[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 160 (Tuesday, August 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50845-50849]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17963]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89530; File No. SR-MIAX-2020-26]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fee Schedule

August 12, 2020.
    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 July 31, 2020, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC (``MIAX
Options'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the 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. 78a.
    \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 Options Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings, at MIAX'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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to extend the cap
waiver of 1,000 contracts per leg for complex PRIME (``cPRIME'') \3\
Agency Order rebates for all tiers under the Priority Customer Rebate
Program (``PCRP'') \4\ until August 31, 2020. The Exchange also
proposes to amend the list of MIAX Select Symbols \5\ contained in the
PCRP \6\ of the Exchange's Fee Schedule to delete the Select Symbol
``JCP,'' associated with J. C. Penney Company, Inc. (``J. C. Penney''),
from the Select Symbols list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``cPRIME'' is the process by which a Member may
electronically submit a ``cPRIME Order'' (as defined in Rule
518(b)(7)) it represents as agent (a ``cPRIME Agency Order'')
against principal or solicited interest for execution (a ``cPRIME
Auction''), subject to the restrictions set forth in Exchange Rule
515A, Interpretation and Policy .12. See Exchange Rule 515A.
    \4\ Under the PCRP, MIAX credits each Member the per contract
amount resulting from each Priority Customer order transmitted by
that Member which is executed electronically on the Exchange in all
multiply-listed option classes (excluding, in simple or complex as
applicable, QCC and cQCC Orders, mini-options, Priority Customer-to-
Priority Customer Orders, C2C and cC2C Orders, PRIME and cPRIME AOC
Responses, PRIME and cPRIME Contra-side Orders, PRIME and cPRIME
Orders for which both the Agency and Contra-side Order are Priority
Customers, and executions related to contracts that are routed to
one or more exchanges in connection with the Options Order
Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan referenced in Exchange
Rule 1400), provided the Member meets certain percentage thresholds
in a month as described in the PCRP table. See Fee Schedule, Section
1)a)iii. ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity that (i) is
not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not place more
than 390 orders in listed options per day on average during a
calendar month for its own beneficial accounts(s). A ``Priority
Customer Order'' means an order for the account of a Priority
Customer. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \5\ The term ``MIAX Select Symbols'' means options overlying
AAL, AAPL, AIG, AMAT, AMD, AMZN, BA, BABA, BB, BIDU, BP, C, CAT,
CLF, CVX, DAL, EBAY, EEM, FB, FCX, GE, GILD, GLD, GM, GOOGL, GPRO,
HAL, INTC, IWM, JCP, JNJ, JPM, KMI, KO, MO, MRK, NFLX, NOK, ORCL,
PBR, PFE, PG, QCOM, QQQ, RIG, SPY, T, TSLA, USO, VALE, WBA, WFC,
WMB, X, XHB, XLE, XLF, XLP, XOM and XOP.
    \6\ See section 1)a)iii) of the Fee Schedule for a complete
description of the PCRP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    Exchange Rule 518(b)(7) defines a cPRIME Order as a type of complex
order \7\ that is submitted for

