[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15002-15003]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6313]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549-0213.
Extension:
    Rule 611; SEC File No. 270-540; OMB Control No. 3235-0600.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval for Rule 611 (17 CFR 242.611)--Order
Protection Rule.
    On June 9, 2005, effective August 29, 2005 (see 70 FR 37496, June
29, 2005), the Commission adopted Rule 611 of Regulation NMS under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et

seq.) to require any national securities exchange, national securities
association, alternative trading system, exchange market maker, over-
the-counter market maker and any other broker-dealer that executes
orders internally by trading as principal or crossing orders as agent,
to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures
reasonably designed to prevent the execution of a transaction in its
market at a price that is inferior to a bid or offer displayed in
another market at the time of execution (a ``trade-though''), absent an
applicable exception and, if relying on an exception, that are
reasonably designed to assure compliance with the terms of the
exception. Without this collection of information, respondents would
not have a means to enforce compliance with the Commission's intention
to prevent trade-throughs pursuant to the rule.
    There are approximately 658 respondents \1\ per year that will
require an aggregate total of 39,480 hours to comply with this rule.\2\
It is anticipated that each respondent will continue to expend
approximately 60 hours annually: two hours per month of internal legal
time and three hours per month of internal compliance time to ensure
that its written policies and procedures are up-to-date and remain in
compliance with Rule 611. The estimated cost for an in-house attorney
is $354 per hour and the estimated cost for an assistant compliance
director in the securities industry is $320 per hour. Therefore the
estimated total cost of compliance for the annual hour burden is as
follows: [(2 legal hours x 12 months x $354) x 658] + [(3 compliance
hours x 12 months x $320) x 658] = $13,170,528.\3\ There are no longer
start-up costs associated with Rule 611.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This estimate includes thirteen national securities
exchanges and one national securities association that trade NMS
stocks. The estimate also includes the approximately 601 firms that
were registered equity market makers or specialists at year-end
2009, as well as 43 alternative trading systems that operate trading
systems that trade NMS stocks.
    \2\ The one-time hour burden associated with developing the
required policies and procedures is no longer applicable.
    \3\ The total cost of compliance for the annual hour burden has
been revised to reflect updated estimated cost figures for an in-
house attorney and an assistant compliance director. These figures
are from SIFMA's Management & Professional Earnings in the
Securities Industry 2010, modified by Commission staff to account
for an 1800-hour work-year and multiplied by 5.35 to account for
bonuses, firm size, employee benefits and overhead.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 to
be 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.
    The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     Dated: March 14, 2011.
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-6313 Filed 3-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 245 (Tuesday, December 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 79586]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32126]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-525-000]

UGI Sunbury, LLC; Revised Notice of Schedule for Environmental
Review of the Sunbury Pipeline Project

    This notice identifies the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) staff's revised schedule for the completion of the
environmental assessment (EA) for UGI Sunbury LLC's Sunbury Pipeline
Project. The previous notice of schedule, issued on November 9, 2015,
identified January 7, 2016 as the EA issuance date.

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA--December 28, 2015
90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline--March 27, 2016

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
project's progress.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

     Dated: December 16, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32126 Filed 12-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

DATE:  	04 January 2007

SUBJECT:	Desmedipham.  Acute and Chronic Aggregate Dietary Exposure Assessment for the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision on Sugar Beets and Garden Beets and Risk Assessment for New Uses on Spinach.

PC Code:104801	Chemical Class: Phenyls-carbamate

MRIDs:   46773001, 42516500       	CFR:180.353

                 46734101, 46734102

From: 		P. Yvonne Barnes, Chemist

Reregistration Branch II

Health Effects Division (7509P)

THROUGH:

		Sheila Piper, Chemist

		Donald Wilbur, Chemist

Dietary Exposure Science Advisory Council (DESAC)

Health Effects Division (7509P)

	and

		Alan Nielsen, Branch Senior Scientist

       		Reregistration Branch 2

Health Effects Division (7509P)

TO:		Rich Griffin, Risk Assessor

Reregistration Branch II

Health Effects Division (7509P)

Executive Summary

An acute and chronic aggregate dietary (food and drinking water) risk assessment were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM-FCID(, Version 2.03), which uses food consumption data from the USDA’s Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) from 1994-1996 and 1998. This analysis is in response to the IR-4 Petition (PP#6E7027) for tolerance reassessment on Sugar Beet and Garden Beet. Tolerances are established for residues of desmedipham in/on sugar beet tops and roots at 0.2 ppm [40 CFR §180.353(a)], and time-limited tolerances are established at 0.2 ppm in/on red beet roots and at 15 ppm in/on red beet tops [40 CFR §180.353(b)].  The time-limited tolerances are set to expire on 06/30/08.  IR-4 has submitted a petition for new uses on spinach and residue data supporting the use of the 1.3 lb/gal EC formulation of desmedipham on spinach.

Acute Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Results and Characterization

Acute dietary exposure analyses were performed in order to determine the highlighted exposure and risk estimates which result from the registered uses of desmedipham.  Tolerance level, field trial data and 100% crop treated (CT) were used in these assessments.

A Tier 1 Drinking Water Assessment (DWA) for desmedipham focusing on the use of sugar beets, derived from surface water sources were used for this dietary assessment (130 ppb for acute peak and annual average of 71 ppb).

Dietary risk estimates are provided for the U.S. population and all population subgroups. This assessment concludes that for all supported registered commodities; the acute dietary risk estimates are below the Agency’s level of concern (less than 100% of the aPAD) for the U.S. population and all population subgroups.  Combined dietary exposure from food and drinking water at the 95th percentile is 8% of the aPAD for the U.S. population and 26% of the aPAD for all Infants, the most highly exposed population.

Chronic Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Results and Characterization

A Tier I dietary exposure assessment was performed for desmedipham i.e. tolerance level residues and 100% crop treated were assessed.  Dietary risk estimates are provided for the general U.S. population and various population subgroups.  This assessment concludes that for all supported commodities for proposed uses; the chronic dietary risk estimates do not exceed HED’s level of concern (less than 100% of the cPAD) and all population subgroups.   Combined dietary exposure from food and drinking water is 4% of the cPAD for the U.S. population and 13% of the cPAD for all Infants (<1 year) the most highly exposed population subgroup

Cancer Dietary Exposure Results and Characterization

Desmedipham has no carcinogenic potential.  It has, “tentatively”, been classified as a “Group E”, “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans” pending the receipt of historical control data and addressing other issues with respect to the number of animals examined in the rat study.  Therefore, no dietary assessment has been performed at this time.

