[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 135 (Monday, July 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38151-38154]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15195]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-92393; File No. SR-Phlx-2021-38]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Options 2,
Section 5, Electronic Market Maker Obligations and Quoting Requirements

July 13, 2021.
    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 June 30, 2021, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed
rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been
prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Options 2, Section 5, Electronic
Market Maker Obligations and Quoting Requirements.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/rulebook/phlx/rules, 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 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 Phlx Rules at Options 2, Section 5,
Electronic Market Maker Obligations and Quoting Requirements.
Currently, the Exchange requires Market Makers \3\ and Lead Maker
Makers \4\ to enter bids and offers for the options to which they are
registered, except in an assigned options series listed intra-day on
the Exchange.\5\ Quotations must meet the legal quote width
requirements specified in Options 2, Section 4(c).\6\ On a daily basis,
an electronic Market Maker must make markets consistent with the
applicable quoting requirements. Market Makers (SQTs and RSQTs)
associated with the same member organization \7\ are collectively
required to provide two-sided quotations in 60% of the cumulative
number of seconds, or such higher percentage as Phlx may announce in
advance, for which that member organization's assigned options series
are open for trading.\8\ Notwithstanding the foregoing, a member
organization is not required to make two-sided markets pursuant to
Options 2, Section 5(c)(2) in any Quarterly Option Series, any adjusted
option series,\9\ and any option series with an expiration of nine
months or greater.\10\ Lead Market Makers (including Remote Lead Market
Makers), associated with the same member organization, are collectively
required to provide two-sided quotations in 90% of the cumulative
number of seconds, or such higher percentage as Phlx may announce in
advance, for which that member organization's assigned options series
are open for trading. Lead Market Makers are required to make two-sided
markets pursuant to Options 2, Section 5 in any Quarterly Option
Series, any Adjusted Option Series, and any option series with an
expiration of nine months or greater.\11\ Finally, a Directed SQT or

