[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 45 (Thursday, March 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 14789]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05277]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER13-405-000]

Cayuga Operating Co., LLC; Notice of Petition for Rate Withdrawal

    Take notice that on February 28, 2013, Cayuga Operating Co., LLC,
filed pursuant to 18 CFR 35.17(a) to withdraw its Federal Power Act
section 205 filing and proposed unexecuted reliability must-run
agreement (RMR Agreement), and also filed a motion to extend or suspend
the current March 4, 2013 comment due date.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 15, 2013.

    Dated: March 1, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-05277 Filed 3-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 58 (Monday, March 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16424-16431]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06348]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91390; File No. SR-NYSECHX-2021-04]

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

March 23, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on March 10, 2021, the NYSE Chicago, Inc. (``NYSE Chicago'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule (the ``Fee
Schedule'') related to co-location to (i) provide Users with access to
the systems, and connectivity to the data feeds, of various additional
third parties; and (ii) remove obsolete text. The proposed rule change
is available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule related to co-
location to (i) provide Users with access to the systems, and
connectivity to the data feeds, of various additional third parties;
and (ii) remove obsolete text.
Proposal To Add Additional Third Party Systems and Third Party Data
Feeds
    The Exchange proposes to amend the co-location \4\ services offered
by the Exchange to provide Users \5\ with access to the systems, and
connectivity to the data feeds, of various additional third parties.
The Exchange proposes to make the corresponding amendments to the
Exchange's Fee Schedule related to these co-location services to
reflect these proposed changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in 2019. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
87408 (October 28, 2019), 84 FR 58778 (November 1, 2019) (SR-
NYSECHX-2019-12) (``NYSE Chicago Co-location Notice''). The Exchange
is an indirect subsidiary of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.
(``ICE'').
    \5\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See id., supra note 4,
at 58778 n.6. As specified in the Fee Schedule, a User that incurs
co-location fees for a particular co-location service pursuant
thereto would not be subject to co-location fees for the same co-
location service charged by the Exchange's affiliates New York Stock
Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), NYSE American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., and
NYSE National, Inc. (together, the ``Affiliate SROs''). See id. at
58779. Each Affiliate SRO has submitted substantially the same
proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See
SR-NYSE-2021-15, SR-NYSEAMER-2021-13, SR-NYSEArca-2021-15, and SR-
NYSENAT-2021-05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As set forth in the Fee Schedule, the Exchange charges fees for
connectivity to the execution systems of third party markets and other
content service providers (``Third Party Systems''), and data feeds
from third party markets and other content service providers (``Third
Party Data Feeds'').\6\ The lists of Third Party Systems and Third
Party Data Feeds are set forth in the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NYSE Chicago Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at 58786-
87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to provide access to the following additional
Third Party Systems: Long Term Stock Exchange, Members Exchange, MIAX
Emerald, MIAX PEARL Equities, Morgan Stanley, and TD Ameritrade (the
``Proposed Third Party Systems''). The Exchange also proposes to amend
the Fee Schedule to change the name of the ``Miami International
Securities

Exchange'' Third Party System to ``MIAX Options,'' to change the name
of the ``MIAX PEARL'' Third Party System to ``MIAX PEARL Options,'' and
to combine MIAX Options, MIAX PEARL Options, MIAX PEARL Equities, and
MIAX Emerald as a single Third Party System on the Fee Schedule. The
list of available Third Party Systems in the Fee Schedule would be
amended as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Third party systems
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
ITG TriAct Matchnow
Long Term Stock Exchange (LTSE)
Members Exchange (MEMX)
[Miami International Securities Exchange]
MIAX Options, MIAX PEARL Options, MIAX PEARL Equities, and MIAX Emerald
Morgan Stanley
Nasdaq

                                * * * * *
OTC Markets Group
TD Ameritrade
TMX Group
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to provide connectivity to data
feeds from Members Exchange (the ``Proposed MEMX Third Party Data
Feed''), MIAX Emerald (the ``Proposed MIAX Emerald Third Party Data
Feed''), MIAX PEARL Equities (the ``Proposed MIAX PEARL Equities Third
Party Data Feed''), and ICE Data Services--ICE TMC \7\ (the ``Proposed
ICE TMC Third Party Data Feed'') (collectively, the ``Proposed Third
Party Data Feeds''). The Exchange also proposes to change the name of
the current ``Miami International Securities Exchange/MIAX PEARL''
Third Party Data Feed to ``MIAX Options/MIAX PEARL Options'' on its Fee
Schedule. Further, the Exchange proposes to delete the ``NASDAQ OMDF''
data feed from the list, as it is no longer offered by the content
service provider. Finally, the Exchange proposes to change the name of
the current ``SR Labs--SuperFeed'' data feeds to ``Vela--SuperFeed,''
to reflect the content provider's recent change to the name of these
products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Proposed ICE TMC Third Party Data Feed is generated by
ICE Bonds, an indirect subsidiary of ICE, and includes market data
for the ICE TMC alternative trading system. It does not include
market data of the Exchange or Affiliate SROs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The list of available Third Party Data Feeds in the Fee Schedule
would be amended as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Monthly
                                                             recurring
                                                           connectivity
                  Third party data feed                    fee per third
                                                            party data
                                                               feed
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Global OTC..............................................            $100
[ICE Data Global Index *]...............................           [100]
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed <=100 Mb............             200