participation in a cPRIME Auction and trading of cPRIME Orders is
governed by Rule 515A, Interpretations and Policies .12.\8\ cPRIME
Orders are processed and executed in the Exchange's PRIME mechanism,
the same mechanism that the Exchange uses to process and execute simple
PRIME orders, pursuant to Exchange Rule 515A.\9\ PRIME is a process by
which a Member may electronically submit for execution an order it
represents as agent (an ``Agency Order'') against principal interest
and/or solicited interest. The Member that submits the Agency Order
(``Initiating Member'') agrees to guarantee the execution of the Agency
Order by submitting a contra-side order representing principal interest
or solicited interest (``Contra-Side Order''). When the Exchange
receives a properly designated Agency Order for Auction processing, a
request for response (``RFR'') detailing the option, side, size and
initiating price is broadcasted to MIAX Options participants up to an
optional designated limit price. Members may submit responses to the
RFR, which can be either an Auction or Cancel (``AOC'') order or an AOC
eQuote. A cPRIME Auction is the price-improvement mechanism of the
Exchange's System pursuant to which an Initiating Member electronically
submits a complex Agency Order into a cPRIME Auction. The Initiating
Member, in submitting an Agency Order, must be willing to either (i)
cross the Agency Order at a single price against principal or solicited
interest, or (ii) automatically match against principal or solicited
interest, the price and size of a RFR that is broadcast to MIAX Options
participants up to an optional designated limit price. Such responses
are defined as cPRIME AOC Responses or cPRIME eQuotes. The PRIME
mechanism is used for orders on the Exchange's Simple Order Book.\10\
The cPRIME mechanism is used for Complex Orders \11\ on the Exchange's
Strategy Book,\12\ with the cPRIME mechanism operates in the same
manner for processing and execution of cPRIME Orders that is used for
PRIME Orders on the Simple Order Book.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ A ``complex order'' is any order involving the concurrent
purchase and/or sale of two or more different options in the same
underlying security (the ``legs'' or ``components'' of the complex
order), for the same account, in a ratio that is equal to or greater
than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one
(3.00) and for the purposes of executing a particular investment
strategy. A complex order can also be a ``stock-option'' order,
which is an order to buy or sell a stated number of units of an
underlying security coupled with the purchase or sale of options
contract(s) on the opposite side of the market, subject to certain
contingencies set forth in the proposed rules governing complex
orders. For a complete definition of a ``complex order,'' see
Exchange Rule 518(a)(5). See also Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 78620 (August 18, 2016), 81 FR 58770 (August 25, 2016) (SR-MIAX-
2016-26).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81131 (July 12,
2017), 82 FR 32900 (July 18, 2017)(SR-MIAX-2017-19). (Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change to Amend MIAX Options Rules 515,
Execution of Orders and Quotes; 515A, MIAX Price Improvement
Mechanism (``PRIME'') and PRIME Solicitation Mechanism; and 518,
Complex Orders).
    \9\ Id.
    \10\ The ``Simple Order Book'' is the Exchange's regular
electronic book of orders and quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(15).
    \11\ A ``complex order'' is any order involving the concurrent
purchase and/or sale of two or more different options in the same
underlying security (the ``legs'' or ``components'' of the complex
order), for the same account, in a ratio that is equal to or greater
than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one
(3.00) and for the purposes of executing a particular investment
strategy. Mini-options may only be part of a complex order that
includes other mini-options. Only those complex orders in the
classes designated by the Exchange and communicated to Members via
Regulatory Circular with no more than the applicable number of legs,
as determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis and
communicated to Members via Regulatory Circular, are eligible for
processing. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(5).
    \12\ The ``Strategy Book'' is the Exchange's electronic book of
complex orders and complex quotes. See Exchange Rule 518(a)(17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extension of Waiver of the Contracts Cap for cPRIME Agency Order
Rebates
    First, the Exchange proposes to amend footnote ``*'' in Section
1)a)iii) of the Fee Schedule to extend the waiver of the contracts cap
per leg for cPRIME Agency Order rebates for all tiers under the PCRP
until August 31, 2020. Prior to a rule filing by the Exchange
(described below), the Exchange limited the cPRIME Agency Order Credit
to be payable only to the first 1,000 contracts per leg for each cPRIME
Agency Order in all tiers under the PCRP. On February 28, 2020, the
Exchange filed, and the Commission approved, the Exchange's proposal to
waive the 1,000 contracts cap per leg for cPRIME Agency Order rebates
for all tiers under the PCRP from March 1, 2020 until May 31, 2020.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88349 (March 10,
2020), 85 FR 14995 (March 15, 2020) (SR-MIAX-2020-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 29, 2020, the Exchange filed, and the Commission approved,
the Exchange's proposal to extend the waiver of the 1,000 contracts cap
per leg for cPRIME Agency Order rebates for all tiers under the PCRP
from June 1, 2020 until July 31, 2020.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89035 (June 9,
2020), 85 FR 36249 (June 15, 2020) (SR-MIAX-2020-12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange now proposes to extend the cap waiver of 1,000
contracts per leg for cPRIME Agency Order rebates for all tiers under
the PCRP until August 31, 2020. The purpose of this proposed change is
for business and competitive reasons and to continue to entice market
participants to submit larger-sized cPRIME Agency Orders.
Select Symbols List Update
    Next, the Exchange proposes to amend Section 1)a)iii) of the Fee
Schedule to update the list of MIAX Select Symbols contained in the
PCRP to delete the Select Symbol ``JCP,'' associated with J.C. Penney,
from the Select Symbols list.
    The Exchange initially created the list of MIAX Select Symbols on
March 1, 2014,\15\ and has added and removed option classes from that
list since that time.\16\ Select Symbols are rebated slightly higher in
certain PCRP tiers than non-Select Symbols. The Exchange notes that on
April 30, 2020, the Exchange issued an alert that it would delist J.C.
Penney options from trading on the Exchange, effective May 1, 2020.\17\
Options on J.C. Penney were authorized to be listed for trading on the
Exchange pursuant to Rule 402, but are no longer listed for trading for
business reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71700 (March 12,
2014), 79 FR 15188 (March 18, 2014) (SR-MIAX-2014-13).
    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 88850 (May 11,
2020), 85 FR 29497 (May 15, 2020) (SR-MIAX-2020-09); 87964 (January
14, 2020), 85 FR 3435 (January 21, 2020) (SR-MIAX-2020-01); 87790
(December 18, 2019), 84 FR 71037 (December 26, 2019) (SR-MIAX-2019-
49); 85314 (March 14, 2019), 84 FR 10359 (March 20, 2019) (SR-MIAX-
2019-07; 81998 (November 2, 2017), 82 FR 51897 (November 8, 2017)
(SR-MIAX-2017-45); 81019 (June 26, 2017), 82 FR 29962 (June 30,
2017) (SR-MIAX-2017-29); 79301 (November 14, 2016), 81 FR 81854
(November 18, 2016) (SR-MIAX-2016-42); 74291 (February 18, 2015), 80
FR 9841 (February 24, 2015) (SR-MIAX-2015-09); 74288 (February 18,
2015), 80 FR 9837 (February 24, 2015) (SR-MIAX-2015-08); 73328
(October 9, 2014), 79 FR 62230 (October 16, 2014) (SR-MIAX-2014-50);
72567 (July 8, 2014), 79 FR 40818 (July 14, 2014) (SR-MIAX-2014-34);
72356 (June 10, 2014), 79 FR 34384 (June 16, 2014) (SR-MIAX-2014-
26); 71700 (March 12, 2014), 79 FR 15188 (March 18, 2014) (SR-MIAX-
2014-13).
    \17\ See Listing Alert (April 30, 2020), available at https://www.miaxoptions.com/alerts/2020/04/30/miax-options-exchange-delisting-j-c-penney-company-inc-jcp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to
delete the symbol ``JCP'' from the list of MIAX Select Symbols
contained in the PCRP. This amendment is intended to eliminate any
potential confusion and to make it clear to market participants that
``JCP'' will not be a MIAX Select Symbol contained in the PCRP as
``JCP'' options are no longer listed on the Exchange.
    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and self-regulatory organization (``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.'' \18\ There are currently 16 registered options exchanges
competing for order flow. Based on publicly-available

information, and excluding index-based options, no single exchange had
more than approximately 14% of the market share of executed volume of
multiply-listed equity and exchange-traded fund (``ETF'') options
trades for the month of June 2020.\19\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity
and ETF options order flow. More specifically, for the month of June
2020, the Exchange had a total market share of 5.05% of all equity
options volume.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
    \19\ The OCC publishes options and futures volume in a variety
of formats, including daily and monthly volume by exchange,
available at: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
    \20\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market shares among
the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow (as further described below), or discontinue or
reduce use of certain categories of products, in response to
transaction and non-transaction fee changes. For example, on March 1,
2019, the Exchange filed with the Commission an immediately effective
filing to decrease certain credits assessable to Members pursuant to
the PCRP.\21\ The Exchange experienced a decrease in total market share
between the months of February and March of 2019. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that the March 1, 2019 fee change may have
contributed to the decrease in the Exchange's market share and, as
such, the Exchange believes competitive forces constrain options
exchange transaction and non-transaction fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85301 (March 13,
2019), 84 FR 10166 (March 19, 2019) (SR-MIAX-2019-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \22\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \23\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using
its facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 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
customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to extend the waiver of the cap
of 1,000 contracts per leg for cPRIME Agency Order rebates for all
tiers under the PCRP until August 31, 2020 provides for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues and fees and is not unfairly
discriminatory for the following reasons. 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.'' \24\ There are currently
16 registered options exchanges competing for order flow. Based on
publicly-available information, and excluding index-based options, no
single exchange had more than approximately 14% of the market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades for
the month of June 2020.\25\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity
and ETF options order flow. More specifically, for the month of June
2020, the Exchange had a total market share of 5.05% of all equity
options volume.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
    \25\ See supra note 19.
    \26\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market shares 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 transaction and/or non-
transaction fee changes. For example, on March 1, 2019, the Exchange
filed with the Commission an immediately effective filing to decrease
certain credits assessable to Members pursuant to the PCRP.\27\ The
Exchange experienced a decrease in total market share between the
months of February and March of 2019. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the March 1, 2019 fee change may have contributed to the
decrease in the Exchange's market share and, as such, the Exchange
believes competitive forces constrain options exchange transaction and
non-transaction fees and market participants can shift order flow based
on fee changes instituted by the exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See supra note 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that its proposal to continue to waive the
1,000 contracts cap per leg for cPRIME Agency Order rebates for all
tiers in the PCRP until August 31, 2020 is reasonable, equitably
allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because this change is for
business and competitive reasons and available equally to all market
participants. The Exchange cannot predict with certainty whether any
market participant would submit additional cPRIME Agency Orders in
excess of 1,000 contracts per leg in light of the proposal to continue
to waive the cap of 1,000 contracts per leg for cPRIME Agency Order
rebates for all tiers under the PCRP, but believes that market
participants would continue to be encouraged to submit larger orders to
obtain the additional credits. The Exchange believes that this proposed
change would encourage increased cPRIME Agency Order flow, which will
bring greater volume and liquidity to the Exchange, which benefits all
market participants by providing more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads.
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to delete the symbol
``JCP'' from the list of MIAX Select Symbols contained in the PCRP is
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act because the proposed change
will allow for the continued benefit to investors by providing them an
updated list of MIAX Select Symbols contained in the PCRP on the
Exchange's Fee Schedule.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to amend an option class
that qualifies for the credit for transactions in MIAX Select Symbols
is fair, equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory. The Exchange
believes that the PCRP itself is reasonably designed because it
incentivizes providers of Priority Customer \28\ order flow to send
that Priority Customer order flow to the Exchange in order to receive a
credit in a manner that enables the Exchange to improve its overall
competitiveness and strengthen its market quality for all market
participants. The PCRP, which provides increased incentives in certain
tiers in high volume select symbols, is also reasonably designed to
increase the competitiveness of the Exchange with other options
exchanges that also offer