RSQT is subject to the requirements within Options 2, Section
5(c)(2)(C).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A ``Market Maker'' means a Streaming Quote Trader or a
Remote Streaming Quote Trader who enters quotations for his own
account electronically into the System. See Options 1, Section
1(b)(28). A ``Streaming Quote Trader'' or ``SQT'' means a Market
Maker who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and
submit option quotations electronically in options to which such SQT
is assigned. An SQT may only submit such quotations while such SQT
is physically present on the trading floor of the Exchange. An SQT
may only submit quotes in classes of options in which the SQT is
assigned. See Options 1, Section 1(b)(54). A ``Remote Streaming
Quote Trader'' or ``RSQT'' means a Market Maker that is a member
affiliated with an Remote Streaming Quote Trader Organization with
no physical trading floor presence who has received permission from
the Exchange to generate and submit option quotations electronically
in options to which such RSQT has been assigned. A qualified RSQT
may function as a Remote Lead Market Maker upon Exchange approval.
An RSQT is also known as a Remote Market Maker (``RMM'') pursuant to
Options 2, Section 11. A Remote Streaming Quote Organization
(``RSQTO'') or Remote Market Maker Organization (``RMO'') are
Exchange member organizations that have qualified pursuant to
Options 2, Section 1. See Options 1, Section 1(b)(49).
    \4\ A ``Lead Market Maker'' means a member who is registered as
an options Lead Market Maker pursuant to Options 2, Section 12(a). A
Lead Market Maker includes a Remote Lead Market Maker which is
defined as a Lead Market Maker in one or more classes that does not
have a physical presence on an Exchange's trading floor and is
approved by the Exchange pursuant to Options 2, Section 11. See
Options 1, Section 1(b)(27).
    \5\ See Options 2, Section 5(c).
    \6\ Options 2, Section 4(c) describes the required bid/ask
differentials.
    \7\ The term ``member organization'' means a corporation,
partnership (general or limited), limited liability partnership,
limited liability company, business trust or similar organization,
transacting business as a broker or a dealer in securities and which
has the status of a member organization by virtue of (i) admission
to membership given to it by the Membership Department pursuant to
the provisions of General 3, Sections 5 and 10 or the By-Laws or
(ii) the transitional rules adopted by the Exchange pursuant to
Section 6-4 of the By-Laws. References herein to officer or partner,
when used in the context of a member organization, shall include any
person holding a similar position in any organization other than a
corporation or partnership that has the status of a member
organization. See General 1, Section 1(17).
    \8\ Options 2, Section 5(c)(2)(A).
    \9\ An adjusted option series is defined as an option series
wherein one option contract in the series represents the delivery of
other than 100 shares of underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund
Shares (``Adjusted Options Series''). See Options 2, Section
5(c)(2)(A)(i).
    \10\ Options 2, Section 5(c)(2)(A).
    \11\ Options 2, Section 5(c)(2)(B).
    \12\ Directed SQTs and Directed RSQTs, associated with the same
member organization, are collectively required to provide two-sided
quotations in 90% of the cumulative number of seconds, or such
higher percentage as Phlx may announce in advance, for which that
member organization's assigned options series are open for trading.
A member organization shall be considered directed in all assigned
options once the member organization receives a Directed Order in
any option in which they are assigned and shall be considered a
Directed SQT or Directed RSQT until such time as the member
organization notifies the Exchange that they are no longer directed.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, a member organization is not required
to make two-sided markets pursuant to this paragraph (c)(2) above in
any Quarterly Option Series, any Adjusted Option Series, and any
option series with an expiration of nine months or greater. A
Directed Order means any order to buy or sell which has been
directed to a particular Lead Market Maker, RSQT, or SQT by an Order
Flow Provider. To qualify as a Directed Order, an order must be
delivered to the Exchange via the System. See also Options 2,
Section 10(a)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A member organization is required to meet each market making
obligation separately.\13\ Currently, Options 2, Section 5(c) states,
``An SQT and RSQT \14\ who is also the Lead Market Maker is held to the
Lead Market Maker obligations in options series in which the Lead
Market Maker is assigned and will be held to SQT and RSQT obligations
in all other options series where assigned. An SQT or RSQT who receives
a Directed Order shall be held to the standard of a Directed SQT or
Directed RSQT, as appropriate.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Options 2, Section 5(c). Today, the Exchange aggregates
all quotes submitted through the Specialized Quote Feed interface
from the member organization, regardless of whether the quote was
submitted by the member organization in its capacity as Lead Market
Maker or Market Maker.
    \14\ The Exchange notes that pursuant to a restriction within
Options 2, Section 4(b)(2), only an SQT can simultaneously quote as
a Lead Market Maker and an SQT. Options 2, Section 4(b)(2) provides,
``An RSQT may only submit quotations electronically from off the
floor of the Exchange. An RSQT may not simultaneously quote both as
RSQT and Remote Lead Market Maker in a particular security. If an
RSQT is a Remote Lead Market Maker in a particular security, the
Remote Lead Market Maker must make a market as a Remote Lead Market
Maker and may not make a market as an RSQT in that particular
security.'' Because an RSQT cannot also be a Lead Market Maker, the
Exchange proposes to delete ``an RSQT'' as part of its amendment to
Options 2, Section 5(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, the Exchange calculates whether a member organization that
is assigned in an options series as both a Lead Market Maker and a
Market Maker has met its quoting obligations as Lead Market Maker and
Market Maker, respectively, by aggregating all quotes submitted through
the Specialized Quote Feed \15\ interface from the member organization,
regardless of whether the quote was submitted by the member
organization in its capacity as Lead Market Maker or Market Maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ``Specialized Quote Feed'' or ``SQF'' is an interface that
allows Lead Market Makers, SQTs and RSQTs to connect, send, and
receive messages related to quotes, Immediate-or-Cancel Orders, and
auction responses into and from the Exchange. Features include the
following: (1) Options symbol directory messages (e.g., underlying
and complex instruments); (2) system event messages (e.g., start of
trading hours messages and start of opening); (3) trading action
messages (e.g., halts and resumes); (4) execution messages; (5)
quote messages; (6) Immediate-or-Cancel Order messages; (7) risk
protection triggers and purge notifications; (8) opening imbalance
messages; (9) auction notifications; and (10) auction responses. The
SQF Purge Interface only receives and notifies of purge requests
from the Lead Market Maker, SQT or RSQT. Lead Market Makers, SQTs
and RSQTs may only enter interest into SQF in their assigned options
series. See Options 3, Section 7(a)(i)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend its calculation to only consider
quotes submitted through the Specialized Quote Feed interface utilizing
badges \16\ and options series \17\ assigned to a Lead Market Maker
when calculating whether a member organization acting as a Lead Market
Maker has satisfied the requirements to provide two-sided quotations in
90% of the cumulative number of seconds, or such higher percentage as
Phlx may announce for which that member organization's assigned options
series are open for trading. Similarly, the Exchange proposes to only
consider quotes submitted through the Specialized Quote Feed interface
utilizing badges and option series assigned to a Market Maker when
calculating whether a member organization acting as a Market Maker has
satisfied the requirements to provide two-sided quotations in 60% of
the cumulative number of seconds, or such higher percentage as Phlx may
announce for which that member organization's assigned options series
are open for trading. With this proposed change, a member organization
that is a Market Maker (SQT) in an options series where the member
organization is also assigned as the Lead Market Maker in an options
series will be held to both the Lead Market Maker and Market Maker
(SQT) obligations, pursuant to Options 2, Section 5(c), separately, in
that option series. The Exchange will consider whether a member
organization, acting as both Lead Market Maker and Market Maker in an
assigned options series, has complied with each requirement by only
considering quotes in the respective badges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The term ``badge'' means an account number, which may
contain letters and/or numbers, assigned to Lead Market Makers and
Market Makers. A Lead Market Maker or Market Maker account may be
associated with multiple badges. See Options 1, Section 1(b)(6).
    \17\ Phlx currently utilizes a badge without an associated
options series to designate a Lead Market Maker assigned in an
options series and a badge with an associated options series to
designate a Market Maker assigned in an option series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that Floor Market Makers \18\ and Floor Lead
Market Makers \19\ are not required to quote electronically in any
designated percentage of series pursuant to Options 8, Section 27(a).
Options 8, Section 27(f) provides for certain trading requirements
applicable to Floor Market Makers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The term ``Floor Market Maker'' is a Market Maker who is
neither an SQT or an RSQT. A Floor Market Maker may provide a quote
in open outcry. See Options 8, Section 2(a)(8).
    \19\ The term ``Floor Lead Market Maker'' is a member who is
registered as an options Lead Market Maker pursuant to Options 2,
Section 12(a) and has a physical presence on the Exchange's trading
floor. See Options 8, Section 2(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By way of example,
    Current Quoting obligation methodology:
    Lead Market Maker firm ABC is assigned five badges: 123A, 123B,
123C, 123D and 123.
    Badge 123 is designated the Lead Market Maker badge and badge 123A-
D are designated as Market Maker badges.
    Today, all quoting activity from all 5 badges is aggregated in
determining if Firm 123 [sic] complied with the requirement to provide
two-sided quotations in 90% of the cumulative number of seconds for
which that member organization's assigned options series are open for
trading. The higher of the two obligations is required today.
    Proposed Quoting obligation methodology:
    Lead Market Maker firm ABC is assigned five badges: 123A, 123B,
123C, 123D and 123.
    Badge 123 is designated the Lead Market Maker badge and badge 123A-
D are designated as Market Maker badges.
    As proposed only quoting activity from badge 123 (and excluding
badges 123 A-D) would be counted toward the requirement to provide two-
sided quotations in 90% of the cumulative number of seconds for which
that member organization's assigned options series are open for
trading.
    All other badges (123 A-D), excluding badge 123, would be counted
toward the requirement to provide two-sided quotations in 60% of the
cumulative number of seconds for which that member organization's
assigned options series are open for trading.
    A member organization may have only one Lead Market Maker badge per
option series.
    The below example explains how the Exchange aggregates quotes from
Lead Market Makers, in their assigned options series, to determine
compliance with quoting requirements, which will not be changing
pursuant to this proposal. The same calculation applies