I.	Introduction

Dietary risk assessment incorporates both exposure and toxicity of a given pesticide.  For acute and chronic assessments, the risk is expressed as a percentage of a maximum acceptable dose (i.e., the dose which HED has concluded will result in no unreasonable adverse health effects).  This dose is referred to as the population adjusted dose (PAD).

For acute and non-cancer chronic exposures, HED is concerned when estimated dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD.  References which discuss the acute and chronic dietary risk assessments in more detail are available on the EPA pesticides web site: “Available Information on Assessing Exposure from Pesticides, A User’s Guide,” 06/21/2000, web link:    HYPERLINK http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2000/July/Day-12/6061.pdf http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2000/July/Day-12/6061.pdf ; or see SOP 99.6 (08/20/1999).

The most recent dietary exposure analysis for desmedipham was conducted in 2004, DP Barcode D301554, Sherrie L. Kinard.

 II.	Residue Information

The Agency has concluded that the registrant's submitted metabolism studies for phenmedipham are adequate for desmedipham.  In an HED Metabolism Committee meeting held on 3/27/95, the Committee has concluded that the desmedipham residue to be regulated in plants and animals is desmedipham per se and that (the phenmedipham residue to be regulated in plants and animals is phenmedipham per se) (D. Miller, CBRS No. 15293, 04/11/95).    Because desmedipham residues in milk and all tissues in the metabolism study were < 0.01 ppm, the Agency considers use of desmedipham on sugar beets to be a 180.6(a)(3) situation for ruminants (i.e., there is no reasonable expectation of finite residues in ruminant commodities).

Desmedipham/Phenmedipham.  Metabolism Committee Decision in reference to the Regulation of Metabolites; DP Barcode D301553 (06/22/04); CBRS Number: 15293; No Master Record ID Number, and No Reregistration Case Number.

Desmedipham Use:  Desmedipham (ethyl-m-hydroxycarbanilate carbanilate) is a selective herbicide that is currently registered by Aventis CropSciences (formerly AgrEvo USA Company) for postemergence use on sugar beets.  Desmedipham is formulated as emulsifiable concentrate (EC) or wettable powder (WP) formulations.  Time-limited tolerances for garden beet roots and tops have been established in conjunction with a Section 18 Emergency Exemption.  Tolerances are listed under 40 CFR §180.353.

Residue Data used for Acute and Chronic Dietary Assessment:

The reassessed tolerance level, field trial data (RDFs) and 100% crop treated (CT) were used in these assessments (see Table 1 below)

Table 1

  Data and Residue Estimates Used in Acute and Chronic Dietary Analyses

Commodity

Field Trial Data

IR-4 (PP#6E7027)

%

Crop

Treated

Processing

Factors	Tolerance established under 40 CFR §180.353

(ppm)	Tolerance Reassessment (ppm)

Beet, Garden, root	TOTALZ=0

TOTALNZ=12

12, 0.05

100

--	0.2*	0.05

Beet, Garden, tops	TOTALZ=0

TOTALNZ=10

0.058, 0.048, 0.05, 0.05, 0.866, 0.683, 0.084, 0.115, 0.05, 0.05	100	-- 15*	1.0

Beet, Sugar,

roots	TOTALZ=0

TOTALNZ=18

18, 0.05	100	--	0.2	0.1

Beet, Sugar,

tops	TOTALZ=0

TOTALNZ=18

13, 0.05

0.055, 0.103, 0.066, 0.135, 0.119	100	--	0.2	5.0

Spinach	TOTALZ=0

TOTALNZ=15

0.05, 0.05, 0.05, 0.67, 0.38, 5.0, 3.9, 1.8, 2.3, 0.096, 0.18, 0.53, 0.50, 0.69, 0.057

100

--	None	6.0

*The time-limited tolerances are set to expire on 06/30/08.

Water Residue Data

The water residue values used in the dietary risk assessment were provided by the Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) in the following memo: Drinking Water Exposure Assessment for Use of Desmedipham on Spinach and Garden Beets (IR-4 Petitions 00337 and 01922) DP Barcode: D327446, William P. Eckel.

A Tier 1 Drinking Water Assessment (DWA) for desmedipham was completed on April 20, 2004 for the tolerance reassessment (D294858, D283345).  That assessment focused on the use on sugarbeets, which comprises almost 99.9% of national use of desmedipham, according to the US Geological Survey (  HYPERLINK "http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/pesticide_use_maps/show_map.php?year=97&m ap=m9014"  http://ca.water.usgs.gov/pnsp/pesticide_use_maps/show_map.php?year=97&ma p=m9014 , accessed 09/01/06).  The balance of the use was on unspecified beets, presumably under Section 18 registrations for garden beets.

The application rates proposed in the IR-4 petitions are 6 pints (0.975 lb/acre) for a single application on spinach and a total of 6.8 pints (1.1 lb/acre) divided into 3 applications for beets.  Aerial application is allowed for spinach, whereas ground spray or banded application is allowed for beets.  The 2004 DWA assumed aerial application and up to a 1.95 lb/acre total application rate.  Water residues were incorporated in the DEEM-FCID(, Version 2.03 into the food categories “water, direct, all sources” and “water, indirect, all sources”. The data for the annual average surface water concentration for Parent was converted to parts per million (ppm) before they were entered in DEEM-FCID(.  Ground water was not included in this assessment, as the estimated environmental concentration for this water source is minimal in comparison to surface water.  The results are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2

Tier I Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations

Chemical Name

Acute (peak) Surface Water Concentration (ppb)

Annual Average Surface Water Concentration

(ppb)

Ground Water Concentration

(ppb)

Desmedipham

130

71

0.039

III.	DEEM-FCID( Program and Consumption Information

Desmedipham acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID(, Version 2.03), which incorporates consumption data from USDA’s Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII), 1994-1996 and 1998.  The 1994-96, 98 data are based on the reported consumption of more than 20,000 individuals over two non-consecutive survey days.  Foods “as consumed” (e.g., apple pie) are linked to EPA-defined food commodities (e.g. apples, peeled fruit - cooked; fresh or N/S; baked; or wheat flour - cooked; fresh or N/S, baked) using publicly available recipe translation files developed jointly by USDA/ARS and EPA.  For chronic exposure assessment, consumption data are averaged for the entire U.S. population and within population subgroups, but for acute exposure assessment are retained as individual consumption events.  Based on analysis of the 1994-96, 98 CSFII consumption data, which took into account dietary patterns and survey respondents, HED concluded that it is most appropriate to report risk for the following population subgroups: the general U.S. population, all infants (less than 1 year old), children 1-2, children 3-5, children 6-12, youth 13-19, adults 20-49, females 13-49, and adults 50+ years old.