increased incentives to higher volume symbols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The term ``Priority Customer'' means a person or entity
that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii) does not
place more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s). See
Exchange Rule 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that its proposal to delete the symbol
``JCP'' from the list of MIAX Select Symbols contained in the PCRP is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act because it will apply
equally to all Priority Customer orders in MIAX Select Symbols in the
Program. All similarly situated Priority Customer orders in MIAX Select
Symbols are subject to the same rebate schedule, and access to the
Exchange is offered on terms that are not unfairly discriminatory.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\29\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule changes would not impose any burden on
competition that are not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. Instead, as discussed above, the Exchange believes
that the proposed change would continue to 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not believe that other market participants at the
Exchange would be placed at a relative disadvantage by the proposed
change to continue to waive the cap of 1,000 contracts per leg for
cPRIME Agency Order rebates for all tiers under the PCRP until August
31, 2020. The proposed change is designed to attract additional order
flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that this proposal will
continue to encourage Members to submit Priority Customer cPRIME Agency
Orders, which will increase liquidity and benefit all market
participants by providing more trading opportunities and tighter
spreads. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed change
will not impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it will continue to
encourage order flow, which provides greater volume and liquidity,
benefiting all market participants by providing more trading
opportunities and tighter spreads.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee
levels at a particular venue to be excessive. 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 approximately 14% of the market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options trades for
the month of June 2020.\30\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity
and ETF options order flow. More specifically, for the month of June
2020, the Exchange had a total market share of 5.05% of all equity
options volume.\31\ In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually adjust its transaction and non-transaction fees to remain
competitive with other exchanges and to attract order flow. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change reflects this
competitive environment because it continues to encourage market
participants to provide and send order flow to the Exchange. To the
extent this is achieved, all the Exchange's market participants should
benefit from the improved market quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See supra note 19.
    \31\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, the Exchange does not believe that its proposal to delete
the symbol ``JCP'' from the list of MIAX Select Symbols contained in
the PCRP will result in any burden on intra-market or inter-market
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. This proposed change is a not a competitive
proposal but rather is designed to update the list of MIAX Select
Symbols contained in the PCRP in order to avoid potential confusion on
the part of market participants and other competing options exchanges.

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,\32\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \33\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \33\ 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-MIAX-2020-26 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-MIAX-2020-26. 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-MIAX-2020-26 and should be
submitted on or before September 8, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-17963 Filed 8-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


New webpage for posting Guidance:

Interim Guidance for Products Including or Adding Efficacy Claims for Use on Porous Materials in Non-Residential Settings

Background
EPA received requests to develop test methods for and guidance on EPA's review of applications for the registration of products intended to control public health pathogens on the surface of porous materials ("porous surfaces" or "porous materials") in clinical and institutional (non-residential) settings. In this document, EPA is providing interim guidance on test methods for efficacy claims for products (including fabrics, textiles, and upholstered items) intended for use on porous materials in clinical and institutional (non-residential) settings and on how to prepare an application for registration for such products.

Introduction
Currently, most EPA-registered liquid-based antimicrobial products, including those on EPA's list of disinfectants effective against SARS-CoV-2 (List N) are registered for use on hard, non-porous surfaces (e.g., stainless steel, porcelain, glass). This interim guidance document describes how porous surface bactericidal claims may be added to products that demonstrate efficacy against base vegetative bacteria on hard non-porous surfaces. This document also describes how porous surface virucidal claims may be added to products that demonstrate efficacy against (1) base vegetative bacteria, (2) all viruses for which claims are desired on hard non-porous surfaces, and (3) base vegetative bacteria on porous surfaces. Claims for viruses should only be added as described in this interim guidance document if the product has also met the performance standards for base bacteria on both hard, non-porous and porous surfaces.

In addition to this interim guidance, EPA is providing recommended standardized quantitative efficacy test methods for both bacteria and viruses for registrants wishing to add claims for certain porous surfaces. This interim guidance and associated test methods address only products with both porous disinfectant claims and hard, non-porous surface disinfectant claims (i.e., not products that have only porous claims).

Based on the porous materials selected in the recommended efficacy test methods, this guidance is intended to be representative of clinical and/or institutional environments (non-residential) and to address efficacy of products against public health pathogens when used on porous materials in these settings, such as non-clothing fabrics and textiles/upholstery that may be laundered on an infrequent (non-routine) basis where spot treatment is the primary means of cleaning and/or disinfection. Examples of clinical and institutional (non-residential) sites include waiting rooms and offices in clinical settings, hospitals and long-term care facilities, schools, hotels, movie theaters, office buildings, and retail establishments, with a focus on high traffic areas and frequently used surfaces. This guidance is not intended to apply to claims on products for use on porous materials such as clothing, frequently laundered porous items, untreated wood, concrete and other hard porous materials, carpet or rugs, or the backing material/stuffing under the porous surface (e.g., beyond what can be visibly observed). Guidance for claims for carpet, rugs, frequently laundered textiles, mattresses, pillows, and upholstered furniture is found in 810.2400 Disinfectants and Sanitizers for Use on Fabrics and Textiles. Note the current guidance is not intended to apply to limited spectrum claims and does not address claims against mycobacterium, fungi, yeasts, or bacterial endospores. Further, the guidance is not intended to address claims for residual efficacy on porous materials. Note that depending on their intended use, some antimicrobial products may be subject to both EPA and FDA jurisdiction. See Table 1 for a summary of relevant guidance to support different claim and material types.