to quotes from Market Makers in their assigned options series.
    Under the proposal, and as is the case today, by way of example,
assume Lead Market Maker Firm ABC assigned in five symbols across 2
different badges:
    Badge 123 is assigned in symbols QQQ and SPY.
    Badge 124 is assigned in symbols IBM, GM, and MSFT.
    Quotes submitted through the Specialized Quote Feed interface from
the Firm ABC's Lead Market Maker badges from all 5 symbols will be
counted in determining compliance with Firm ABC's requirement to
provide two-sided quotations in 90% of the cumulative number of seconds
for which Firm ABC's assigned options series are open for trading.
    If Firm ABC Lead Market Maker badge 123 quotes symbol QQQ at 95%
and SPY at 90% and Firm ABC Lead Market Maker badge 124 quotes IBM at
85%, GM at 95%, and MSFT at 90% then Firm ABC will have met requirement
to provide two-sided quotations in 90% of the cumulative number of
seconds for which Firm ABC's assigned options series are open for
trading because the percentage across the 5 symbols is 91%.
Implementation
    The Exchange proposes to implement this rule change on August 2,
2021. The Exchange has issued an Options Regulatory Alert notifying
members and member organizations of this change.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Options Regulatory Alert 2021-36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\21\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\22\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade and to protect investors
and the public interest by requiring Lead Market Makers and Market
Makers to separately meet quoting requirements as both a Lead Market
Maker and Market Maker, respectively, when the member organization is
assigned in both roles in an options series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange's proposal to separately calculate Market Maker and
Lead Market Maker quoting obligations where the member organization is
assigned as both Lead Market Maker and Market Maker in an options
series is consistent with the Act. Specifically, the Exchange's
proposal would only consider quotes submitted through the Specialized
Quote Feed interface utilizing badges and options series assigned to a
Lead Market Maker when calculating whether a member organization acting
as a Lead Market Maker has satisfied the requirements to provide two-
sided quotations in 90% of the cumulative number of seconds, or such
higher percentage as Phlx may announce for which that member
organization's assigned options series are open for trading. Similarly,
the Exchange's proposal would only consider quotes submitted through
the Specialized Quote Feed interface utilizing badges and option series
assigned to a Market Maker when calculating whether a member
organization acting as a Market Maker has satisfied the requirements to
provide two-sided quotations in 60% of the cumulative number of
seconds, or such higher percentage as Phlx may announce for which that
member organization's assigned options series are open for trading.
    The proposed change for calculating the Lead Market Maker
requirement separate from the Market Maker requirement, where a member
organization is assigned in both roles in an options series, would
ensure that the member organization quotes the requisite number of
seconds in an assigned options series, when acting as both Lead Market
Maker and Market Maker. This would ensure that a member organization
adds the requisite amount of liquidity in that assigned options series
in exchange for certain benefits offered by the Exchange to the member
organization, such as enhanced Lead Market Maker allocation \23\ and
favorable pricing,\24\ in addition to the member organization
fulfilling other market making obligations specified in Options 2,
Section 5(a).\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Options 3, Section 10(a)(1)(B).
    \24\ See Options 7, Pricing Schedule.
    \25\ In registering as an electronic Market Maker, a member
organization commits to various obligations. Transactions of an
electronic Market Maker in its market making capacity must
constitute a course of dealings reasonably calculated to contribute
to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, and those member
organizations should not make bids or offers or enter into
transactions that are inconsistent with such course of dealings.
Electronic Market Makers should not effect purchases or sales except
in a reasonable and orderly manner. Ordinarily during trading hours,
an electronic Market Maker must: (1) Maintain a two-sided market in
those options in which the electronic Market Maker is registered to
trade, in a manner that enhances the depth, liquidity and
competitiveness of the market. (2) Engage, to a reasonable degree
under the existing circumstances, in dealings for its own account
when there exists, or it is reasonably anticipated that there will
exist, a lack of price continuity, a temporary disparity between the
supply of (or demand for) a particular option contract, or a
temporary distortion of price relationships between option contracts
of the same class. (3) Compete with other electronic Market Makers
in all options in all capacities in which the electronic Market
Maker is registered to trade. (4) Make markets that will be honored
for the number of contracts entered into the System in all options
in which the electronic Market Maker is registered to trade. (5)
Update quotations in response to changed market conditions in all
options in which the electronic Market Maker is registered to trade.
(6) Maintain active markets in all options in which the electronic
Market Maker is registered. (7) Honor all orders attributed to the
electronic Market Maker that the System routes to away markets
pursuant to Options 5, Section 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the proposal would
ensure that member organizations that are assigned in an options series
as both the Lead Market Maker and Market Maker, respectively, are
meeting the same quoting obligations as other member organizations who
are assigned solely as either the Lead Market Maker or Market Maker in
an option series. Also, this proposal would ensure that a member
organization quotes the requisite number of seconds in an assigned
options series, when acting as both Lead Market Maker and Market Maker,
respectively, thereby adding the requisite amount of liquidity in
exchange for certain benefits provided by the Exchange such as enhanced
Lead Market Maker allocation \26\ and favorable pricing,\27\ in
addition to fulfilling its other market making obligations specified in
Options 2, Section 5(a).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Options 3, Section 10(a)(1)(B).
    \27\ See Options 7, Pricing Schedule.
    \28\ See note 25 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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 for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \29\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \30\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \31\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\32\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative upon filing. Waiving the operative delay will
allow the Exchange to amend, without delay, its rules regarding Market
Maker quoting obligations to ensure that member organizations assigned
in an options series as both the Lead Market Maker and Market Maker
would have the same quoting obligations as member organizations who are
assigned solely as either Lead Market Maker or Market Maker in an
option series. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest and hereby designates the proposed rule change to be
operative upon filing.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \33\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also 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 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.