For chronic dietary exposure assessment, an estimate of the residue level in each food or food-form (e.g., orange or orange juice) on the food commodity residue list is multiplied by the average daily consumption estimate for that food/food form to produce a residue intake estimate.  The resulting residue intake estimate for each food/food form is summed with the residue intake estimates for all other food/food forms on the commodity residue list to arrive at the total average estimated exposure.  Exposure is expressed in mg/kg body weight/day and as a percent of the cPAD.  This procedure is performed for each population subgroup.

For acute exposure assessments, individual one-day food consumption data are used on an individual-by-individual basis.  The reported consumption amounts of each food item can be multiplied by a residue point estimate and summed to obtain a total daily pesticide exposure for a deterministic exposure assessment, or “matched” in multiple random pairings with residue values and then summed in a probabilistic assessment.  The resulting distribution of exposures is expressed as a percentage of the aPAD on both a user (i.e. only those who reported eating relevant commodities/food forms) and a per-capita (i.e., those who reported eating the relevant commodities as well as those who did not) basis.  In accordance with HED policy, per capita exposure and risk are reported for all tiers of analysis.  However, for tiers 1 and 2, any significant differences in user vs. per capita exposure and risk are specifically identified and noted in the risk assessment.

IV.	Toxicological Information

In a meeting on October 27, 1998, the Health Effects Division (HED) Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee (HIARC) revaluated the toxicology database for desmedipham, selected doses and endpoints for acute and chronic dietary exposure risk assessments, and evaluated the potential enhanced sensitivity of developing fetuses and infant/children pursuant to the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (TXR NO 012991).  The acute and chronic dietary reference doses and PADs are presented in Table 3 below. The potential for increased susceptibility of infants and children from exposure to thifensulfuron methyl was also evaluated as required by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 and HIARC concluded that no special FQPA safety factor (i.e. 1x) is required since there are no residual uncertainties for pre and postnatal toxicity.

Desmedipham has no carcinogenic potential.  It has, “tentatively”, been classified as a “Group E”, “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans” pending the receipt of historical control data and addressing other issues with respect to the number of animals examined in the rat study.  Therefore, no dietary assessment has been performed at this time.

Table 3

Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Desmedipham

for Use in Dietary Exposure Assessment

Exposure Scenario

Dose (mg/kg/day)

Endpoint

Study

Acute Dietary

Maternal

NOAEL = 10

UF = 100

FQPA SF=1X

Increased maternal methemoglobin

Developmental Toxicity Study in Rats

MRID 00156725

Acute RfD = 0.10 mg/kg, Acute PAD = 0.10 mg/kg

Chronic Dietary

NOAEL = 4

UF = 100

FQPA SF=1X

Anemia and increased spleen weight

2-Generation Reproduction in Rats

MRID 40387105

Chronic RfD = 0.04 mg/kg, Chronic PAD = 0.04 mg/kg

Results/Discussion

As stated above, for the acute and chronic assessment, HED is concerned when the dietary risk exceeds 100% of the PAD.  The DEEM-FCID( analysis estimates the dietary exposure of the U.S. population and various population subgroups.  The chronic dietary exposure analysis results are reported in Table 5 for the general U.S. population, all infants (less than 1 year old), children 1-2, children 3-5, children 6-12, youth 13-19, females 13-49, adults 20-49, and adults 50+ years.

Dietary risk estimates are provided for the U.S. population and all population subgroups. This assessment concludes that for all supported registered commodities; the acute dietary risk estimates are below the Agency’s level of concern (less than 100% of the aPAD) for the U.S. population and all population subgroups.  Combined dietary exposure from food and drinking water at the 95th percentile is 8% of the aPAD for the U.S. population and 26% of the aPAD for all Infants, the most highly exposed population. See Table 4 below.

Table 4

Acute Aggregate Dietary Exposure at 95th  Percentile and Risk Estimates for the Reassessed Tolerances and 100% Crop Treated residue data files on Sugar Beet, Garden Beet and the proposed New Use on Spinach

aPAD ( 0.10 mg/kg bw/day)

DEEM-FCID

Population Subgroup	Residue Data Files1	Reassessed Tolerances2

	Exposure

mg/kg bw/day	% aPAD	Exposure

mg/kg bw/day	% aPAD

U.S. Population	0.006927

	6.9

	0.007640

	7.6

All infants 	0.025496	25.5	0.025626	25.6

Children 1-2 yrs	0.010859	10.9	0.011649	11.7

Children 3-5 yrs	0.009842	 9.8	0.010406	10.4

Children 6-12 yrs	0.006821	 6.8	0.007231	 7.2

Youth 13-19 yrs	0.005575	 5.6	0.005902	 5.9

Adults 20-49 yrs	0.006396	 6.4	0.007016	 7.0

Adults 50+ yrs	0.005815	 5.8	0.006309	 6.3

Females 13-49 yrs	0.006424	 6.4	0.006424	 6.4

**The values for the highest exposed population are bolded.

1. Anticipated residues were derived from field trial data and RDFs were created.  See Table 1.

2. Reassessed Tolerances only.

This assessment concludes that for all supported commodities for proposed uses; the chronic dietary risk estimates do not exceed HED’s level of concern (less than 100% of the cPAD) and all population subgroups.   Combined dietary exposure from food and drinking water is 4% of the cPAD for the U.S. population and 13% of the cPAD for all Infants (<1 year) the most highly exposed population subgroup.  See Table 5 below.

Table 5

Chronic Aggregate Dietary Exposure and Risk Estimates for Reassessed Tolerances on Sugar Beet, Garden Beet and the Proposed New Use on Spinach.

Population Subgroup

cPAD ( 0.04 mg/kg bw/day)

DEEM-FCID

Exposure, mg/kg bw/day

% cPAD

U.S. Population

0.001710

 4.3

All infants (< 1 yr)

0.005037

12.6

Children 1-2 yrs

0.002585

 6.5

Children 3-5 yrs

0.002352

 5.9

Children 6-12 yrs

0.001592

 4.0

Youth 13-19 yrs

0.001168

 2.9

Adults 20-49 yrs

0.001610

 4.0

Adults 50+ yrs

0.001735

 4.3

Females 13-49 yrs

0.001620

 4.0

**The values for the highest exposed population are bolded.

 VI.	Conclusions

The Acute and Chronic Aggregate Dietary Exposure and Risk Estimates for the U.S. population and all subgroups have dietary exposure and risk estimates less than 100% of the PAD which is below HED’s level of concern.