Table 1: Summary of Testing to Support Efficacy Claims for Use on Porous Materials
                                  Porous Site
                                     Claim
                                   Materials
                                   Guidance
Clinical and institutional (non-residential) settings
Disinfectant
Non-clothing fabrics and textiles/upholstery that may be laundered on an infrequent (non-routine) basis where spot treatment is the primary means of cleaning and/or disinfection
Interim Guidance: Review of Products Including or Adding Efficacy Claims for Use on Porous Materials In Non-Residential Settings
Laundry
Disinfectant
Clothing, outerwear, linens
810.2400 Disinfectants and Sanitizers for Use on Fabrics and Textiles (insert link)
Mattress, pillow, and upholstered furniture
Sterilant, disinfectant, sanitizer
(For gases and vapors)
Upholstered furniture, pillows, mattresses, and similar objects
810.2400 Disinfectants and Sanitizers for Use on Fabrics and Textiles
Carpet
Sanitizer
Carpets, rugs
810.2400 Disinfectants and Sanitizers for Use on Fabrics and Textiles
Hard porous materials

Disinfectant
Untreated wood, concrete, unglazed tile, rubber

Guidance not currently available*; consult with EPA prior to submitting methods or studies.
Residential sites
Disinfectant
Upholstered furniture including backing material/stuffing under the porous surface, carpets, rugs, draperies
Guidance not currently available*; consult with EPA prior to submitting methods or studies.
*EPA anticipates addressing these claims in future guidance.

A full description of the efficacy testing expected to support claims against both bacteria and viruses is included below. Note that EPA may consider other methods or studies to support porous surface efficacy claims provided they are scientifically sound with data to inform method variability and reproducibility. Applicants are highly encouraged to consult with EPA prior to submitting other methods or studies.
Efficacy Testing to Support Disinfectant Claims on Products for Use on the Surfaces of Certain Porous Materials in Clinical and Institutional (Non-Residential) Settings

 Liquid formulations or spray products should satisfy all efficacy requirements for standard disinfectant claims (hard, non-porous surface) and should have undergone testing to support standard disinfectant claims to be eligible for porous surface disinfectant claims as described in this guidance.
 Eligible product types include those applied as liquids, sprays (including trigger sprays and aerosols), and foams. For efficacy testing purposes, all products will be applied to the test material as a liquid. The wet contact time should be readily observable on all test materials for the duration of the contact time.
 Conduct a wetness test consistent with that outlined in Methods and Guidance for Testing the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Products Against Spores of Clostridioides difficile on Hard Non-Porous Surfaces (September 2022) and provide evidence (such as a photo) to demonstrate that the surface remains wet for the duration of the contact time.
 For products using methods of application beyond those listed here including towelettes, fogging, misting, and electrostatic spray, please consult with the Agency.
 Bactericidal claims for use on the surface of porous materials (see Table 2)
 Utilize EPA's proposed method (see Antimicrobial Testing Methods & Procedures Developed by EPA's Microbiology Laboratory) for the Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Bacteria) to support bactericidal claims for products intended for use on the surface of porous materials ("porous surfaces" or "porous materials").
 Base Bacteria -- Consistent with EPA Guideline 810.2200 for a hospital disinfectant claim, Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC No. 6538) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC No. 15442) should be used to support a claim as a disinfectant for use on the surfaces of porous materials.
 For Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC No. 6538) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC No. 15442), the target control range is a mean 4.0-5.5 log CFU/carrier. Each control carrier should have a minimum 4.0 log CFU/carrier of the test microbe.
 Conduct the bacterial efficacy testing with the three representative porous materials specified in the method: vinyl seating fabric (VF-01, representative of seating fabrics found in clinical settings and laboratories), privacy curtain fabric (PCF-03), and non-PVC fabric (NVF-01, mattress cover fabrics and seating materials).  To support a bactericidal efficacy claim for porous surfaces, the product should achieve the performance standard on all three material types with each base bacterium.
 Additional porous surface materials (carriers) may be chosen by the applicant. The additional materials chosen should be able to be cut into one centimeter diameter discs (two millimeter maximum thickness), withstand physical screening, cleaning and sterilization, drying under desiccation, as well as the vortex steps outlined in the method. The inoculated material should provide the necessary recovery level of each test organism to measure acceptable performance for the claim. Applicants are encouraged to consult with EPA prior to initiating testing with additional porous surfaces.
 For all porous surfaces tested, the applicant should document compatibility of the product with the porous material per the proposed label prior to use. Data and observations pertaining to physical degradation, pitting, fraying, cracking, delamination, bleaching of dyes, etc., may indicate incompatibility of the product with the porous surface. These data and observations should be submitted in the final report to the Agency.
 For each lot (or batch) of product, evaluate the following for each type of porous carrier: five carriers against the product and three untreated control carriers. Test each lot on separate days; however, multiple test microbes and/or surface types may be tested on the same day.
 Use the three-part soil load identified in the method.
 Conduct testing on three product lots at the lower certified limit (LCL) for each bacterium. In accordance with the OCSPP 810.2000 Test Guideline, certificates of analysis should be submitted to substantiate the tested concentration.
 To support claims for additional bacteria, testing should be conducted according to the Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Bacteria, but with a reduced number of product lots (two) as specified in the OCSPP 810.2000 Test Guideline. The same control carrier count and performance standard levels identified in Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Bacteria apply to additional microbes.
 Each lot of the product should achieve a minimum mean 4.0-log reduction in <= 10 minutes +- 5 seconds for qualifying bacteria when compared to the controls to support porous surface disinfectant claims for the three representative porous surfaces and any additional fabrics/materials for which claims are made. Each of the five treated carriers for each material type should have a minimum 4.0-log reduction.
 The contact time for disinfectants for use on porous surfaces is consistent with the contact time for disinfectants for use on hard, non-porous surfaces, as described in OCSPP 810.2200 Test Guideline.