                              * * * * * * *
ICE Data Services Consolidated Feed Shared Farm >1 Gb...           1,000
ICE Data Services--ICE TMC..............................             200
ICE Data Services PRD...................................             200

                              * * * * * * *
ITG TriAct Matchnow.....................................           1,000
Members Exchange (MEMX).................................           3,000
MIAX Emerald............................................           3,500
[Miami International Securities Exchange]MIAX Options/             2,000
 MIAX PEARL Options.....................................
MIAX PEARL Equities.....................................           2,500
Montr[eacute]al Exchange (MX)...........................           1,000

                              * * * * * * *
NASDAQ OMX Global Index Data Service....................             100
[NASDAQ OMDF]...........................................           [100]
NASDAQ UQDF & UTDF......................................             500

                              * * * * * * *
OTC Markets Group.......................................           1,000
Vela[SR Labs]--SuperFeed <500 Mb........................             250
Vela[SR Labs]--SuperFeed >500 Mb to <1.25 Gb............             800
Vela[SR Labs]--SuperFeed >1.25 Gb.......................           1,000
TMX Group...............................................           2,500

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange would provide access to the Proposed Third Party
Systems (``Access'') and connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data
Feeds (``Connectivity'') as conveniences to Users. Use of Access or
Connectivity would be completely voluntary.
    The Exchange does not have visibility into whether third parties
currently offer, or intend to offer, Users access to the Proposed Third
Party Systems and connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds,
as such third parties are not required to make that information public.
However, the market for access to Third Party Systems and connectivity
to Third Party Data Feeds is competitive. The Exchange competes with
other providers--including other colocation providers and market data
vendors--that offer

access to Third Party Systems and connectivity to Third Party Data
Feeds. The Exchange is not aware of any impediment to such third
parties offering access to the Proposed Third Party Systems or
connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds.
    If one or more third parties presently offer, or in the future opt
to offer, such Access and Connectivity to Users, a User may utilize the
ICE Data Services (``IDS'') network, a third party telecommunication
network, a cross connect, or a combination thereof to access such
services and products through a connection to an access center outside
the data center (which could be an IDS access center, a third-party
access center, or both), another User, or a third party vendor.
Access to the Proposed Third Party Systems
    The Exchange proposes to revise the Fee Schedule to provide that
Users may obtain connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Systems for a
fee. As with the current Third Party Systems, Users would connect to
the Proposed Third Party Systems over the internet protocol (``IP'')
network, a local area network available in the data center.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See NYSE Chicago Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at 58787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As with the current Third Party Systems, in order to obtain access
to a Proposed Third Party System, the User would enter into an
agreement with the relevant Proposed Third Party, pursuant to which the
third party content service provider would charge the User for access
to the Proposed Third Party System. The Exchange would then establish a
unicast connection between the User and the Proposed Third Party System
over the IP network.\9\ The Exchange would charge the User for the
connectivity to the Proposed Third Party System. A User would only
receive, and would only be charged for, access to the Proposed Third
Party System for which it enters into agreements with the third party
content service provider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Information flows over existing network connections in two
formats: ``unicast'' format, which is a format that allows one-to-
one communication, similar to a phone line, in which information is
sent to and from the Exchange; and ``multicast'' format, which is a
format in which information is sent one-way from the Exchange to
multiple recipients at once, like a radio broadcast.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has no affiliation with the providers of any of the
Proposed Third Party Systems. Establishing a User's access to a
Proposed Third Party System would not give the Exchange any right to
use the Proposed Third Party System. Connectivity to a Proposed Third
Party System would not provide access or order entry to the Exchange's
execution system, and a User's connection to a Proposed Third Party
System would not be through the Exchange's execution system.
Connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds
    The Exchange proposes to revise the Fee Schedule to provide that
Users may obtain connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds
for a fee. As with the existing connections to Third Party Data Feeds,
the Exchange would receive a Proposed Third Party Data Feed from the
content service provider at the data center. The Exchange would then
provide connectivity to that data to Users for a fee. Users would
connect to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds over the IP network.\10\
The Proposed Third Party Data Feeds would include trading information
concerning the securities that are traded on the relevant Proposed
Third Party Systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See NYSE Chicago Co-location Notice, supra note 4, at
58787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As with the existing connections to Third Party Data Feeds, in
order to connect to a Proposed Third Party Data Feed, a User would
enter into a contract with the content service provider, pursuant to
which the content service provider may charge the User for the data
feed. The Exchange would receive the Proposed Third Party Data Feed
over its fiber optic network and, after the content service provider
and User entered into an agreement and the Exchange received
authorization from the content service provider, the Exchange would
retransmit the data to the User over the User's port. The Exchange
would charge the User for connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data
Feed. A User would only receive, and would only be charged the fee for,
connectivity to a Proposed Third Party Data Feed for which it entered
into a contract.
    The Exchange has no affiliation with the sellers of the Proposed
MEMX Third Party Data Feed, the Proposed MIAX Emerald Third Party Data
Feed, or the Proposed MIAX PEARL Equities Third Party Data Feed, and
would have no right to use those feeds other than as a redistributor of
the data. Similarly, although the Exchange and ICE Bonds--the generator
of the Proposed ICE TMC Third Party Data Feed--are both indirect
subsidiaries of ICE, the Exchange would have no right to use the
Proposed ICE TMC Third Party Data Feed other than as a redistributor of
the data. None of the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds would provide
access or order entry to the Exchange's execution system. The Proposed
Third Party Data Feeds would not provide access or order entry to the
execution systems of the third parties generating the feeds. The
Exchange would receive the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds via arms-
length agreements and would have no inherent advantage over any other
distributor of such data.
Proposal To Remove Obsolete Text
Proposal To Remove References to ICE Data Global Index
    The Exchange proposes to remove obsolete references to the ICE Data
Global Index (the ``GIF'') from the list of Third Party Data Feeds
available for connectivity and related text.
    In May 2020, ICE, which publishes the GIF, announced to its
customers that before the end of 2020, it would cease offering the GIF
as a stand-alone product. The Exchange accordingly amended its Fee
Schedule to inform customers that it would cease offering connectivity
to the GIF once it is no longer available.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88990 (June 2,
2020), 85 FR 34778 (June 8, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ICE has now informed the Exchange that it ceased offering the GIF
as a stand-alone product, making the references to the GIF obsolete.
The operative date was announced through a customer notice.
Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to remove ``ICE Data Global Index*''
and the corresponding asterisked note from the Fee Schedule.
    In order to implement the proposed change, the Exchange proposes to
make the following changes to the section of the Fee Schedule entitled
``Connectivity to Third Party Data Feeds'':
     In the first paragraph and in the table of Third Party
Data Feeds, delete ``ICE Data Global Index*''.
     Following the table of Third Party Data Feeds, delete the
following text:
    * ICE will cease to offer the GIF as a stand-alone product, which
the Exchange has been informed by ICE is currently expected to occur
before the end of 2020. The Exchange will announce the operative date
through a customer notice. Any change fees that a User would otherwise
incur as a result of the proposed change will be waived.
Proposal To Remove the Temporary Waiver of Hot Hands Fees
    The Exchange proposes to remove the obsolete reference to the
waiver of Hot Hands fees in light of the reopening of the Mahwah, New
Jersey data center.
    In March 2020, ICE announced to each User that, starting on March
16, 2020, the Mahwah, New Jersey data