VII.		List of Attachments

			Attachment 1.  Acute Results File (Residue Data Files).

			Attachment 2.  Acute Results File (Reassessed Tolerances).

			Attachment 3.  Acute Input File (Residue Data Files).

			Attachment 4.  Chronic Input File.

			Attachment 5.  Chronic Results File.

Attachment 1.  Acute Results File (Residue Data Files).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                  Ver. 2.02

DEEM-FCID ACUTE Analysis for DESMEDIPHAM                         (1994-98 data)

Residue file: Desmedipham 01 03 2007 acute.R98    Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date: 01-03-2007/12:58:43    Residue file dated: 01-03-2007/12:53:17/8

Daily totals for food and foodform consumption used.

MC iterations = 1000      MC list in residue file     MC seed = 10

Run Comment: ""

======================================================================== =======

Summary calculations (per capita):

                    95th Percentile      99th Percentile      99.9th Percentile

                   Exposure   % aRfD    Exposure   % aRfD    Exposure   % aRfD

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

U.S. Population:

                    0.006927     6.93    0.013120    13.12    0.026355    26.36

All infants:

                    0.025496    25.50    0.036829    36.83    0.065502    65.50

Children 1-2 yrs:

                    0.010859    10.86    0.018758    18.76    0.028253    28.25

Children 3-5 yrs:

                    0.009842     9.84    0.015507    15.51    0.031799    31.80

Children 6-12 yrs:

                    0.006821     6.82    0.011613    11.61    0.016347    16.35

Youth 13-19 yrs:

                    0.005575     5.57    0.009377     9.38    0.016672    16.67

Adults 20-49 yrs:

                    0.006396     6.40    0.010852    10.85    0.019300    19.30

Adults 50+ yrs:

                    0.005815     5.81    0.008644     8.64    0.015599    15.60

Females 13-49 yrs:

                    0.006424     6.42    0.010709    10.71    0.020082    20.08

Attachment 2.  Acute Results File (Reassessed Tolerances).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                  Ver. 2.02

DEEM-FCID ACUTE Analysis for DESMEDIPHAM                         (1994-98 data)

Residue file: Desmedipham 01 04 2007 acute tol.R98

Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date: 01-04-2007/14:18:51    Residue file dated: 01-04-2007/14:17:08/8

Daily totals for food and foodform consumption used.

Run Comment: ""

======================================================================== =======

Summary calculations (per capita):

                    95th Percentile      99th Percentile      99.9th Percentile

                   Exposure   % aRfD    Exposure   % aRfD    Exposure   % aRfD

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

U.S. Population:

                    0.007640     7.64    0.015808    15.81    0.034876    34.88

All infants:

                    0.025626    25.63    0.037685    37.69    0.073484    73.48

Children 1-2 yrs:

                    0.011649    11.65    0.021319    21.32    0.078957    78.96

Children 3-5 yrs:

                    0.010406    10.41    0.017198    17.20    0.055068    55.07

Children 6-12 yrs:

                    0.007231     7.23    0.012605    12.61    0.023224    23.22

Youth 13-19 yrs:

                    0.005902     5.90    0.010431    10.43    0.022236    22.24

Adults 20-49 yrs:

                    0.007016     7.02    0.013718    13.72    0.029885    29.89

Adults 50+ yrs:

                    0.006309     6.31    0.012853    12.85    0.033900    33.90

Females 13-49 yrs:

                    0.007097     7.10    0.013634    13.63    0.030134    30.13

Attachment 3.  Acute Input File (Residue Data Files).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.02

DEEM-FCID Acute analysis for DESMEDIPHAM

Residue file name: F:\USER\PBARNES\Desmedipham\Spinach sugar beets garden beets\Desmedipham 01 03 2007 acute.R98

Analysis Date 01-03-2007             Residue file dated: 01-03-2007/12:53:17/8

Reference dose (aRfD) = 0.1 mg/kg bw/day

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

RDL indices and parameters for Monte Carlo Analysis:

Index Dist Parameter #1           Param #2    Param #3    Comment

  #   Code

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

  1    6   Garden beets root.rdf

  2    6   Garden beets tops.rdf

  3    6   Spinach.rdf

  4    6   Sugar  beets root.rdf

  5    6   Sugar  beets tops.rdf

  EPA    Crop Food Name                         Def Res     Adj.Factors  RDL  Comment

  Code    Grp                                    (ppm)       #1     #2   Pntr

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

01010500 1AB  Beet, garden, roots                0.050000   1.000  1.000   1

02000510 2    Beet, garden, tops                 1.000000   1.000  1.000   2

01010521 1A   Beet, sugar-babyfood               0.100000   1.000  1.000   4

01010530 1A   Beet, sugar, molasses              5.000000   1.000  1.000   5

01010531 1A   Beet, sugar, molasses-babyfood     5.000000   1.000  1.000   5

04013550 4A   Spinach                            6.000000   1.000  1.000   3

86010000 O    Water, direct, all sources         0.130000   1.000  1.000

86020000 O    Water, indirect, all sources       0.130000   1.000  1.000

Attachment 4. Chronic Input File.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.00

DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for DESMEDIPHAM                        1994-98 data

Residue file: F:\USER\PBARNES\Desmedipham\Spinach sugar beets garden beets\Desmedipham 1 03 2007 chronic.R98

                                                           Adjust. #2 NOT used

Analysis Date 01-03-2007             Residue file dated: 01-03-2007/12:42:33/8

Reference dose (RfD) = 0.04 mg/kg bw/day

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

Food Crop                                       Residue       Adj.Factors      Comment

EPA Code  Grp  Food Name                          (ppm)

                                                             #1         #2

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

01010500 1AB  Beet, garden, roots                0.050000   1.000      1.000

02000510 2    Beet, garden, tops                 1.000000   1.000      1.000

01010521 1A   Beet, sugar-babyfood               0.100000   1.000      1.000

01010530 1A   Beet, sugar, molasses              5.000000   1.000      1.000

01010531 1A   Beet, sugar, molasses-babyfood     5.000000   1.000      1.000

04013550 4A   Spinach                            6.000000   1.000      1.000

86010000 O    Water, direct, all sources         0.071000   1.000      1.000

86020000 O    Water, indirect, all sources       0.071000   1.000      1.000

Attachment 5.  Chronic Results File

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency                                 Ver. 2.00

