change the name of the Exchange to ISE Gemini, LLC. The Exchange is
also proposing one technical revision to the LLC Agreement to reflect
that the LLC Agreement has been approved.
    At the time of formation, the name of the Exchange was established
as ``Topaz Exchange, LLC.'' As of the launch date, the Exchange was
doing business as ``ISE Gemini.'' The Exchange has now determined that
for marketing purposes, it would be desirable to change the name of the
Exchange to ``ISE Gemini, LLC.''
    Specifically, the Constitution and Certificate of Formation \3\
would be amended to remove the reference to ``Topaz Exchange, LLC'' and
replace it with ``ISE Gemini, LLC.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Upon effectiveness of this rule change to change the name of
the Exchange to ISE Gemini, LLC, the Exchange will officially amend
its Certificate of Formation in the State of Delaware to reflect the
new name, as indicated in Exhibit 5B attached hereto.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the LLC Agreement, references to ``Topaz Exchange, LLC'' and
``Topaz'' would be replaced with ``ISE Gemini, LLC'' and ``ISE
Gemini,'' respectively. In addition, the following language located on
the signature page of the LLC Agreement would be deleted in light of
the fact that the LLC Agreement has been approved:
    ``To be approved at the first meeting of the Interim Board of
Directors of Topaz Exchange, LLC which will be held after the grant of
registration of the Topaz Form 1 application by the U.S. Securities
Exchange Commission.''
    In the Exchange's Rules and Schedule of Fees, references to ``Topaz
Exchange, LLC'' and ``Topaz,'' would be replaced with ``ISE Gemini,
LLC'' and ``ISE Gemini,'' respectively.
    None of the foregoing changes are substantive.
2. Statutory Basis
    The basis under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange
Act'') for this proposed rule change is the requirement under Section
6(b)(5) that an exchange have rules that are designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism for a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
proposes to change its name for marketing purposes, and the proposed
rule change is intended to accurately reflect the name change in the
Exchange's rules and governing documents. In addition, as a technical
change, the Exchange is proposing to delete an outdated explanation on
the signature page of the LLC Agreement to reflect the current state of
affairs, which is in line with good corporate governance practices.

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. The proposed rule change to change the name of the Exchange to
ISE Gemini, LLC is technical in nature, and therefore, does not
implicate any burdens on competition.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3) of

the Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(3) \5\ thereunder. At any time within 60
days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may
summarily temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the
Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 No. SR-Topaz-2014-06 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Topaz-2014-06. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method.
    The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet
Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with
respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission,
and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change
between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be
withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Topaz-2014-06 and should be
submitted on or before March 19, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-04129 Filed 2-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P