center would be closed to third parties in response to COVID-19. The
Exchange temporarily waived all Hot Hands fees from the date of the
closing through the date of the reopening of the data center, and added
a note to the fees for the Hot Hands service stating as much.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange first waived the Hot Hands Fee in a March 17,
2020 filing, and subsequently extended the waiver four times. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 88400 (March 17, 2020), 85 FR
16434 (March 23, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-07); 88522 (March 31, 2020),
85 FR 19191 (April 6, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-10); 88957 (May 27,
2020), 85 FR 33766 (June 2, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-15); 89176 (June
29, 2020), 85 FR 40377 (July 6, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-2020-19); and
89654 (August 25, 2020), 85 FR 53879 (August 31, 2020) (SR-NYSECHX-
2020-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Mahwah, New Jersey data center reopened on October 1, 2020. The
date of the reopening was announced through a customer notice. As a
result of the reopening, the waiver of Hot Hands fees ceased, and the
note became obsolete. The Exchange now proposes to remove the obsolete
text.
    In order to implement this proposed change, the Exchange proposes
to make the following changes to the Fee Schedule:
     In the Types of Service table, remove the `` [dagger] ''
symbol after ``Hot Hands Service*** ''.
     Following the Types of Service table, remove the following
text:
    [dagger] Fees for Hot Hands Services will be waived beginning on
March 16, 2020 through the reopening of the Mahwah, New Jersey data
center. The date of the reopening will be announced through a customer
notice.
Application and Impact of the Proposed Changes
    The proposed changes would not apply differently to distinct types
or sizes of market participants. Rather, they would apply to all Users
equally. As is currently the case, the purchase of any colocation
service is completely voluntary and the Fee Schedule is applied
uniformly to all Users.
    As with the existing connections to Third Party Systems, the
Exchange proposes to charge a monthly recurring fee for connectivity to
the Proposed Third Party Systems. Specifically, when a User requests
access to a Proposed Third Party System, it would identify the
applicable content service provider and what bandwidth connection is
required. The Exchange proposes to modify its Fee Schedule to add the
Proposed Third Party Systems to its existing list of Third Party
Systems. The Exchange does not propose to change the monthly recurring
fee the Exchange charges Users for unicast connectivity to each Third
Party System, including the Proposed Third Party Systems.
    As it does with the existing Third Party Data Feeds, the Exchange
proposes to charge a monthly recurring fee for connectivity to the
Proposed Third Party Data Feeds. Depending on its needs and bandwidth,
a User may opt to receive all or some of the feeds or services included
in the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds. The Exchange proposes to add
the following fees for connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data
Feeds to its existing list in the Fee Schedule: (i) $200 per month for
ICE Data Services--ICE TMC; (ii) $3,000 per month for Members Exchange;
(iii) $3,500 per month for MIAX Emerald, and (iv) $2,500 per month for
MIAX PEARL Equities.
    Under this proposal, obsolete references to connectivity to the GIF
data feed and the temporary waiver of Hot Hands fees would be removed
for all Users.
Competitive Environment
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges and other vendors (e.g., Hosting Users) offer co-location
services as a means to facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their operations. The Commission has
repeatedly expressed its preference for competition over regulatory
intervention in determining prices, products, and services in the
securities markets. Specifically, in Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496, 37499 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes are not otherwise intended to address any
other issues relating to co-location services and/or related fees, and
the Exchange is not aware of any problems that Users would have in
complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, because it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. The Exchange further believes
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the
Act,\16\ because it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers and other
persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Rule Change Is Reasonable
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is reasonable
and would perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a
national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest, for the following reasons.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to Access and
Connectivity is reasonable and would remove impediments to, and perfect
the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system
and, in general, protect investors and the public interest because by
offering additional services, the Exchange would give each User
additional options for addressing its access and connectivity needs,
responding to User demand for access and connectivity options.
Providing additional services would help each User tailor its data
center operations to the requirements of its business operations by
allowing it to select the form and latency of access and connectivity
that best suits its needs. In addition, the Exchange believes that the
proposed change is reasonable because by offering Access and
Connectivity to Users when available, the Exchange would give Users
additional options for connectivity and access to new services as soon
as they are available, responding to User demand for access and
connectivity options.
    The Exchange would provide Access and Connectivity as conveniences
to Users. Use of Access or Connectivity would be completely voluntary.
The Exchange is not aware of any impediment to third parties offering
Access or Connectivity. The Exchange