DEEM-FCID Chronic analysis for DESMEDIPHAM                      (1994-98 data)

Residue file name: F:\USER\PBARNES\Desmedipham\Spinach sugar beets garden beets\Desmedipham 1 03 2007 chronic.R98

                                                 Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 01-03-2007/12:43:45     Residue file dated: 01-03-2007/12:42:33/8

Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = .04 mg/kg bw/day

======================================================================== =======

                    Total exposure by population subgroup

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

                                                    Total Exposure

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

          Population                         mg/kg             Percent of

           Subgroup                       body wt/day             Rfd

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

U.S. Population (total)                     0.001710                 4.3%

U.S. Population (spring season)             0.001689                 4.2%

U.S. Population (summer season)             0.001763                 4.4%

U.S. Population (autumn season)             0.001668                 4.2%

U.S. Population (winter season)             0.001723                 4.3%

Northeast region                            0.001650                 4.1%

Midwest region                              0.001657                 4.1%

Southern region                             0.001619                 4.0%

Western region                              0.001968                 4.9%

Hispanics                                   0.001847                 4.6%

Non-hispanic whites                         0.001659                 4.1%

Non-hispanic blacks                         0.001662                 4.2%

Non-hisp/non-white/non-black                0.002371                 5.9%

All infants (< 1 year)                      0.005037                12.6%

Nursing infants                             0.001983                 5.0%

Non-nursing infants                         0.006196                15.5%

Children 1-6  yrs                           0.002378                 5.9%

Children 7-12 yrs                           0.001511                 3.8%

Females 13-19 (not preg or nursing)         0.001110                 2.8%

Females 20+ (not preg or nursing)           0.001774                 4.4%

Females 13-50 yrs                           0.001657                 4.1%

Females 13+ (preg/not nursing)              0.001514                 3.8%

Females 13+ (nursing)                       0.002489                 6.2%

Males 13-19 yrs                             0.001216                 3.0%

Males 20+ yrs                               0.001522                 3.8%

Seniors 55+                                 0.001718                 4.3%

Children 1-2 yrs                            0.002585                 6.5%

Children 3-5 yrs                            0.002352                 5.9%

Children 6-12 yrs                           0.001592                 4.0%

Youth 13-19 yrs                             0.001168                 2.9%

Adults 20-49 yrs                            0.001610                 4.0%

Adults 50+ yrs                              0.001735                 4.3%

Females 13-49 yrs                           0.001620                 4.0%

Desmedipham	Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessment	DP Barcode: DP 334732

PC Code: 104801		Page:   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  11

Desmedipham	Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessment	DP Barcode: 334732

PC Code: 104801		Page:   PAGE  6  of   NUMPAGES  11

Desmedipham	Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessment	DP Barcode: 334732

PC Code: 104801		Page:   PAGE  7  of   NUMPAGES  11

Desmedipham	Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessment	DP Barcode: 334732

PC Code: 104801		Page:   PAGE  11  of   NUMPAGES  11


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 205 (Friday, October 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64493-64495]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26974]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2015-0160]

Privacy Act of 1974; Department of Transportation/ALL 8, Parking
and Transit Benefit System

AGENCY: Privacy Office, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Privacy Act system of records.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the U.S.
Department of Transportation proposes to rename, update, and reissue
the Department of Transportation system of records currently titled,
``Department of Transportation/ALL 8 Employee Transportation
Facilitation System of Records.'' This system of records allows the
Department of Transportation/Office of the Secretary to collect and
maintain records on Department of Transportation employees who
participate in the Department's transit, carpool/vanpool, bicycle and
parking benefit program, employees of other Federal agencies for whom
DOT administers a Federal carpool/vanpool, and/or parking and transit
benefit program. It also allows the Federal Aviation Administration to
collect and maintain records on behalf of its employees who participate
in transit and parking benefit programs administered by the Federal
Aviation Administration. In addition to non-substantive changes to
simply the formatting and text of the previously published notice, we
are revising this notice to reflect System Manager's address change,
and clarify the routine uses of information in the system. This updated
system will be renamed and included in the Department of
Transportation's inventory of record systems and referred to as ``DOT/
ALL 8--Parking and Transit Benefit System.''

DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before November 23,
2015. The Department may publish an amended SORN in light of any
comments received. This revised system will be effective November 23,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number DOT-
OST-2015-0160 by any of the following methods:
     Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number
DOT-OST-2015-0160. All comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received in any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register published on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316-3317).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions, please contact: Claire
W. Barrett, Departmental Chief Privacy Officer, Privacy Office,
Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
(202) 527-3284.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The DOT/Office of the Secretary (OST) manages a Transportation
Subsidy Program (TSP) and facilitates the distribution of public-
transport fare media to DOT and other Federal Agency employees, to
schedule distribution of the fare media, to maintain an inventory of
fare media on hand, and to manage the fare media billing. DOT
administers the TSP for its employees, and, also, for employees of
other Federal agencies through Interagency Agreements between DOT and
the employer-agency. Additionally, the Office of Transportation
Services (TRANServe), within DOT's Office of the Assistant Secretary
for Administration, manages the bicycle benefit program and the vehicle
parking resources at the DOT South East Federal Center (SEFC)
Headquarters Facility. Parking at the Headquarters Facility is
allocated via the DOT Headquarters Parking Application (DOT HPA)
reservation system. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
administers its own parking and transit benefit program for FAA
employees in the Washington, DC area (transit and parking benefits for
FAA field office employees are administered by OST).
    In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT)/Office of the Secretary of
Transportation (OST) proposes to rename, update, and reissue the DOT
system of records currently titled, ``DOT/ALL-8 Employee Transportation
Facilitation.'' This system of records will be renamed ``DOT/ALL-8,
Parking and Transit Benefit System.''
    In addition, we are updating this system of records notice to
reflect the change in the system manager's address resulting from DOT's
move from its previous headquarters location at 400 7th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20950, to its new location of 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. We have also updated the system to provide
greater detail about the categories of records collected and
maintained, and include additional categories to reflect DOT's
administration of the bicycle benefit program. Additionally, DOT will
begin to collect the names of other riders in van pools (in addition to
those individuals who are participating in the TSP). DOT will collect
this information to aid in efforts to identify potential waste, fraud,
and abuse. Finally, we are updating the routine uses to provide greater
clarity and specificity to our routine uses of the information in this
system. The current SORN generally describes the routine uses for this
system in a narrative format. We wish to update this to provide great
specificity about who we disclose these records to and the purposes for
which we make the disclosure. We believe that these changes do not
substantively alter the current routine uses, but merely provide
greater transparency.
    This updated system will be included in DOT's inventory of record
systems.