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-Phlx-2021-38 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-Phlx-2021-38. 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
20549-1090, 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-Phlx-2021-38 and should be
submitted on or before August 9, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\34\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-15195 Filed 7-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38490-38492]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15826]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0356]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Mentor Harbor Yachting Club Fireworks, Lake Erie,
Mentor, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake Erie, Mentor, OH. This safety zone is intended to restrict vessels
from a portion of Lake Erie during the Mentor Harbor Yachting Club
fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect
spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with a fireworks
display.

DATES: This rule will be effective from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m. on July
3, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2012-0356]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box, and click ``Search.'' You may
visit the Docket Management Facility, Department of Transportation,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email LT Christopher Mercurio, Chief of
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716-
843-9343, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The
final details for this event were not known to the Coast Guard until
there was insufficient time remaining before the event to publish an
NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a
comment period to run would be both impracticable and contrary to the
public interest because it would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to
protect spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with a
maritime fireworks display, which are discussed further below.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for 30 day notice period run would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Between 10 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on July 3, 2012, a fireworks display
will be held on Lake Erie near Mentor, OH. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo has determined that fireworks launched proximate to a gathering
of watercraft pose a significant risk to public safety and property.
Such hazards include premature and accidental detonations, dangerous
projectiles, and falling or burning debris.