does not have visibility into whether third parties currently offer, or
intend to offer, Users access to the Proposed Third Party Systems and
connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds. However, if one or
more third parties presently offer, or in the future opt to offer, such
access and connectivity to Users, a User may utilize the IDS network, a
third party telecommunication network, a cross connect, or a
combination thereof to access such services and products through a
connection to an access center outside the data center (which could be
an IDS access center, a third-party access center, or both), another
User, or a third party vendor.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change to Access
and Connectivity is reasonable because the Exchange operates in a
highly competitive market in which exchanges offer co-location services
as a means to facilitate the trading and other market activities of
those market participants who believe that co-location enhances the
efficiency of their operations. Accordingly, fees charged for co-
location services are constrained by the active competition for the
order flow of, and other business from, such market participants. If a
particular exchange charges excessive fees for co-location services,
affected market participants will opt to terminate their co-location
arrangements with that exchange and adopt a possible range of
alternative strategies, including placing their servers in a physically
proximate location outside the exchange's data center (which could be a
competing exchange), or pursuing strategies less dependent upon the
lower exchange-to-participant latency associated with co-location. For
these reasons, an exchange charging excessive fees would stand to lose
not only co-location revenues but also the liquidity of the formerly
co-located trading firms, which could have additional follow-on effects
on the market share and revenue of the affected exchange.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule change to Access
and Connectivity is reasonable because the market for access to Third
Party Systems and connectivity to Third Party Data Feeds is
competitive. The Exchange competes with other providers--including
other colocation providers and market data vendors--that offer access
to Third Party Systems and connectivity to Third Party Data Feeds.
Although the Exchange does not have complete visibility into whether
third parties currently offer, or intend to offer, Users access to the
Proposed Third Party Systems and connectivity to the Proposed Third
Party Data Feeds (as such third parties are not required to make that
information public), the Exchange understands that at least one other
vendor is currently offering the Proposed MIAX Third Party Data Feeds.
As such, the Exchange is not aware of any impediment to such third
parties offering substitutes to such Access and Connectivity. If the
Exchange were to propose to charge supra-competitive fees for access to
any of the Proposed Third Party Systems or connectivity to any of the
Proposed Third Party Data Feeds, the Exchange's competitors would
respond by offering such access and connectivity at lower rates, and
market participants would respond by substituting the Exchange's
offerings with more competitively-priced access and connectivity
options available from other providers. As such, competition and the
availability of substitutes is a check on the Exchange's ability to
charge unreasonable fees for Access and Connectivity.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed change to Access
and Connectivity is reasonable because in order to offer the Access and
Connectivity as conveniences to Users, the Exchange must provide,
maintain, and operate the data center facility hardware and technology
infrastructure. The Exchange must handle the installation,
administration, monitoring, support, and maintenance of such services,
including by responding to any production issues. Since the inception
of co-location, the Exchange has made numerous improvements to the
network hardware and technology infrastructure and has established
additional administrative controls. The Exchange has expanded the
network infrastructure to keep pace with the increased number of
services available to Users, including resilient and redundant feeds.
    In addition, in order to provide Access and Connectivity, the
Exchange would establish and maintain multiple connections to each
Proposed Third Party System and Proposed Third Party Data Feed,
allowing the Exchange to provide resilient and redundant connections;
adapt to any changes made by the relevant third party; and cover any
applicable fees charged by the relevant third party, such as port fees.
For example, the Exchange already offers several Third Party Data Feeds
supplied by ICE Data Services, such that the Exchange could add the
Proposed ICE TMC Third Party Data Feed over this established connection
with less effort. In contrast, in order to offer connectivity to the
Proposed MEMX Third Party Data Feed, the Proposed MIAX Emerald Third
Party Data Feed, and the Proposed MIAX PEARL Equities Data Feed, the
Exchange must establish and maintain connections to those exchanges,
which requires significantly more effort. As such, it is reasonable for
the Exchange to offer connectivity to the Proposed ICE TMC Third Party
Data Feed at a lower fee than it proposes to charge for connectivity to
the Proposed MEMX Third Party Data Feed, the Proposed MIAX Emerald
Third Party Data Feed, and the Proposed MIAX PEARL Equities Third Party
Data Feed. Further, the different fees that the Exchange proposes for
the Proposed MIAX Emerald Third Party Data Feed and the Proposed MIAX
PEARL Equities Third Party Data Feed are reflective of the fact that
MIAX charges separate fees to the Exchange to become a distributor of
each of its data feed products, and that these distribution fees that
the Exchange must pay to MIAX are higher for the Proposed MIAX Emerald
Third Party Data Feed than for the Proposed MIAX PEARL Equities Third
Party Data Feed.
    As such, the Exchange believes the proposed fees for Access and
Connectivity are reasonable because they would allow the Exchange to
defray or cover the costs associated with offering Users Access and
Connectivity while providing Users the convenience of receiving such
Access and Connectivity within co-location, helping them to tailor
their data center operations to the requirements of their business
operations.
    The Exchange believes that removing obsolete text from the Fee
Schedule would perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a
national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest. Because the GIF is no longer available as a stand-
alone data feed, the references to the GIF and its associated fee in
the Fee Schedule are obsolete. Similarly, because the Mahwah, New
Jersey data center has reopened, the note to the Hot Hands service has
become obsolete. In both cases, removing the obsolete text would
enhance the clarity and transparency of the Fee Schedule and reduce
potential customer confusion.
The Proposed Rule Change Is Equitable
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its members, issuers, and other persons using its facilities, for
the following reasons.
    First, the proposed fees for Access and Connectivity would not
apply differently to different types or sizes of market participants.
Rather, the