II. Privacy Act

    The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) governs the means by which the
Federal Government collects, maintains, and uses personally
identifiable information (PII) in a System of Records. A ``System of
Records'' is a group of any records under the control of a Federal
agency from which information about individuals is retrieved by name or
other personal identifier. The Privacy

Act requires each agency to publish in the Federal Register a System of
Records notice (SORN) identifying and describing each System of Records
the agency maintains, including the purposes for which the agency uses
PII in the system, the routine uses for which the agency discloses such
information outside the agency, and how individuals to whom a Privacy
Act record pertains can exercise their rights under the Privacy Act
(e.g., to determine if the system contains information about them and
to contest inaccurate information).
    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), DOT has provided a report of
this system of records to the Office of Management and Budget and to
Congress.
SYSTEM OF RECORDS:
    DOT/ALL 8

SYSTEM NAME:
    Parking and Transit Benefit System.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:
    Unclassified, sensitive.

SYSTEM LOCATION:
    Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary, Parking and
Transit Benefit Office, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20950;
Federal Aviation Administration, Transit Benefit Office, 800
Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:
    Federal employees' who receive transit or bicycle subsidies, who
hold parking permits, or are members of carpools and vanpools;
applicants for ridesharing information; recipients of match letters for
carpooling; applicants for transit subsidies issued by DOT; vanpool
operators.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
    Categories of records in the system include:
    The following information about recipients of bicycle or transit
subsidies; holders of parking permits, participants in carpools or
vanpools; or applicants for ridesharing information:
    Full name
    Employee identification number (which, depending on the employer,
may be the employee's social security number, the last four digits of
the employee's social security number, or some other identification
number used by a Federal agency as an employee's identification number)
    Employer name
    Employer's address
    Home address
    Business telephone number
    Employee's work email address
    Transit provider name, address, and mode of transportation used for
commute
    Location employee commutes to/from
    Number of days employee commutes per month
    Subsidy amount
    System identifier (number randomly generated by DOT's system and
assigned to files)
    Transit card number
    Parking permit number
    License plate number and issuing state
    Parking permit holder payment status (paid/unpaid) and payment
information
    Bicycle benefit recipients' itemized lists of expenditures eligible
for bicycle benefit
    The following information may be collected and maintained about van
pool operators:
    Full name
    Business address
    First and last name of individuals who use the van pool

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:
    5 U.S.C. 7905; 26 U.S.C. 132; 26 CFR 132f; Executive Order 13150
(April 21, 2001)

PURPOSE:
    The purpose of this system is to collect and maintain information
about Federal employees' and vanpool operators who participate in
carpool/vanpool, transit, parking, or bicycle benefit programs in
connection with the DOT's administration of these programs for its and
other Federal agency employees.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES
OF USERS AND THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
    In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C.
552a(b) of the Privacy Act, all or a portion of the records or
information contained in this system may be disclosed outside DOT as a
routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows:

    1. To the Federal agency for whom DOT administers a transit benefit
program, for purposes of verifying that agency's employee's
participation in the program, and auditing and verifying disbursements;
    2. To the operators of transit systems or vanpools for purposes of
activating, distributing, and verifying benefits;
    3. To the entity that manages the parking facility at the DOT
Headquarters in Southeast Washington, DC, information about individuals
who have delinquent daily parking fees for purpose of ensuring
eligibility of daily parkers;
    4. To the Department of Treasury's approved Financial Agent for
purposes of distributing transit benefits;
    5. To consumer reporting agencies (collecting on behalf of the
United States Government) as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act
(15 U.S.C. 1681a(f)) or the Federal Claims Collection Act of 1982 (31
U.S.C. 3701(a)(3));
    6. See ``Prefatory Statement of General Routine Uses'' (available
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy/privacyactnotices). Other possible
routine uses of the information, applicable to all DOT Privacy Act
systems of records, are published in the Federal Register at 75 FR
82132, December 29, 2010, and 77 FR 42796, July 20, 2012, under
``Prefatory Statement of General Routine Uses'' (available at http://www.dot.gov/privacy/privacyactnotices).

DISCLOSURES TO CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES:
    Disclosures may be made from this system to consumer reporting
agencies (collecting on behalf of the United States Government) as
defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a(f)) or the
Federal Claims Collection Act of 1982 (31 U.S.C. 3701(a)(3)).

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING,
AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
STORAGE:
    Hard copy or electronically. Hard copies are maintained at the
System Manager address.

RETRIEVABILITY:
    Records can be retrieved by employer agency name, participant name,
or any other identifier in the system

SAFEGUARDS:
    Records in this system are safeguarded in accordance with
applicable rules and policies, including all applicable DOT automated
systems security and access policies. Appropriate controls have been
imposed to minimize the risk of compromising the information that is
being stored. Access to records in this system is limited to those
individuals who have a need to know the information for the performance
of their official duties and who have appropriate permissions.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
    Records in this system are retained for three years and then
destroyed, in

accordance with General Record Schedule 9, Item 7. Source documents
provided to DOT by its Federal agencies customers are considered
temporary records and are destroyed not more than 120 after of receipt
by DOT.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:
    OST Parking and Transit Office, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
Washington, DC 20950; FAA Transit Benefit Office, 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:
    Individuals seeking notification of and access to any record
contained in this system of records, or seeking to contest its content,
may submit a request in writing to the OST Parking and Transit Office
at the contact information provided under ``System Manager and
Address.'' FAA employees in the National Capital Region seeking
notification of and access to any record contained in this system, or
seeking to contest its content, may submit a request in writing to the
FAA Transit Benefit Office at the contact information provided under
``System Manager and Address.''
    When seeking records about yourself from this system of records or
any other Departmental system of records your request must conform with
the Privacy Act regulations set forth in 49 CFR part 10. You must sign
your request, and your signature must either be notarized or submitted
under 28 U.S.C. 1746, a law that permits statements to be made under
penalty of perjury as a substitute for notarization. While no specific
form is required, you may obtain forms for this purpose from the
Departmental Freedom of Information Act Officer, http://www.dot.gov/foia or<PHONE_NUMBER>. In addition you should provide the following:
     An explanation of why you believe the Department would
have information on you;
     Identify which component(s) of the Department you believe
may have the information about you;
     Specify when you believe the records would have been
created;
     Provide any other information that will help the FOIA
staff determine which DOT component agency may have responsive records;
and
    If your request is seeking records pertaining to another living
individual, you must include a statement from that individual
certifying his/her agreement for you to access his/her records. Without
this bulleted information the component(s) may not be able to conduct
an effective search, and your request may be denied due to lack of
specificity or lack of compliance with applicable regulations.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:
    See ``Notification procedure'' above.