Table 2: Summary of Testing for Adding Bactericidal Efficacy Claims to Products for Use on Porous Materials Including Fabrics, Textiles, and Upholstered Items for Clinical and Institutional (Non-Residential) Settings
                                     Claim
                                  Test Method
                                Test Organisms
                                 Carrier Types
                                  No. of Lots
Base Bacteria
Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC No. 6538) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC No. 15442)
VF-01, PCF-03, and NVF-01
3 lots per organism at the LCL for each carrier type
Additional Vegetative Bacteria
Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Bacteria
All vegetative bacteria claimed on the label
VF-01, PCF-03, and NVF-01

2 lots per organism at the LCL for each carrier type

 This guidance addresses only the addition of porous surface claims for viruses to products that have also met the performance standard for bacteria on porous surfaces (see Table 3).
 Utilize EPA's proposed method (see Antimicrobial Testing Methods & Procedures Developed by EPA's Microbiology Laboratory for the Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Viruses ) to support virucidal claims on products intended for use on the surface of porous materials.
 All viruses for which claims are desired should be tested.
 Two lots of product at the LCL should be tested for the hardest to kill virus. For additional information on selecting the most difficult to kill virus, see EPA's Emerging Viral Pathogens Guidance. Test each lot on separate test days; however, multiple viruses and/or surface types may be tested on the same day.
 Two lots of product at the nominal concentration should be tested for additional viruses. Test each lot on separate test days; however, multiple viruses and/or surface types may be tested on the same day.
 Utilize the same porous surfaces used to conduct the bacterial testing.
 Untreated control carriers should yield 4.0-5.5 log viable virus particles/carrier.  Each control carrier should exhibit a minimum 4.0 logs of viable virus particles.
 Use the three-part soil load identified in the method.
 Each lot of the product should achieve a minimum mean 3.0-log reduction in <= 10 minutes +- 5 seconds for qualifying viruses when compared to the controls, consistent with the OCSPP 810.2200 Product Performance Test Guideline, to support porous surface disinfectant claims for the three representative porous surfaces and any additional fabrics/materials for which claims are made. Each of the five treated carriers for each material type should have a minimum 3.0-log reduction.
 The contact time for disinfectants for use on porous surfaces is consistent with the contact time for disinfectants for use on hard, non-porous surfaces, as described in OCSPP 810.2200 Test Guideline.

Table 3: Summary of Testing for Adding Virucidal Efficacy Claims to Products for Use on Porous Materials Including Fabrics, Textiles, and Upholstered Items for Clinical and Institutional (Non-Residential) Settings
                                     Claim
                                  Test Method
                                Test Organisms
                                 Carrier Types
                                  No. of Lots
Base Bacteria
Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC No. 6538) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC No. 15442)
VF-01, PCF-03, and NVF-01
3 lots per organism at the LCL for each carrier type
Virucidal
Interim Quantitative Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antimicrobial Test Substances on Porous Surfaces Against Viruses
Hardest to kill virus
VF-01, PCF-03, and NVF-01
2 lots at the LCL for each carrier type

All viruses claimed on the label
VF-01, PCF-03, and NVF-01
2 lots at the nominal concentration for each carrier type

 Disinfectant Claims for Products for Use on Surfaces of Certain Porous Materials: Labeling and Additional Information
 Products are eligible for inclusion on List N if they meet the criteria in the Emerging Viral Pathogens guidance or are supported by appropriate testing for a qualifying virus (e.g., SARS-CoV-2 or human coronavirus strain 229E).
 A claim for additional microorganisms not under the scope of this guidance (e.g., mycobacterium, fungi, yeasts, or bacterial endospores) may be proposed by the registrant upon consultation with EPA prior to submission and will require a protocol submission and/or Agency protocol review separate from the current method for S. aureus and P. aeruginosa, the subject of this guidance.
 Sample directions for use:
 Apply in a limited area (spot treatment), monitor treated area for wetness for duration of the contact time, and allow to dry.
 Apply to surfaces only. Do not use on surfaces that routinely contact skin (i.e., clothing, sheets, towels).
 Only for use on non-launderable surfaces or those that may be laundered on an infrequent (non-routine) basis.
 Sample marketing claims
 An effective disinfectant for the surface of porous materials*
                  *Non-clothing fabrics, textiles, and upholstery that may be laundered on an infrequent (non-routine) basis where spot treatment is the primary means of cleaning and/or disinfection such as waiting room chairs, privacy curtains, safety belts, laboratory chairs, vehicle interiors (e.g., public transit, medical transportation), seat coverings, mattress covers not intended to be laundered, and mattress covers fixed to mattresses.
 How to Prepare an Application for Registration
 Requests to Amend Currently Registered Products That Require the Review of Data Under PRIA:
 Submission of new efficacy data to add porous surface disinfectant claims to an already EPA-registered product can be submitted as a PRIA A570 action.
 If the currently registered product labeling is approved only for sanitizer claims or the labeling is approved with no public health claims, the following data should be submitted for EPA to consider approving porous surface disinfectant and virucidal claims under this guidance:
 Efficacy data to support a base (hard, non-porous surface) disinfection claim (Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa), see OCSPP 810.2200 for details, and hard, non-porous surface virus data for all viruses for which porous surface claims for viruses are made.
 Porous surface disinfection efficacy data (Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) and porous surface virucidal efficacy data for the hardest to kill virus as described above.
 If the currently registered product labeling is approved for broad spectrum or hospital hard, non-porous surface disinfection and virucidal claims, the following data should be submitted for EPA to consider approving porous surface disinfectant and virucidal claims under this guidance:
 Porous surface disinfection efficacy data (Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) and porous surface virucidal efficacy data for the hardest to kill virus as described above.
 If the currently registered product labeling is approved for broad spectrum or hospital hard, non-porous surface disinfection claims with no virucidal claims, the following data should be submitted for EPA to consider approving porous surface disinfectant and virucidal claims under this guidance:
 Hard, non-porous surface virus data for all viruses for which porous surface claims for viruses are being requested.
 Porous surface disinfection (Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) efficacy data and porous surface virucidal efficacy data for the hardest to kill virus as described above.
 To ensure the efficient processing of your PRIA submission, please include the following in a cover letter to EPA:
 A subject line that clearly indicates "Existing Product Submission of Efficacy Data for Porous Disinfectant";
 A list of the submitted efficacy data;
 The identification of all the organism(s) and respective study ID number(s) (MRID/s) for which review is being requested.
 The following should also be included with your PRIA submission:
 An up-to-date Certification with Respect to Data Citation Form (Form 8570-34) and Data Matrix (Form 8570-35);
 CSF(s) (Form 8570-4);
 An 8570-1 application form;
 A revised master label, both a highlighted version and a clean version, with the updated directions for use for porous surface disinfection, contact time, and emergent pathogen claims if applicable; and
 If a request to add an emerging viral pathogen claim is being made, please refer to the instructions for adding these claims
 A PRIA fee payment, in the amount of $4,023, or small business fee waiver request with the appropriate fee for a PRIA A570 action
 Submit your application via the CDX portal. Once you submit or if you have already submitted your application, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with your CDX tracking number (CDX_XXXX_XXXXXXX).
 For questions about what is needed as part of your submission, please contact the Product Manager for your product.
 Requests for A New Product That Requires the Review of Data Under PRIA
 New Product Formulated with A Registered Source of Active Ingredient(s)
 For an application for registration of a new pesticide product for porous surface disinfection intended to be formulated from a registered technical or manufacturing use product, follow the instructions in EPA's previously announced review of certain PRIA submissions for products intended for use against the SARS-CoV-2, the novel human coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Specifically, follow the directions for "Submission of an application for a new pesticide product that requires EPA to review newly submitted efficacy data to support virucidal claims where the product is formulated with a registered source of active ingredient(s)" and include the additional information specified above for porous surface disinfectants. As specified in the PRIA guidance, this is a PRIA A540 action, and the submission should include a PRIA fee payment in the amount of $5,363, or small business fee waiver request with appropriate fee for a PRIA A540 action.
 Submit your application via the CDX portal. Once you submit or if you have already submitted your application, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with your CDX tracking number (CDX_XXXX_XXXXXXX).
 New Product Formulated with An Unregistered Source of Active Ingredient(s)
 For an application for registration of a new pesticide product for porous surface disinfection intended to be formulated from an unregistered technical or manufacturing use product, follow the instructions in EPA's previously announced review of certain PRIA submissions for products intended for use against the SARS-CoV-2, the novel human coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Specifically, follow the directions for "Submission of an application for a new pesticide product that requires EPA to review newly submitted efficacy data to support virucidal claims where the product is formulated with an unregistered source of active ingredient(s)" and include the additional information specified above for porous surface disinfectants. As specified in the PRIA guidance, this may be either a PRIA A540 action or a PRIA A572 action. The submission should include a PRIA fee payment in the amount of $5,363, or small business fee waiver request with appropriate fee for a PRIA A540 action or $13,888 for an A572 action, or small business fee waiver request with the appropriate fee for a PRIA A572 action.
 Submit your application via the CDX portal. Once you submit or if you have already submitted your application, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>your CDX tracking number (CDX_XXXX_XXXXXXX).