proposed fees would apply equally to any User that opts to access the
Proposed Third Party Systems or connect to the Proposed Third Party
Data Feeds, irrespective of that User's size or the type of market
participant it is.
    Second, under the proposed rule change, only Users that choose to
connect to the Proposed Third Party Systems and Proposed Third Party
Data Feeds would be charged the proposed fees for Access and
Connectivity. Users who opt not to use the Access or Connectivity would
not be charged. In this way, the proposed rule change equitably
allocates the proposed fees only to Users who choose to use the
Proposed Third Party Systems and Proposed Third Party Data Feeds.
    In addition, as noted above, the Exchange would provide Access and
Connectivity as conveniences to Users. Use of Access or Connectivity
would be completely voluntary. By offering additional services, the
Exchange would give each User additional options for addressing its
access and connectivity needs, responding to User demand for access and
connectivity options. Providing additional services would help each
User tailor its data center operations to the requirements of its
business operations by allowing it to select the form and latency of
access and connectivity that best suits its needs. A User that does not
wish to use the Access or Connectivity offered by the Exchange is not
required to do so.
    The Exchange is not aware of any impediment to third parties
offering Access or Connectivity. The Exchange does not have visibility
into whether third parties currently offer, or intend to offer, Users
access to the Proposed Third Party Systems and connectivity to the
Proposed Third Party Data Feeds, as third parties are not required to
make that information public. However, if one or more third parties
presently offer, or in the future opt to offer, such access and
connectivity to Users, a User may utilize the IDS network, a third
party telecommunication network, a cross connect, or a combination
thereof to access such services and products through a connection to an
access center outside the data center (which could be an IDS access
center, a third-party access center, or both), another User, or a third
party vendor.
    The Exchange believes that removing obsolete text from the Fee
Schedule would perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and a
national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest. Because the GIF is no longer available as a stand-
alone data feed, the references to the GIF and its associated fee in
the Fee Schedule are obsolete. Similarly, because the Mahwah data
center has reopened, the note to the Hot Hands service has become
obsolete. The changes would have no impact on pricing. Rather, they
would remove obsolete text, thereby clarifying the Exchange rules and
alleviating possible market participant confusion.
The Proposed Change Is Not Unfairly Discriminatory
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change does not permit
unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers,
for the following reasons.
    First, the proposed Access and Connectivity are available on equal
terms to all Users. Users that opt to use the proposed Access or
Connectivity would not receive access or connectivity that is not
available to all Users, as all market participants that contract with
the content provider may receive access or connectivity.
    Second, the proposed fees for Access and Connectivity would not
apply differently to different types or sizes of market participants.
Rather, the proposed fees would apply equally to any User that opts to
access the Proposed Third Party Systems or connect to the Proposed
Third Party Data Feeds, and would not unfairly discriminate against any
User based on the User's size or the type of market participant it is.
    Third, the proposed rule change does not permit unfair
discrimination between market participants because only Users that
choose to connect to the Proposed Third Party Systems and Proposed
Third Party Data Feeds would be charged the proposed fees for access
and connectivity. Users who opt not to use the Access or Connectivity
will not be charged.
    In addition, as noted above, the Exchange would provide Access and
Connectivity as conveniences to Users. Use of Access or Connectivity
would be completely voluntary. By offering additional services, the
Exchange would give each User additional options for addressing its
access and connectivity needs, responding to User demand for access and
connectivity options. Providing additional services would help each
User tailor its data center operations to the requirements of its
business operations by allowing it to select the form and latency of
access and connectivity that best suits its needs. A User that does not
wish to use the Access or Connectivity offered by the Exchange is not
required to do so.
    The Exchange is not aware of any impediment to third parties
offering Access or Connectivity. The Exchange does not have visibility
into whether third parties currently offer, or intend to offer, Users
access to the Proposed Third Party Systems and connectivity to the
Proposed Third Party Data Feeds, as third parties are not required to
make that information public. However, if one or more third parties
presently offer, or in the future opt to offer, such access and
connectivity to Users, a User may utilize the IDS network, a third
party telecommunication network, a cross connect, or a combination
thereof to access such services and products through a connection to an
access center outside the data center (which could be an IDS access
center, a third-party access center, or both), another User, or a third
party vendor.
    The Exchange believes that removing obsolete text from the Fee
Schedule would not permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers. Because the GIF is no longer available as
a stand-alone data feed, the references to the GIF and its associated
fee in the Fee Schedule are obsolete. Similarly, because the Mahwah
data center has reopened, the note to the Hot Hands service has become
obsolete. The changes would have no impact on pricing. Rather, they
would remove obsolete text, thereby clarifying the Exchange rules and
alleviating possible market participant confusion.
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
* * * * *
    For all these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\17\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intramarket Competition
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes would not place any
burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, for the following reasons.