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:
    See ``Notification procedure'' above.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
    Records are obtain from applications submitted by individuals for
parking permits, carpool and vanpool membership, ridesharing
information, and fare subsidies; from notifications from other Federal
agencies in the program; and from periodic certifications or
recertifications and reports regarding fare subsidies.

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:
    None.

Claire W. Barrett,
Departmental Chief Privacy Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-26974 Filed 10-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register: February 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 33)]
[Notices]
[Page 7789-7790]
[DOCID:fr20fe07-33]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55280; File No. SR-NASD-2007-003]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Regarding Fees and Credits for the NASD/BSE Trade Reporting
Facility

February 12, 2007.
    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 January 16, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD'') 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 NASD. NASD filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing
with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD proposes to adopt a new NASD Rule 7000D Series relating to
fees and credits for the Trade Reporting Facility (``NASD/BSE TRF'')
established by NASD and the Boston Stock Exchange (``BSE''). The text
of the proposed rule change is available at http://www.nasd.com, NASD, and 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, NASD 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. NASD has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    On December 13, 2006, the Commission approved SR-NASD-2006-115,\5\
which established rules relating to the new NASD/BSE TRF. The NASD/BSE
TRF will provide NASD members with another mechanism for reporting to
NASD locked-in transactions in exchange-listed securities effected
otherwise than on an exchange. It is anticipated that the NASD/BSE TRF
will commence operation in February 2007 upon successful completion of
system testing and certification. The instant proposed rule change
would adopt a new NASD Rule 7000D Series relating to fees and credits
applicable to the NASD/BSE TRF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54932 (December 13,
2006), 71 FR 76409 (December 20, 2006)(order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD is proposing that under new Rule 7002D there will be no
transaction fee for reporting locked-in trades to the NASD/BSE TRF in
securities listed on the New York Stock Exchange (``Tape A''), the
American Stock Exchange (``Tape B''), and the Nasdaq Exchange (``Tape
C''). Although NASD is not required to file a proposed rule change
where no fees are to be assessed, for members' convenience and to avoid
potential confusion with the fee structures of other NASD facilities,
NASD is proposing Rule 7002D to clarify that there will be no charge
for use of the NASD/BSE TRF to report locked-in transactions in
exchange-listed securities effected otherwise than on an exchange. The
text of proposed Rule 7002D is identical to the text of current Rule
7002C relating to the NASD/NSX TRF.
    In addition, NASD is proposing a transaction credit program under
new Rule 7001D that is identical to the existing transaction credit
program for the NASD/Nasdaq TRF under Rule 7001B.\6\ NASD members
reporting trades in Tape A, Tape B and Tape C stocks to the NASD/BSE
TRF will receive a 50% pro rata credit on market data revenue earned by
the NASD/BSE TRF with respect to those trade reports after deducting
the amount, if any, that the Trade Reporting Facility pays to the

Consolidated Tape Association or the Nasdaq Securities Information
Processor for capacity usage. Credits will be paid on a quarterly
basis. To the extent that market data revenue is subject to any
adjustment, credits may be adjusted accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54353 (August 23,
2006), 71 FR 51255 (August 29, 2006).
    NASD also notes that the proposed transaction credit program is
substantially equivalent to the existing transaction credit program
for the NASD/NSX TRF under Rule 7001C. The only difference between
the two programs is that under the NASD/NSX TRF transaction credit
program, members receive 50% of gross revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tape A and Tape B revenue is currently distributed to NASD and the
exchanges based on number of trades reported, while Tape C revenue is
distributed based on an average of the number of trades and number of
shares reported. Thus, under the proposed program, the Tape A and Tape
B revenue attributable to a member will be based on number of trades
reported, while the Tape C revenue attributable to a member would be
based on number of trades and number of shares reported. A member will
receive 50% of the revenue attributable to it in each of the three
tapes.
    NASD filed the proposed rule change for immediate effectiveness.
NASD proposes to implement the proposed rule change on the first day of
operation of the NASD/BSE TRF, which is currently anticipated to be in
February 2007.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A of the Act,\7\ in general, and with Section
15A(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, which requires, among other
things, that NASD rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees and other charges among members and issuers and
other persons using any facility or system that NASD operates or
controls. NASD believes that the proposed rule change is a reasonable
and equitable fee and credit structure in that there will be no fees
charged for trade reporting to the NASD/BSE TRF and the proposed
transaction credit program is identical to existing credits for the
NASD/Nasdaq TRF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 7o-3.
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 8o-3(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    (i) Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    (ii) Impose any significant burden on competition; and
    (iii) Become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \9\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\10\ At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily
abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASD has asked that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay
set forth in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act \11\ to allow the
proposed rule change to be implemented on the first day of operation of
the NASD/BSE TRF, which is currently anticipated to be in February
2007. The Commission believes such waiver is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest, for it will allow the
proposed fees and credits to be in place at the time NASD begins
operating the NASD/BSE TRF. For these reasons, the Commission
designates the proposal to be effective and operative upon filing with
the Commission.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(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 (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NASD-2007-003 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2007-003. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of NASD. All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-NASD-2007-003 and should be submitted on or before March 13, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-2852 Filed 2-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34406-34408]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13488]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0018]

Asbestos in General Industry; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection
(Paperwork) Requirements

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

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Standard on
Asbestos in General Industry (29 CFR 1910.1001).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
August 6, 2013.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, OSHA Docket No. OSHA-2010-0018,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier
service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket
Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., ET