C. Discussion of Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Buffalo has determined that this temporary safety zone is necessary to
ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the Mentor Harbor
Yachting Club Fireworks. This zone will be effective and enforced from
9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m. on July 3, 2012. This zone will encompass all
waters of Lake Erie, Mentor, OH within a 500 foot radius of position
41[deg]43'36'' N, and 081[deg]21'09'' W (NAD 83).
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. Executive Order
12866 or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of
Management and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. It is not
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is
not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will
have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other
agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan
recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The
safety zone created by this rule will be relatively small and enforced
for relatively short time. Also, the safety zone is designed to
minimize its impact on navigable waters. Furthermore, the safety zone
has been designed to allow vessels to transit around it. Thus,
restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Erie on the evening of July 3,
2012.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
safety zone would be activated, and thus subject to enforcement, for
only an hour and a half late in the day. Traffic may be allowed to pass
through the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port. The
Captain of the Port can be reached via VHF channel 16. Before the
activation of the zone, we would issue local Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapters 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0356 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0356  Safety Zone; Mentor Harbor Yachting Club, Lake
Erie, Mentor, OH.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Erie, Mentor, NY within a 500 foot radius of position 41[deg]43'36'' N,
and 081[deg]21'09'' W (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective and Enforcement Period. This regulation is effective
and will be enforced on July 3, 2012 from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or
his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 12, 2012.
S.M. Wischmann,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2012-15826 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76255-76257]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29859]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0926]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; New Jersey Intracoastal
Waterway, Barnegat Bay, Seaside Heights, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the operating
schedule that governs the S37 Bridge, at NJICW mile 14.1 over Barnegat
Bay, at Seaside Heights, NJ. Over the span of two and half years, the
bridge will be closed to navigation for three four-month closure
periods. Extensive replacement of parts and repairs to the bridge
necessitate these closures.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before February 18, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-0926 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
four methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Jim Rousseau, District Five Prevention Bridges, the
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section Symbol
U.S.C. United States Code
NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this proposed rulemaking by
submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will
be posted, without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
proposed rulemaking (USCG-2012-0926), indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a

comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2013-0926] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``Search.'' then click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated
with this rulemaking. If you submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them
by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material received during the comment period
and may change the rule based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2013-0926) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine
that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and
place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Parsons Brinkerhoff, a design consultant on behalf of NJDOT,
requested a temporary change to the existing regulations for the S37
Bridge to facilitate necessary repairs. The repairs consist of
extensive structural rehabilitation, decking replacement, bearing
replacement, electrical repairs, gate replacement and improvements to
necessitate this closure. To facilitate repairs, the bascule span would
be maintained in the closed position to navigation on three four-month
closure periods beginning at 8 a.m., December 1, 2015 until 8 p.m.,
March 31, 2016; from 8 a.m., December 1, 2016 until 8 p.m., March 31,
2017; and from 8 a.m., December 1, 2017 until 8 p.m. March 31, 2018.
    The Coast Guard has reviewed the bridge data provided by NJDOT. The
data, from years 2004 to 2013, shows a substantial decrease in the
number of bridge openings and vessel traffic transiting the area
between December and March. Spring and fall average openings are
approximately 100 per month. Winter months average approximately 6
vessel openings per month. A survey was conducted with nine local
commercial marinas also indicating minimal impact to their customers
and operations. The S37 Bridge, also known locally as the Thomas A.
Mathis Bridge, is a double-leaf bascule bridge with a vertical
clearance of approximately 30 feet, above mean high water. Based on the
data provided, the proposed closure dates will have minimal impact on
vessel traffic.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily amend 33 CFR 117.733(c)(1)
governing the S37 Bridge, at NJICW mile 14.1, over Barnegat Bay, at
Seaside Heights, NJ. The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily suspend 33
CFR 117.733(c)(1) and insert this new regulation at 33 CFR
117.733(c)(4). Paragraph (c)(4) would allow the draw to be maintained
in the closed position to vessels during the extensive rehabilitation
project on three four-month closure periods beginning 8 a.m., December
1, 2015 until 8 p.m., March 31, 2016; from 8 a.m., December 1, 2016
until 8 p.m., March 31, 2017; and from 8 a.m., December 1, 2017 until 8
p.m., March 31, 2018. Vessels with a mast height less than 30 feet can
pass underneath the bridge in the closed position at anytime. The
Atlantic Ocean is the only alternate route available for vessels unable
to pass underneath the bridge and the bridge will be unable to open
during the closure period.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget
has not reviewed it under those Orders. The proposed change is expected
to have minimal impact on mariners due to slow down of users in the
winter months with no anticipated change to vessel traffic.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. There
have been minimal vessel requests requiring openings for the past 9
years in the winter months. Vessels that can safely transit under the
bridge may do so at any time.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT'' section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This proposed rule is not an economically significant rule and
would not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
might disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to temporarily amend 33 CFR Part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. From December 1, 2015 through March 31, 2018 in Sec.  117.733,
suspend paragraph (c)(1) and add paragraph (c)(4), to read as follows:

Sec.  117.733  New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) From every December 1 through March 31, beginning in 2015 until
2018, the draw may remain closed to navigation.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 18, 2013.
Steven H. Ratti,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2013-29859 Filed 12-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19653-19656]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07596]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91510; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2021-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Amend
the NYSE American Options Fee Schedule