    The proposed change to Access and Connectivity would give each User
additional options for addressing its access and connectivity needs,
responding to User demand for access and connectivity options.
Providing additional services would help each User tailor its data
center operations to the requirements of its business operations by
allowing it to select the form and latency of access and connectivity
that best suits its needs. The Exchange believes that providing Users
with these additional options for access and connectivity to new
services would not impose any burden on intramarket competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act,
and would in fact enhance intramarket competition, by giving Users
additional access and connectivity options through which they may
differentiate their business operations from each other.
    The Exchange does not have visibility into whether third parties
currently offer, or intend to offer, Users access to the Proposed Third
Party Systems and connectivity to the Proposed Third Party Data Feeds,
as third parties are not required to make that information public.
However, if one or more third parties presently offer, or in the future
opt to offer, such access and connectivity to Users, a User may utilize
the IDS network, a third party telecommunication network, a cross
connect, or a combination thereof to access such services and products
through a connection to an access center outside the data center (which
could be an IDS access center, a third-party access center, or both),
another User, or a third party vendor.
    In this way, the proposed changes would enhance intramarket
competition by helping Users tailor their Access and Connectivity to
the needs of their business operations by allowing them to select the
form and latency of access and connectivity that best suits their
needs.
    The Exchange further believes that removing the GIF and its
associated fee from the list of Third Party Data Feeds available for
connectivity in the Fee Schedule and removing the note regarding the
temporary waiver of the Hot Hands fee would not permit unfair
discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers would
not place any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary
or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed
changes are not designed to address any competitive issue, but rather
to remove obsolete text, thereby clarifying Exchange rules and
alleviating any possible market participant confusion. The removal of
the obsolete text would not put any market participants at a relative
disadvantage compared to other market participants, or penalize one or
more categories of market participants in a manner that would impose an
undue burden on competition.
Intermarket Competition
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes will not impose any
burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, for the following reasons.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges and other vendors (i.e., Hosting Users) offer co-location
services as a means to facilitate the trading and other market
activities of those market participants who believe that co-location
enhances the efficiency of their operations. Accordingly, fees charged
for co-location services are constrained by the active competition for
the order flow of, and other business from, such market participants.
If a particular exchange charges excessive fees for co-location
services, affected market participants will opt to terminate their co-
location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt a possible range of
alternative strategies, including placing their servers in a physically
proximate location outside the exchange's data center (which could be a
competing exchange), or pursuing strategies less dependent upon the
lower exchange-to-participant latency associated with co-location.
Accordingly, an exchange charging excessive fees would stand to lose
not only co-location revenues but also the liquidity of the formerly
co-located trading firms, which could have additional follow-on effects
on the market share and revenue of the affected exchange.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change reflects this competitive environment and does not impose any
undue burden on intermarket competition.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \18\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\19\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \19\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \20\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \21\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSECHX-2021-04 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSECHX-2021-04. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the

Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please
use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSECHX-2021-04 and should be submitted
on or before April 19, 2021.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-06348 Filed 3-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 134 (Friday, July 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32547-32548]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14838]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0667; FRL-9960-41-Region 4]

Notice of Issuance and Notice of Rescission of Outer Continental
Shelf Air Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final actions.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is to announce that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) issued a final Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) air permit
numbered OCS-EPA-R4021 to Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko) on
December 20, 2016. In addition, the EPA is providing notice that, at
the permittee's request, EPA rescinded an OCS permit numbered OCS-EPA-
R4012 on March 23, 2016, for Statoil Gulf Services LLC (Statoil).

ADDRESSES: The final permits and supporting information are available
at https://www.epa.gov/caa-permitting/outer-continental-shelf-ocs-permit-activity-southeastern-us. These materials are also available for
review at the EPA Region 4 Office and upon request in writing. The EPA
requests that you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT

section to schedule an inspection of these materials or to submit a
written request for copies of these materials. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kelly Fortin, Air Permitting
Section, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta,
Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Fortin can be reached by phone at (404) 562-
9117 and via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 14, 2016, EPA requested public
comments on the proposed OCS air permit numbered OCS-EPA-R4021 for the
Anadarko Bob Douglas project. During the public comment period, which
ended on December 14, 2016, the EPA did not receive any comments.
    After consideration of the pertinent federal statutes and
regulations, the application and supplemental information submitted by
the applicant, and additional material relevant to the application
contained in the Administrative Record, the EPA made a final
determination on December 20, 2016, in accordance with 40 CFR parts 55
and 71 to issue the final air permit. Because no comments were filed,
the Anadarko permit became effective on December 20, 2016. See 40 CFR
71.11(i)(iii), 40 CFR 124.15(b)(3).
    In addition, on December 29, 2015, EPA received a request from
Statoil for EPA to rescind OCS permit OCS-EPA-R4012 as Statoil was no
longer conducting exploratory drilling operations pursuant to this
permit. Pursuant to Statoil's request and 40 CFR part 55, EPA
terminated Statoil's OCS permit on March 23, 2016.
    EPA must follow the administrative procedures of 40 CFR part 71
when issuing permits to OCS sources subject to Title V requirements
such as the Anadarko and Statoil sources identified above. See 40 CFR
71.4(d). Prior to November 17, 2016, EPA was also required to follow
the administrative procedures in 40 CFR part 124 used to issue
Prevention of Significant Deterioration permits when processing OCS
permit applications under Part 55, including OCS permit applications
for sources subject to Title V requirements.\1\ Under 40 CFR
124.19(l)(3) and 40 CFR 71.11(l)(7), notice of any final Agency action
regarding a subject permit must be published in the Federal Register.
Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) provides for review of
final Agency action that is locally or regionally applicable in the
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit. Such a
petition for review of final Agency action must be filed on or before
11:59 p.m. on the 60th day from the date of notice of such action in
the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Effective November 17, 2016, EPA must follow the applicable
procedures of 40 CFR part 71 or part 124 in processing OCS permit
applications under 40 CFR part 55. See 40 CFR 55.6(a)(3), 81 FR
71613 (October 18, 2016). Prior to this effective date, EPA was
required to follow the applicable procedures of 40 CFR part 124 when
processing such applications and also required to follow the
procedures of 40 CFR part 71 when issuing permits to OCS sources
subject to Title V requirements.

    Dated: March 14, 2017.
Beverly H. Banister,
Director, Air, Pesticides, and Toxics, Management Division, Region 4.

    Editorial note: This document was received for publication by
the Office of the Federal Register on July 11, 2017.
[FR Doc. 2017-14838 Filed 7-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 217 (Monday, November 9, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 71373]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24789]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-90327; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2020-66]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American, LLC; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Exchange's Co-Location Services To Establish
Procedures for the Allocation of Cabinets to Its Co-Located Users

November 3, 2020.
    On September 2, 2020, NYSE American, LLC (``NYSE American'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to establish procedures as part of the Exchange's
co-location rules to allocate cabinets to its co-located users in
situations where the Exchange cannot satisfy the user demand for
cabinets. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on September 21, 2020.\3\ The Commission received no
comments on the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 89880 (September 15,
2020), 85 FR 59365 (SR-NYSEAMER-2020-66).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is November 5, 2020. The Commission is extending this 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds it appropriate to designate a longer period
within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has
sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ designates
December 20, 2020, as the date by which the Commission shall either
approve or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2020-66).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-24789 Filed 11-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


As was the case for the burden hour analysis for the Special Review and Registration Review DCIs, two types of costs to respondents are considered for developing the cost associated with this ICR: Administrative Cost and Technical Cost. The definitions of these costs are the same as those defined for the burden hours with the exception that they are costs not hours. The assumption is that the respondent would expend approximately two percent of the total test cost for the Administrative Burden5; the Technical Burden is based on the assumption that one third of the total test cost represents labor cost6; the value of labor is divided proportionally among management ( 20%), technical staff ( 65%) and clerical ( 15%). 7 The value of labor per hour for management,

technical, and clerical is $ 130, $ 88, and $ 40, respectively. 8 The Agency anticipates that multiple respondents for a given chemical could establish consortiums to share in the burden of generating the data and that the burden and cost may be distributed proportionately across such participating members. DRAFT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT April 12, 2004 Page 54 of 55 ATTACHMENT H Display Related to OMB Control # 2070 0057  Listings of Related Regulations in 40 CFR 9.1 As of May 10, 1993, the OMB approval numbers for EPA regulations in Chapter I of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR) appear in a listing in 40 CFR 9.1 ( 58 FR 27472). This listing fulfills the display requirements in section 3507( f) of the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) for EPA regulations. The listing at 40 CFR 9.1 displays this OMB Control number for the following regulations:

Program Title 40 CFR citation Registration Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155.30 Data Requirements for Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.101 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.155 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.160 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.162 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.165 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.167 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.170 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.175 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.180 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.190 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.240 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.290 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.340 DRAFT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT April 12, 2004 Page 55 of 55 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.390 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.440 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.490 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.540 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.590 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.640 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.690 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158.740 Good Laboratory Practice Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part 160


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 28, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41967-41969]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13730]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2023-D-2370]

Patient-Matched Guides to Orthopedic Implants; Draft Guidance for
Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of the draft guidance entitled ``Patient-Matched
Guides to Orthopedic Implants.'' This draft guidance document provides
recommendations regarding information that should be included in
regulatory submissions for patient-matched guides to orthopedic
implants. This draft guidance also provides recommendations that
manufacturers should consider when developing their design process for
these device types.