    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2010-0018) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). All comments, including any personal information you provide,
are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information
on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires OSHA to obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The basic purpose of the information collection requirements in the
Standard is to document that employers in general industry are
providing their workers with protection from exposure to hazardous
asbestos. Asbestos exposure results in asbestosis, an emphysema-like
condition; lung cancer; mesothelioma; and gastrointestinal cancer.
    Several provisions of the Standard specify paperwork requirements,
including: implementing an exposure monitoring program that notifies
workers of their exposure monitoring results, establishing a written
compliance program, and informing laundry personnel of the requirement
to prevent release of airborne asbestos above the time-weighted average
and excursion limit. Other provisions associated with paperwork
requirements include: Maintaining records of information obtained
concerning the presence, location, and quantity of asbestos-containing
materials (ACMs) and/or presumed asbestos-containing materials (PACMs)
in a building/facility; notifying housekeeping workers of the presence
and location of ACMs and PACMs in areas they may occupy during their
work; posting warning signs demarcating regulated areas; posting signs
in mechanical rooms/areas that workers may enter and that contain ACMs
and PACMs, informing them of the identity and location of these
materials and about work practices that prevent disturbing the
materials; and affixing warning labels to asbestos-containing products
and to containers holding such products. Additional provisions that
contain paperwork requirements include: Using information, data, and
analyses to demonstrate that PACMs do not contain asbestos; providing
medical surveillance for workers potentially exposed to ACMs and/or
PACMs, including administering a worker medical questionnaire,
providing information to the examining physician, and providing the
physician's written opinion to the worker; maintaining records of
exposure monitoring, objective data used for exposure determinations,
and medical surveillance; and making specified records (e.g., exposure
monitoring and medical surveillance records) available to designated
parties.
    These paperwork requirements permit employers, workers and their
designated representatives, OSHA, and other specified parties to
determine the effectiveness of an employer's asbestos-control program.
Accordingly, the requirements ensure that workers exposed to asbestos
receive all of the protections afforded by the Standard.

II. Special Issues for Comment

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

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting an adjustment decrease in burden hours from
11,932 to 11,694 (a total decrease of 238 hours). The reason for this
reduction is the removal of burden hours associated with the
requirement that employers provide training to workers. Upon further
analysis, this provision is not considered to be a collection of
information under PRA-95.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Asbestos in General Industry (29 CFR 1910.1001).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0133.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 121.
    Frequency of Response: Annually; Semi-annually.
    Total Responses: 32,253.
    Average Time per Response: Varies from 5 minutes to maintain
records to 1.5 hours for workers to receive medical evaluations.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 11,694.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $925,026.

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

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name

and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0018). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>). Comments
and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit
comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User
Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about
materials not available through the Web site and for assistance in
using the Internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on June 3, 2013.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2013-13488 Filed 6-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52994-52995]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20774]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70241; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2013-109]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Modify NASDAQ's Optional Anti-Internalization Functionality

August 21, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on August 16, 2013, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``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. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ proposes to modify NASDAQ's optional anti-internalization
functionality.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.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, NASDAQ 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
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    NASDAQ is proposing to modify its voluntary anti-internalization
functionality to provide an additional option under that functionality.
In addition, the proposed rule change contains certain clarifications
to the text of the rule. Anti-internalization functionality is designed
to assist market participants in complying with certain rules and
regulations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (``ERISA'')
that preclude and/or limit broker-dealers managing accounts governed by
ERISA from trading as principal with orders generated for those
accounts. The functionality can also assist market participants in
avoiding execution fees that may result from the interaction of
executable buy and sell trading interest from the same firm. NASDAQ
notes that use of the functionality does not relieve or otherwise
modify the duty of best execution owed to orders received from public
customers. As such, market participants using anti-internalization
functionality will need to take appropriate steps to ensure that public
customer orders that do not execute because of the use of anti-
internalization functionality ultimately receive the same execution
price (or better) they would have originally obtained if execution of
the order was not inhibited by the functionality.
    Currently, market participants may apply anti-internalization logic
to all quotes/orders entered through a particular MPID, or to all
orders entered through a particular order entry port, to which a unique
group identification modifier is then appended. In other words, the
logic may be applied on an MPID-by-MPID, or on a port-by-port basis.\3\
Currently, two forms of anti-internalization logic may be applied: (i)
if quotes/orders are equivalent in size, both quotes/orders will be
cancelled, or if they are not equivalent in size, the smaller will be
cancelled and the size of the larger will be reduced by the size of the
smaller; or (ii) regardless of the size of the quotes/orders, the
oldest quote/order will be cancelled in full. The applicable logic may
be applied to an entire MPID, or alternatively, different logic may be
applied to different order entry ports under a particular MPID.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In the proposed rule change that introduced the ability to
assign a group identification modifier with respect to anti-
internalization processing, NASDAQ stated that the modifier may be
assigned ``at the port level.'' Securities Exchange Act Release No.
65868 (December 2, 2011), 76 FR 76795 (December 8, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-
2011-158). However, this level of specificity was not included in
the text of Rule 4757. In addition, although the rule indicates that
designation of functionality at the port level is an option
available to the market participant, the rule does not make it clear
that in order to make use of these options, market participants must
use NASDAQ's OUCH order entry protocol. Thus, the proposed rule
change also adds additional specificity to the rule text with
respect to these aspects of the anti-internalization functionality.
    \4\ With respect to this functionality also, participants
wishing to make designations on the order port level must use the
OUCH order entry protocol.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to member input, the proposed rule change will add an
additional form of anti-internalization logic that a market participant
could choose to apply, under which the most recent quote/order would be
cancelled. As with the two existing forms of anti-internalization
logic, the logic could be applied to an entire MPID, or to selected
order entry ports under a particular MPID.\5\ NASDAQ believes that the
change will provide members with an additional tool for managing the
book of

orders that they submit to NASDAQ and the associated execution costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\6\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \7\ in particular, in that the proposal 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. Specifically, NASDAQ
believes that the change, which is responsive to member input, will
facilitate transactions in securities and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market by providing members with additional optional
functionality that may assist them with managing the book of orders
that they submit to NASDAQ and the associated execution costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Specifically, by
offering market participants additional options with regard to
preventing inadvertent internalization of orders submitted to NASDAQ,
the change has the potential to enhance NASDAQ's competitiveness with
respect to other trading venues, thereby promoting greater competition.
Moreover, the change does not burden competition in that its use is
optional and provided at no additional cost to members.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \8\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NASDAQ-2013-109 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-109. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room on official business days
between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
offices of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number
SR-NASDAQ-2013-109, and should be submitted on or before September 17,
2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20774 Filed 8-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P