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20595-20597]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07139]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-97230; File No. SR-ICEEU-2023-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1, Relating to Amendments of the ICE Clear
Europe Delivery Procedures

March 31, 2023.
    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 20, 2023, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or
the ``Clearing House'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule changes described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been primarily prepared by
ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the proposed rule change
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii)
thereunder,\4\ such that the proposed rule change was immediately
effective upon filing with the Commission. On March 27, 2023, ICE Clear
Europe filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1 (hereafter the
``proposed rule change''),\5\ from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
    \5\ Amendment No. 1 amended and restated in its entirety the
Form 19b-4 and Exhibit 1A in order to correct the narrative
description of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or the ``Clearing
House'') proposes to amend its Delivery Procedures (``Delivery
Procedures'' or ``Procedures'') to add a new Part N2 thereto (``Part
N2''), which will apply to certain ICE Futures Europe Deliverable
Carbon Credit Contracts (together the ``Contracts''), for which
delivery will be made through a registry account of the Clearing
House.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the Delivery Procedures or, if not defined
therein, the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe 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. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

(a) Purpose
    ICE Clear Europe is proposing to add a new Part N2 to the Delivery
Procedures. Part N2 would apply to the Contracts, which are to be
traded on ICE Futures Europe and cleared at ICE Clear Europe, and would
address settlement that will occur through a Registry Account of the
Clearing House. The proposed Delivery Procedures are intended to become
operative on March 28, 2023, subject to regulatory approval. ICE Clear
Europe will announce by Circular the specific Contracts to which Part
N2 of the Delivery Procedures will apply. ICE Clear Europe currently
expects that Part N2 will apply to all ICE Futures Europe physically
deliverable carbon credit contracts.
    Pursuant to Part N2, delivery under the Contracts, in the case of
the Seller, would be effected upon the transfer of the relevant Carbon
Credits from the Registry Account of the Seller into the Registry
Account of the Clearing House and acceptance of the Carbon Credits by
the Clearing House. In the case of the Buyer, delivery would be
effected upon transfer of the relevant Carbon Credits from the relevant
Registry Account of the Clearing House to the relevant Registry Account
of the Buyer, and there would not be a prerequisite for the Buyer to
accept the Carbon Credits. Part N2 would set out the Clearing House's
ability not to accept a transfer from the Seller in the event the
transferred carbon credits are not in accordance with the contract
specifications. Delivery would take place during the Delivery Period
for the relevant Contracts in accordance with the contract
specifications, and neither delivery by Seller nor receipt by Buyer
would require performance by the other to occur simultaneously.
Consistent with the foregoing, the amendments would also state that
both the Buyer and Seller would deal directly with the Clearing House
in the settlement.
    The amendments would set out relevant definitions related to
delivery under the contract, including as to the underlying deliverable
Carbon Credits. The amendments provide that the Carbon Credits must
conform to the specification described in the Contract and the
specifications of the Registry to and from which delivery may be made
under the relevant Contract. In cases where the Seller effected the
transfer of carbon credits that are not in accordance with the relevant
Contract specifications, the Clearing House would reserve the right to
reject the transfer and return the respective carbon credits. In such
scenario the Seller would remain under an obligation to deliver the
Carbon Credits of the specified quantity along with the Contract within
the appropriate timeline. The amendments would further specify certain
details of the delivery process for the Contracts including quantity,
settlement price, and timing of cessation of trading.
    The amendments would state that the Contracts would be based on
Open Contract Positions after expiration of the relevant Contract Set
and the delivery process would occur over a three consecutive Business
Day period. In addition, the amendments would include delivery
timetables with detailed timeframes and descriptions of the processes
for delivery under Contracts. Such timetables would set out, among
other processes, the time for cessation of trading, submission of
delivery intentions, confirmation reports, confirmations of delivery
position/expiry, payment by the Buyer, payment and return of delivery
margin, Seller's delivery to the Clearing House, payment to Seller, and
Clearing House delivery to the Buyer.
    The amendments would also address the responsibilities of the
Clearing House and relevant parties for delivery under Contracts, as
well as certain limitations of liability for the Clearing House.
Specifically, the Clearing House would not be responsible for the
performance or non-performance of, or any delay or error in performance
by any Registry or Registry Operator; the compliance or lack of
compliance of any Seller or Buyer or their respective