This draft guidance is intended to promote clarity and transparency as
to expectations regarding submission recommendations for orthopedic
patient-matched guides. Following such recommendations may increase
efficiency and consistency in review. This draft guidance is not final
nor is it for implementation at this time.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by August 28, 2023 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2023-D-2370 for ``Patient-Matched Guides to Orthopedic Implants.''
Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    An electronic copy of the guidance document is available for
download from the internet. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for information on electronic access to the guidance. Submit written
requests for a single hard copy of the draft guidance document entitled
``Patient-Matched Guides to Orthopedic Implants'' to the Office of
Policy, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 5431, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist
that office in processing your request.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michel Janda, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4428, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
and FDA staff entitled ``Patient-Matched Guides to Orthopedic
Implants.'' FDA has developed this guidance document for members of
industry who submit and FDA staff who review premarket submissions for
patient-matched guides for orthopedic implants. Patient-matched guides
are intended to assist in the execution of a pre-surgical plan
concurred upon by the patient's healthcare professional to position an
orthopedic implant in a way consistent with the implant's indicated
use. This draft guidance is intended to promote clarity and
transparency as to expectations regarding submission recommendations
for orthopedic patient-matched guides. Following such recommendations
may increase efficiency and consistency in review. Additionally, this
draft guidance provides recommended best practices regarding certain
elements of the design process.
    This draft guidance was part of the 2015 initiative to incorporate
stakeholder feedback during guidance development (80 FR 1424, January
9, 2015) available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/01/09/2015-00115/medical-device-user-fee-and-modernization-act-notice-to-public-of-website-location-of-fiscal-year. Specific questions were
posed to solicit input into the context of the guidance and comments
were collected through Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1021.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on ``Patient-
Matched Guides to Orthopedic Implants.'' It does not establish any
rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can
use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Electronic Access

    Persons interested in obtaining a copy of the draft guidance may do
so by downloading an electronic copy from the internet. A search
capability for all Center for Devices and Radiological Health guidance
documents is available at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products. This guidance document is also
available at https://www.regulations.gov or https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents. Persons unable to
download an electronic copy of ``Patient-Matched Guides to Orthopedic
Implants'' may send an email request to [email protected] to
receive an electronic copy of the document. Please use the document
number GUI01400006 and complete title to identify the guidance you are
requesting.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no new collection of information, it
does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information.
Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information in the following FDA regulations, guidance, and forms
have been approved by OMB as listed in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          21 CFR Part                   Topic           OMB Control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
807, subpart E................  Premarket                      0910-0120
                                 notification.
820...........................  Current Good                   0910-0073
                                 Manufacturing
                                 Practice (CGMP);
                                 Quality System (QS)
                                 Regulation.
812...........................  Investigational                0910-0078
                                 Device Exemption.
814, subparts A through E.....  Premarket approval...          0910-0231
800, 801, and 809.............  Medical Device                 0910-0485
                                 Labeling Regulations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: June 22, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-13730 Filed 6-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 71)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 19245-19246]
[DOCID:fr14ap10-12]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0217]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Elizabeth River, Eastern Branch,
VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the
Berkley Bridge (I-264), across the Elizabeth River, Eastern Branch,
mile 0.4, at Norfolk, VA. The deviation is necessary to facilitate
structural repairs to the lift spans. This deviation allows the
drawbridge to remain in the closed to navigation position.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 8 p.m. on April 23, 2010
through 4:30 a.m. on June 21, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0217 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0217 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Terrance Knowles, Environmental Protection Specialist,
Fifth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Transportation,
who owns and operates this bascule-type drawbridge, has requested a
temporary deviation from the current operating regulations set out in
33 CFR 117.1007(b) and (c) to facilitate the resurfacing of the bridge
roadway, as modified by the temporary deviation at Docket No. USCG-
2010-0083, published in the Federal Register on March 3, 2010, 75 Fed.
Reg. 9521.

    The Berkley Bridge (I-264) at mile 0.4, across the Elizabeth River,
Eastern Branch, in Norfolk, VA, has a vertical clearance in the closed
position of 48 feet above mean high water.
    Under this temporary deviation, the drawbridge will be maintained
in the closed to navigation position on four separate weekends
beginning at 8 p.m. on Fridays until and including 4:30 a.m. on Mondays
from April 23-26, 2010; April 30-May 3, 2010; May 14-17, 2010; and from
June 4-7, 2010. In addition, if severe or inclement weather occurs, the
alternate closure dates will be rescheduled to May 7-10, 2010 and/or
June 18-21, 2010. During these closure periods, vessel openings of the
draw spans along with the removal of barges in the waterway will be
provided if at least two hours advance notice is given to the bridge
operator at<PHONE_NUMBER>. No marine events are scheduled during these
time periods and the waterway will still allow for the passage of
vessels of heights less than 48 feet.
    Smaller vessels that can pass under the bridge without a bridge
opening may do so at most times. There are no alternate routes for
vessels transiting this section of the Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth
River. The bridge can be opened for emergencies but may be delayed by
two hours.
    The waterway users are large commercial vessels, tugs, barges, and
smaller leisure craft. The Berkley Bridge opens rarely on weekends for
larger commercial vessels, approximately 2-3 times/weekend. The Coast
Guard has coordinated the restrictions with the commercial and
recreational waterway users. Additionally, the Coast Guard will inform
unexpected users of the waterway through our local and broadcast
Notices to Mariners of the closure periods for the bridge so that
vessels can arrange their transits to minimize any impacts caused by
the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: April 1, 2010.
Patrick B. Trapp,
Captain, United States Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2010-8476 Filed 4-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P