    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 April 8, 2021, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-
regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE American Options Fee
Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') regarding the Professional Step-Up
Incentive program. The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change
effective April 8, 2021.\4\ The proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange originally filed to amend the Fee Schedule on
April 1, 2021 (SR-NYSEAmer-2021-18) and withdrew such filing on
April 8, 2021 to make a clarifying change to the proposed Fee
Schedule, set forth in the instant filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to modify the Fee Schedule regarding
the Professional Step-Up Incentive program (the ``Step-Up Incentive'')
\5\ and correct a typographical error.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Fee Schedule, Section I.H.
    \6\ The Exchange proposes a non-substantive change to delete an
extraneous word in Section I.H., which would improve the clarity of
the Fee Schedule. See proposed Fee Schedule, Section I.H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement the rule change on April 8,
2021.
    The Exchange has established various pricing incentives designed to
encourage increased Electronic volume executed on the Exchange,
including (but not limited to) the American Customer Engagement
(``ACE'') Program \7\ and the Step-Up Incentive. While the ACE Program
is limited to Electronic Customer volume, the Step-Up Incentive is
limited to Electronic Professional \8\ volume. The Exchange proposes to
modify certain volume exclusions and qualifying criteria for the Step-
Up Incentive to continue to encourage greater Electronic Professional
volume and, specifically, to continue to incentivize increased
Electronic Professional volume. To the extent that the modifications
succeed, the increased liquidity on the Exchange would result in
enhanced market quality for all participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Fee Schedule, Section I.E.
    \8\ For purposes of this filing, Electronic ``Professional''
volume includes Electronic volume in the Professional Customer,
Broker Dealer, Non-NYSE American Options Market Maker, and Firm
ranges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Step-Up Incentive program provides that ATP Holders
who increase their monthly Electronic Professional volume by specified
percentages of TCADV over their August 2019 volume or, for new ATP
Holders, that increase Electronic Professional volume by the specified
percentages of TCADV above a base level of 10,000 contracts ADV (the
``Qualifying Volume''), will qualify for certain reduced transaction
rates on Electronic Professional volume, as well as credits on
Electronic Customer volume at Tier 1 of the ACE program.
    The Exchange proposes to modify the Step-Up Incentive program to
(1) exclude an additional category of volume from the calculations of
base volume amounts and Qualifying Volume, and (2) revise the
Qualifying Volume percentages for Tiers A and B.
    Currently, volumes from Strategy Executions, CUBE Auctions, and QCC
Transactions are excluded from the calculation of base volume amounts
and Qualifying Volume. The Exchange proposes to further specify that
volume from interest that takes liquidity from posted Customer interest
would also be excluded for purposes of calculating base volume amounts
and Qualifying Volume for the Step-Up Incentive, as such Customer
interest is eligible for discounted rates and credits under other
programs set forth in the Exchange's Fee Schedule.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., Fee Schedule, Section I.E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Step-Up Incentive program includes two tiers that ATP Holders
can qualify for based on Qualifying Volume as a percentage of TCADV.
The Exchange proposes to increase the qualification for Tier A from
0.12% of TCADV to 0.20% of TCADV and for Tier B from 0.15% of TCADV to
0.25% of TCADV. This proposed change is shown in the table below, with
to-be-deleted

text in brackets and proposed (new) text underscored.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See also proposed Fee Schedule, Section I.H.