Transferors or Transferees with any rules of the relevant Registry or
any laws applicable to it; any errors in the Registry Account details
entered into the relevant Registry systems or provided to the Clearing
House by a Seller, Transferor, Buyer or Transferee in respect of a
delivery; closure of any Registry Accounts; or the compliance with the
contractual obligations owed to the Registry in respect of any Clearing
House Registry Accounts, among other matters. Additionally, neither the
Buyer or Seller would have any claim against the Clearing House for any
loss, cost, damage or expense incurred or suffered as a result of the
condition or operation of any Registry Operator or the performance or
non-performance of any Registry Operator. The amendments would state
that the section on liability would be without prejudice to the
generality of and subject to the provisions of the Rules relating to
liability and would be in addition to the general requirements of the
Delivery Procedures. Furthermore, the Clearing House would not make any
representation regarding the authenticity, validity or accuracy of any
delivery tender notice, description of a Registry, market tracking
system or any other Registry instructions, confirmations of transfer or
any other notice, document, file, record or instrument used or
delivered pursuant to the Contract Terms or pursuant to the procedures
of any Registry.
    The amendments would provide details related to delivery contract
security, which is the delivery margin to be provided by Buyer and
Seller, and which would take into account the Finance Procedures. The
Clearing House would retain the Seller's security until the full
contract value is released to the Seller following the delivery
timetables.
    The amendments would outline the use of the relevant Registry.
Clearing Members would have to ensure their Transferors/Transferees
have established the appropriate Registry Accounts at the relevant
Registry for the Contracts in question and provide necessary
instructions or confirmations to the Registry. Furthermore, Clearing
Members making or taking delivery of the Contracts for their own
account would be required to have established Registry Accounts in the
relevant Registry for the Contract in question. In addition, it would
be the responsibility of the Clearing Members to comply, and ensure
their Transferors/Transferees also comply, with the rules, regulations
and laws applicable to the Registry. The Clearing Members would also
have to provide, and ensure their respective Transferors/Transferees
also provide, correct Registry account details at all times.
    The amendments would also provide for the use of an Alternative
Delivery Procedure (``ADP'') in the event of a failure to transfer
carbon credits in the manner and on the terms specified in the
Contract. In such case, a Clearing Member may request agreement of the
Clearing House to enter into an ADP to provide for delivery outside the
terms of the Contract. In such case, settlement of the Contract would
be dealt with in the manner specified in the ADP, and the affected
parties and the Clearing House would be released from their rights and
obligations in respect of the existing Contract. If the existing
Contract would be liquidated under the ADP Agreement, it would be on
the basis of the Exchange Delivery Settlement Price. A new Contract or
Contracts would then be formed for purposes of the Rules, and delivery
under an ADP Agreement would be subject to the specified requirements
of the Delivery Procedures, the same Contract Terms as the Contracts
replaced by the ADP Agreement (subject to the terms agreed in the ADP),
the directions by the Clearing House that it may issue under its
discretion, and the terms of the ADP Agreement. Any Clearing Member
that enters into an ADP agreement would be deemed to have agreed to
indemnify the Clearing House in respect of all and any of the Clearing
House's costs, losses, charges and expenses incurred by the Clearing
House in connection with the ADP. If a Clearing Member and the Clearing
House are unable to enter into an ADP Agreement or effect delivery
under an ADP within a reasonable time period after the failed delivery,
the Clearing House may refer the matter to ICE Futures Europe and it
will consider in its discretion what other reasonable next steps it
should take, if any, under applicable exchange rules.
(b) Statutory Basis
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed amendments to the
Delivery Procedures are consistent with the requirements of Section 17A
of the Act \7\ and the regulations thereunder applicable to it. In
particular, Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \8\ requires, among other
things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions, the safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody
or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and
the protection of investors and the public interest. The proposed
changes to the Delivery Procedures are designed to establish delivery
procedures relating to ICE Futures Europe Deliverable Carbon Credit
Contracts under which delivery will be made through a Registry Account
of the Clearing House. The amendments would set out the role,
responsibilities and liabilities of the Clearing House, Clearing
Members and designated transferors and transferees in the delivery
process, in line with Delivery Procedures for other types of carbon
credit futures contracts. Contracts providing for delivery under Part
N2 will be cleared by the Clearing House in the substantially same
manner as other types of deliverable carbon credit contracts that have
been settled bilaterally rather than through a Clearing House Registry
Account, and will be supported by ICE Clear Europe's existing F&O
financial resources, risk management, systems and operational
arrangements. Accordingly, ICE Clear Europe believes that its financial
resources, risk management, systems and operational arrangements are
sufficient to support clearing of such contracts and to manage the
risks associated with such contracts. As a result, in ICE Clear
Europe's view, the amendments would be consistent with the prompt and
accurate clearance and settlement of the contracts, and the protection
of investors and the public interest consistent with the requirements
of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\9\ (In ICE Clear Europe's view, the
amendments would not affect the safeguarding of funds or securities in
the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is
responsible, within the meaning of Section 17A(b)(3)(F).\10\)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(10) \11\ provides that ``[e]ach
covered clearing agency shall establish, implement, maintain and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to, as
applicable [. . .] establish and maintain transparent written standards
that state its obligations with respect to the delivery of physical
instruments, and establish and maintain operational practices that
identify, monitor and manage the risks associated with such physical
deliveries.'' As discussed above, the amendments would establish a new
set of procedures applicable to the delivery and settlement of ICE
Futures Europe Deliverable Carbon Credit Contracts that are to be
settled by

delivery through the Clearing House's Registry Account. The procedures
would address, among other matters, delivery specifications for such
contracts, the obligations and roles of Clearing Members and the
Clearing House, certain limitations of liability for the Clearing
House, and certain other documentation and timing matters. Clearance of
the Contracts would otherwise be supported by ICE Clear Europe's
existing financial resources, risk management, systems and operational
arrangements. The amendments thus appropriately clarify the role and
responsibilities of the Clearing House and Clearing Members with
respect to physical delivery. As a result, ICE Clear Europe believes
the amendments are consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(10).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(10).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
amendments to the Delivery Procedures are intended to establish a new
set of procedures applicable to the delivery and settlement of ICE
Futures Europe Deliverable Carbon Credit Contracts under which delivery
will be made through a Registry Account of the Clearing House. In ICE
Clear Europe's view, the amendments will thus enhance the settlement
process, and would not otherwise materially affect the terms of the
contract. ICE Clear Europe does not believe the amendments would
adversely affect competition among Clearing Members, materially affect
the cost of clearing, adversely affect access to clearing for Clearing
Members or their customers, or otherwise adversely affect competition
in clearing services. Accordingly, ICE Clear Europe does not believe
that the amendments would impose any impact or burden on competition
that is not appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed amendment have not been
solicited or received by ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe will notify
the Commission of any comments 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 has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \13\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \14\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2023-007 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-ICEEU-2023-007. 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 (https://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 such filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe
and on ICE Clear Europe's website at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/regulation.
    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-ICEEU-2023-007 and should be
submitted on or before April 27, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-07139 Filed 4-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


DATE & TIME: 	December 11, 2006, 11:00 a.m.

SUBJECT:   	Ex-Parte Communications on Halogenated Solvent Cleaning rule

FROM:		H. Lynn Dail

TO:		Docket EPA-HA-OAR-2002-0009

Meeting with OAQPS, HSIA and Representatives from the Narrow Tubing
Industry

December 11, 2006

11:00 a.m. til 2:00 p.m.

Washington, DC

Attendees in person:

Steve Risotto, HSIA

Jon McChesney, Parts Cleaning Technologies

David R. Crandell, Parts Cleaning Technologies

Jeff Farina, Accellent Endoscopy

Wendy Cooper, Accellent Endoscopy

Carol McCabe, Manko, Gold, Katcher & Fox

John Coates, Hardy and Harman

Gary Johnson, Tube Methods

Matt Courtney, Salem Tube Inc.