                                         Professional Step-Up Incentive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Qualifying volume as    Per contract     Per contract
                                        a % of TCADV         penny rate     non-penny rate      ACE benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier A............................  [0.12%] 0.20%.......            $0.35            $0.60  Tier 1
Tier B............................  [0.15%] 0.25%.......             0.20             0.50  Tier 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in the table above, by achieving an increase in Qualifying
Volume, benefits accrue to the ATP Holder. For example, assume an ATP
Holder executed Electronic Professional volume in August 2019 totaling
9,000 ADV and, in April 2021, the ATP Holder executed Electronic
Professional volume of 100,000 ADV and the TCADV is 37,200,000. To
qualify for the Step-Up Incentive, that ATP Holder would need to
execute Electronic Professional volume that is at least 74,400
contracts (i.e., 0.20% of TCADV) above its August 2019 Electronic
Professional Volume for Tier A, as modified, or at least 93,000
contracts (i.e., 0.25% of TCADV) above its August 2019 Electronic
Professional Volume for Tier B, as modified. In other words, that ATP
Holder would need to attain Electronic Professional volume of 83,400
contracts to qualify for Tier A and 102,000 contracts to qualify for
Tier B, and, in this example, would qualify for Tier A but not for Tier
B. If an ATP Holder did not have August 2019 volume, it would have to
execute the outlined volumes above the 10,000 ADV base level to qualify
for Tiers A and B. Such an ATP Holder would need to attain Electronic
Professional volume of 84,400 contracts to qualify for Tier A and
103,000 contracts to qualify for Tier B, and, in this example, would
likewise qualify for Tier A but not for Tier B.
    ATP Holders that qualify for Tier A, as modified, would continue to
be charged reduced rates of $0.35 and $0.60 on Electronic Professional
executions on Penny and Non-Penny issues, respectively, and would also
receive ACE Tier 1 Customer Credits on Customer executions.
    ATP Holders that qualify for Tier B, as modified, would continue to
be eligible for even further reduced rates of $0.20 and $0.50 on
Electronic Professional executions on Penny and Non-Penny issues,
respectively, and would also receive ACE Tier 1 Customer Credits on
Customer executions. The Exchange also proposes to modify the Fee
Schedule to specify that ATP Holders that qualify for Tier B as
modified (i.e., ATP Holders that increase Qualifying Volume by 0.25% of
TCADV) and also execute posted Professional volume (i.e., that adds
liquidity) of at least 0.10% of TCADV would continue to receive a $0.03
per contract discount off the Tier B rates.
    The Exchange's fees are constrained by intermarket competition, as
ATP Holders may direct their order flow to any of the 16 options
exchanges, including an exchange with a similar incentive program.\11\
Thus, ATP Holders have a choice of where they direct their order flow.
These proposed modifications to the Step-Up Incentive program are
designed to continue to encourage ATP Holders to increase the amount of
Electronic Professional volume directed to and executed on the
Exchange. The Exchange notes that all market participants stand to
benefit from increased Electronic Professional volume, which promotes
market depth, facilitates tighter spreads, and enhances price
discovery, and may lead to a corresponding increase in order flow from
other market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See, e.g., MIAX Options (``MIAX'') Fee Schedule, Section
1.a.iv, Professional Rebate Program, available at: https://www.miaxoptions.com/sites/default/files/fee_schedule-files/MIAX_Options_Fee_Schedule_01_13_21.pdf (setting forth incentive
program that, like the Step-Up Incentive, provides a discounted net
rate on Professional (as defined by the MIAX program) electronic
volume, provided the Member achieves certain Professional volume
increase percentage thresholds in the month relative to the fourth
quarter of 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the Step-Up Incentive, as modified,
would continue to incent ATP Holders to direct volume to the Exchange
even with the exclusion of interest that takes liquidity from posted
Customer interest from the calculations of base volume amounts and
Qualifying Volume, and even though ATP Holders would have to meet
higher volume thresholds to qualify for Tiers A and B. Because both
Tiers A and B, as proposed, will continue to offer discounted rates
coupled with ACE program Tier 1 credits on certain Customer executions,
the Exchange believes the Step-Up Incentive, as modified, should
continue to incent the consistent and concerted redirection of order
flow to the Exchange by ATP Holders in exchange for better economics as
provided by the incentive program (i.e., enhanced discounts and
credits), making it a more attractive venue for trading.
    The Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether any ATP Holders
would be incented to qualify for the Step-Up Incentive, as modified;
however, the Exchange believes that ATP Holders would continue to be
encouraged to direct Electronic Professional volume to the Exchange to
qualify for the Step-Up Incentive.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and (5) of the Act,\13\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change is Reasonable
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market. The
Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over
regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and services
in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005) (S7-10-04) (``Reg NMS
Adopting Release'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based

options, no single exchange has more than 16% of the market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades.\15\
Therefore, currently no exchange possesses significant pricing power in
the execution of multiply-listed equity and ETF options order flow.
More specifically, in February 2021, the Exchange had less than 10%
market share of executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF
options trades.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange,
available here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
    \16\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of
equity-based options and monthly volume of ETF-based options, see
id., the Exchange's market share in multiply-listed equity and ETF
options increased slightly from 8.42% for the month of February 2020
to 8.86% for the month of February 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market share among the
exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants can
shift order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, in response to fee changes. Accordingly, competitive forces
constrain options exchange transaction fees. Stated otherwise, changes
to exchange transaction fees can have a direct effect on the ability of
an exchange to compete for order flow.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed modifications to the Step-
Up Incentive are reasonable because they are designed to continue to
incent ATP Holders to increase the amount of Electronic Professional
order flow directed to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that, even
though the proposed changes to the Step-Up Incentive program would
exclude an additional category of volume from the calculation of base
volume and Qualifying Volume, as well as increase the threshold volume
to qualify for Tiers A and B, ATP Holders will still be incentivized to
direct order flow to the Exchange in exchange for better economics as
provided by the incentive program (i.e., enhanced discounts and
credits). The Exchange also notes that all market participants stand to
benefit from increased Electronic Professional volume, as such increase
promotes market depth, facilitates tighter spreads and enhances price
discovery, and may lead to a corresponding increase in order flow from
other market participants that do not participate in (or qualify for)
the Step-Up Incentive program.
    Finally, to the extent the proposed modifications attract greater
volume and liquidity, the Exchange believes the proposed changes would
improve the Exchange's overall competitiveness and strengthen its
market quality for all market participants, and continue to attract
Electronic Professional volume to the Exchange even though the proposed
changes would raise the qualification thresholds for the Step-Up
Incentive. In the backdrop of the competitive environment in which the
Exchange operates, the proposed changes are a reasonable attempt by the
Exchange to increase the depth of its market and improve its market
share relative to its competitors. The proposed changes are designed to
incent ATP Holders to direct liquidity to the Exchange in Electronic
Professional executions, similar to another exchange program offering
incentives on professional volume,\17\ thereby promoting market depth,
price discovery and improvement and enhancing order execution
opportunities for market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See, e.g., supra note 11 (regarding MIAX Professional
Rebate Program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change is an Equitable Allocation of Credits and Fees
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is an equitable
allocation of its fees and credits. The proposed change is based on the
amount and type of business transacted on the Exchange, and ATP Holders
can opt to avail themselves of the Step-Up Incentive program or not.
Moreover, even though the proposed changes would exclude additional
volume from the calculation of base volume and Qualifying Volume, as
well as increase the threshold volume to qualify for the Step-Up
Incentive, the Exchange believes they are designed to encourage ATP
Holders to aggregate their executions--particularly Electronic
Professional--at the Exchange as a primary execution venue. To the
extent that the proposed changes attract more Electronic Professional
volume to the Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to
make the Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other things,
order execution. Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule changes
would continue to improve market quality for all market participants on
the Exchange and, as a consequence, continue to attract more order flow
to the Exchange thereby improving market-wide quality and price
discovery.
The Proposed Rule Change is not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is not unfairly
discriminatory because the proposed modifications would be available to
all similarly-situated market participants on an equal and non-
discriminatory basis.
    The proposed changes are based on the amount and type of business
transacted on the Exchange and ATP Holders are not obligated to
participate in the Step-Up Incentive program. Rather, the proposed
changes are designed to continue to encourage ATP Holders to utilize
the Exchange as a primary trading venue (if they have not done so
previously) or increase Electronic Professional volume sent to the
Exchange. To the extent that the proposed changes attract more
executions to the Exchange, this increased order flow would continue to
make the Exchange a more competitive venue for, among other things,
order execution. Thus, the Exchange believes the proposed rule changes
would improve market quality for all market participants on the
Exchange and, as a consequence, attract more order flow to the Exchange
thereby improving market-wide quality and price discovery, even though
they exclude an additional category of volume from the calculation of
base volume and Qualifying Volume and increase the threshold volume to
qualify for the Step-Up Incentive. The resulting increased volume and
liquidity would provide more trading opportunities and tighter spreads
to all market participants and thus would promote just and equitable
principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal
is consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed changes would encourage the submission of additional
liquidity to a public exchange, thereby promoting market depth, price
discovery and transparency and enhancing order execution opportunities
for all market participants. As a result, the Exchange believes that
the proposed change furthers the Commission's goal in