Charles Downs, Greenville Tubes

John Stedge, Superior Tube

Mark Hammond, Drinker Biddle & Reath (representing Superior Tube)

Dwayne Davis, Plymouth Tube

Steven Lemon, Jones Lemon Graham & Norman (representing Plymouth Tube)

Lynn Dail, OAQPS

Robin Dunkins, OAQPS

Dennis Pagano, OAQPS

Larry Sorrels, OAQPS

Attendees via conference call:

Winifred Okoye, EPA/OGC

Ann Johnson, EPA/OPEI

Tim Benner, EPA/ORD

Keith Holman, SBA

Joe Johnson, SBA

	The narrow tubing industry and their legal representation came to the
Environmental Protection Agency’s Research Triangle Park Campus to
discuss their comments on the August 17, 2006 proposal of Halogenated
solvents cleaning MACT amendments.

	The participants presented their MS Power Point display that will be
embedded in this document and installed in the docket.  Their primary
concerns centered around the proposed emission limits and these
industry’s ability to comply with the limits, the fact that EPA
underestimated the costs associated with reducing emissions, the fact
that there are many technical issues and infeasibilities in methods
available to reduce emissions and the time limitations of the proposal
to attempt to comply with the standards.

	The main message from the narrow tube industry is that the proposed
regulation may generally be suitable to control emissions from a large
segment of affected facilities, yet because of this industry’s
technical specifications, size and specialized processes, they are quite
divergent from the normal degreasing operation and EPA should consider
them as special cases apart from the proposed MACT amendments.  The
narrow tubing industry provided information of the technical
infeasibility of applying most available emission control technologies
from solvent switching, retrofitting and vacuum to vacuum technology.
Most methods are infeasible to adapt to the performance, size and
operational requirements of the narrow tube industry.

		EPA provided the recently signed and approved Notice of Data
Availability to the participants that EPA intends to issue public and
would allow these industries to provide specific data and information
that may compel EPA to consider differing standards for these
industries.  The industry is going to provide EPA with additional data
and information on the uniqueness of this industry and what the industry
is capable of doing in regards to reducing total emissions.


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Hearth & Home article by Dr. James Houck regarding the proposed NSPS for Residential Wood Heaters.

This document can be viewed at the USEPA Docket Center Public Reading Room.  Address: 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 12 (Thursday, January 21, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6279-6281]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00835]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1193; Airspace Docket No. 20-AAL-28]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Hughes, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Hughes Airport, Hughes, AK,
to accommodate new area navigation (RNAV) procedures. This action would
ensure the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR)
operations within the National Airspace System.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 8, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
1-800-647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2020-1193; Airspace Docket No. 20-AAL-28, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Roberts, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S. 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would establish Class E airspace to support new RNAV procedures
at Hughes Airport, Hughes AK.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Persons wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2020-1193;
Airspace Docket No. 20-AAL-28''. The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 2200 S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA
98198.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective
September 15, 2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Hughes Airport, Hughes, AK.
    The Class E airspace would be established within a 3.8-mile radius
of the airport and within an area 2 miles each side of the 194[deg]
bearing extending from the airport 6.4 miles south. This area would
protect aircraft on approach to runway 36 as they descend through 1,500
feet above ground level (AGL). In addition, an extension in the shape
of a dogleg would be established 1.8 miles each side of the 14[deg]
bearing extending from the 3.8-mile radius to 6 miles north of the
airport and then 1.8 miles each side of the 39[deg] bearing from a
point in space, Lat. 66[deg]08'14'' N, long. 154[deg]12'17'' W, forming
an angle that extends from the 3.8-mile radius northeast 9.5 miles from
the airport. This section would protect aircraft on approach to runway
18 descending through 1,500 feet AGL and those aircraft on departure
until reaching 1,200 feet AGL.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21,
2020, and effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Hughes, AK [New]

Hughes Airport, AK
    (66[deg]02'21'' N, 154[deg]15'53'' W)

    That airspace within a 3.8-mile radius of Hughes Airport, AK,
and that airspace 2 miles each side of the 194[deg] bearing
extending from the 3.8-mile radius south 6.4 miles from the airport,
and that airspace extending from the 3.8-mile radius beginning 1.8
miles west of the 14[deg] bearing to Lat. 66[deg]08'55'' N, long.
154[deg]16'32'' W to Lat. 66[deg]12'15'' N, long. 154[deg]10'06'' W
to Lat. 66[deg]10'03'' N, long. 154[deg]03'03'' W to Lat.
66[deg]07'23'' N, long. 154[deg]08'18'' W to the point on the 3.8-
mile radius 1.8 miles east of the 14[deg] bearing.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on January 11, 2021.
Byron Chew,
Acting Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-00835 Filed 1-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83916-83917]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28027]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Rule 201 and Rule 200(g) of Regulation SHO, SEC File No. 270-
606, OMB Control No. 3235-0670.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (``PRA''), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 201 (17 CFR 242.201) and
Rule 200(g) (17 CFR 242.200(g)) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 201 is a short sale-related circuit breaker rule that, if
triggered, imposes a restriction on the prices at which securities may
be sold short. Rule 200(g) provides that a broker-dealer may mark
certain qualifying sell orders ``short exempt.'' The information
collected under Rule 201's written policies and procedures requirement
applicable to trading centers, the written policies and procedures
requirement of the broker-dealer provision of Rule 201(c), the written
policies and procedures requirement of the riskless principal provision
of Rule 201(d)(6), and the ``short exempt'' marking requirement of Rule
200(g) enable the Commission and self-regulatory organizations
(``SROs'') to examine and monitor for compliance with the requirements
of Rule 201 and Rule 200(g).
    In addition, the information collected under Rule 201's written
policies and procedures requirement applicable to trading centers helps
to ensure that trading centers do not execute or display any
impermissibly priced short sale orders, unless an order is marked
``short exempt,'' in accordance with the rule's requirements.
Similarly, the information collected under the written policies and
procedures requirement of the broker-dealer provision of Rule 201(c)
and the riskless principal provision of Rule 201(d)(6) helps to ensure
that broker-dealers comply with the requirements of these provisions.
The information collected pursuant to the ``short exempt'' marking
requirement of Rule 200(g) also provides an indication to a trading
center of when it must execute or display a short sale order without
regard to whether the short sale order is at a price that is less than
or equal to the current national best bid.
    It is estimated that SRO and non-SRO respondents registered with
the Commission and subject to the collection of information
requirements of Rule 201 and Rule 200(g) incur an aggregate annual
burden of 2,908,309 hours to comply with the rules and an aggregate
annual external cost of $120,000.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Pamela Dyson, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549, or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

     Dated: November 16, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-28027 Filed 11-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P