adopting Regulation NMS of fostering integrated competition among
orders, which promotes ``more efficient pricing of individual stocks
for all types of orders, large and small.'' \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Reg NMS Adopting Release, supra note 14, at 37499.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intramarket Competition. The proposed changes are designed to
attract additional order flow (particularly Electronic Professional
volume) to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed
modifications to the Step-Up Incentive would continue to incent market
participants to direct additional volume to the Exchange. Greater
liquidity benefits all market participants on the Exchange and
increased Electronic Professional volume would increase opportunities
for execution of other trading interest. The proposed modifications to
the calculation of base volume amounts and Qualifying Volume and to the
qualification bases for Tiers A and B of the Step-Up Incentive would
apply to all ATP Holders that execute Electronic Professional volume,
and, as such, the proposed change would not impose a disparate burden
on competition among market participants on the Exchange.
    Intermarket Competition. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor one
of the 16 competing option exchanges if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange
must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive with other
exchanges and to attract order flow to the Exchange. Based on publicly-
available information, and excluding index-based options, no single
exchange has more than 16% of the market share of executed volume of
multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades.\19\ Therefore, currently
no exchange possesses significant pricing power in the execution of
multiply-listed equity and ETF options order flow. More specifically,
in February 2021, the Exchange had less than 10% market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See supra note 15.
    \20\ Based on a compilation of OCC data for monthly volume of
equity-based options and monthly volume of ETF-based options, see
id., the Exchange's market share in multiply-listed equity and ETF
options increased slightly from 8.42% for the month of February 2020
to 8.86% for the month of February 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it modifies the Exchange's fees in a
manner designed to continue to encourage ATP Holders to direct trading
interest (and, in particular, Electronic Professional volume) to the
Exchange, to provide liquidity and to attract order flow. To the extent
that this purpose is achieved, all the Exchange's market participants
should benefit from the improved market quality and increased
opportunities for price improvement.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change could promote
competition between the Exchange and other execution venues, including
those that currently offer similar pricing incentives, by encouraging
additional orders to be sent to the Exchange for execution.

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

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

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \21\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \22\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \23\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 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-NYSEAMER-2021-20 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-NYSEAMER-2021-20. 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-NYSEAMER-2021-20, and should be
submitted on or before May 5, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-07596 Filed 4-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 96 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 28621]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12078]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0998]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Regulations for In Vivo
Radiopharmaceuticals Used for Diagnosis and Monitoring

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled, ``Regulations for In Vivo
Radiopharmaceuticals Used for Diagnosis and Monitoring'' has been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 08, 2015, the Agency submitted a
proposed collection of information entitled, ``Regulations for In Vivo
Radiopharmaceuticals Used for Diagnosis and Monitoring'' to OMB for
review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB
control number 0910-0409. The approval expires on April 30, 2018. A
copy of the supporting statement for this information collection is
available on the Internet at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: May 13, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-12078 Filed 5-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P