[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47977-47984]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19610]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86878; File No. SR-CBOE-2019-050]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Exchange Rules Regarding Routing Services, Including the Hybrid Agency
Liaison System, and Move Those Rules From the Currently Effective
Rulebook to the Shell Rulebook To Be Effective Upon Migration

September 5, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on August 23, 2019, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``Cboe Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Rules regarding
routing services, including the Hybrid Agency Liaison (``HAL'') system,
and move those Rules from the currently effective Rulebook (``current
Rulebook'') to the

shell structure for the Exchange's Rulebook that will become effective
upon the migration of the Exchange's trading platform to the same
system used by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges (as defined below)
(``shell Rulebook''). The text of the proposed rule change is provided
in Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    In 2016, the Exchange's parent company, Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
(formerly named CBOE Holdings, Inc.) (``Cboe Global''), which is also
the parent company of Cboe C2 Exchange, Inc. (``C2''), acquired Cboe
EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA''), Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'' or
``EDGX Options''), Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or ``BZX
Options''), and Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (``BYX'' and, together with
Cboe Options, C2, EDGX, EDGA, and BZX, the ``Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges''). The Cboe Affiliated Exchanges are working to align
certain system functionality, retaining only intended differences,
between the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, in the context of a technology
migration. Cboe Options intends to migrate its trading platform to the
same system used by the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, which the Exchange
expects to complete on October 7, 2019. In connection with this
technology migration, the Exchange has a shell Rulebook that resides
alongside its current Rulebook, which shell Rulebook will contain the
Rules that will be in place upon completion of the Cboe Options
technology migration.
    The Exchange proposes to harmonize its rules in connection with
routing functions on the Exchange to that of the Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to update and amend
current Rule 6.14A, which governs the operation of the HAL system to be
consistent with of the corresponding rule of EDGX Options, Rule 21.18,
which governs the operation of the Step Up Mechanism (``SUM''). The
Exchange also proposes to harmonize Rule 6.6A, Rule 6.14B, and Rule
6.14C with that of its affiliate option exchange, C2, Rule 6.15, as
well as EDGX and BZX Rule(s) 21.9, which provide for order routing
rules of the exchange. The Exchange proposes these amendments to
reflect the routing functions rule language of the Cboe Affiliated
Exchange rules, retaining only slight differences regarding Exchange-
specific language/definitions. In conforming its routing rules to that
of the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges' rules, the Exchange proposes few
substantive changes, namely amending the rules to allow for all Users
\5\ to respond to a SUM (the Exchange proposes to rename HAL as SUM,
and refers to SUM herein) exposure message, to allow a User to opt out
of having its exposed order routed to other exchanges at the conclusion
of a SUM exposure period, to update the scenarios in which a SUM
auction will terminate early (which includes incorporating provisions
that account for All-or-None orders), and, finally, to adopt the order
routing functionality currently in place on the Cboe Affiliated
Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``User'' means any TPH or Sponsored User who is
authorized to obtain access to the System. See Rule 1.1 in the shell
Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to make non-substantive changes to
simplify, clarify, and generally update its routing rules by
consolidating its routing provisions into a single rule, simplify rule
language, update the rule text to read in plain English, reformat the
paragraph lettering and/or numbering, and update cross-references to
rules not yet in the shell Rulebook but that will be in the shell
Rulebook and implemented upon migration.
Proposed Rule 5.35
    Current Rule 6.14A governs the operation of HAL. SUM is the EDGX
Options equivalent of the Exchange's HAL. Both systems allow for orders
not automatically executed by the respective exchange to ``step up'' to
meet the NBBO in order to interact with orders sent to the Exchange.
Both rules govern the current handling of orders eligible for such
automatic handling, which include (i) an order that is marketable
against the Exchange's disseminated quotation (the ``BBO'', as
specifically defined in the Exchange's Rules) while not the NBBO and
(ii) an order that would improve the BBO and that is marketable against
quotations disseminated by other exchanges (the ``ABBO'') that are
participants in the Options Order Protection and Locked/Crossed Plan
(the ``Linkage Plan'').\6\ In anticipation of migration, the Exchange
proposes to move Rule 6.14A to proposed Rule 5.35 (and subsequently
delete Rule 6.14A upon migration) and amend the current provisions
under Rule 6.14A to be consistent with EDGX Option's corresponding Rule
21.18. This includes renaming ``HAL'' to be called ``SUM'', which, as
stated, is a substantially similar system for processing orders not
automatically executed by the respective exchanges. The automatic
handling systems across the affiliated exchanges will function in a
substantively identical manner upon migration, therefore updating HAL
to be called SUM will mitigate any potential investor confusion and
provide for uniform rules regarding the same functionality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The proposed rule deletes an additional eligible order
provision that will no longer apply the rules and functionality on
Cboe Options upon migration because the drill through provision
referenced will mirror that of EDGX Options, which is not SUM
specific.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently on HAL, pursuant to Rule 6.14A(b), only Market-Makers
with an appointment in the relevant option class and Trading Permit
Holders (``TPHs'') acting as agent for orders resting at the top of the
Book in the relevant option series opposite the order submitted to HAL
may submit responses to the exposure message during the exposure period
(unless the Exchange determines, on a class-by-class basis, to allow
all TPHs to submit responses to the exposure message). The proposed
rule change updates this provision to align with the manner in which
SUM responses function on EDGX Options; all Users may submit responses
to the exposure message during the exposure period.\7\ The Exchange
currently allows all TPHs to respond to all classes during the exposure
period, therefore this change does not change or impact the manner in
which the SUM process currently functions, but instead merely removes
the flexibility for the Exchange to allow all TPHs to respond on a
class-by-class basis, as this is the manner in which the Exchange
intends for the

SUM process to continue to function upon migration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See proposed 5.35(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that as a result of this proposed change, the
proposed rule also removes: (i) The current rule text which provides
that an order will not be exposed if the Exchange quotation contains
resting orders and does not contain sufficient Market Maker quotation
interest to satisfy the entire order; (ii) the early termination
provision that terminate an exposure period if Market Maker interest
decrements to an amount equal to the size of the exposed order; and
(iii) the current Interpretation and Policy .01 which prohibits the
redistribution of exposure messages to market participants not eligible
to respond to such messages. The proposed rule change removes these
provisions because the Exchange proposes for SUM to not be dependent
only on Market-Maker interest in any way and all Users will be
permitted to respond to all exposure messages.
    The proposed rule change also amends the current provision
regarding allocation of exposed orders to allow for a User to opt out
of having the remaining portion of its exposed order routed to other
exchanges following the exposure period.\8\ This is consistent with the
EDGX Options SUM rule and the manner in which Users on EDGX Options may
currently opt out of having their remaining portion of SUM exposed
orders routed away.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See proposed Rule 5.35(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change also updates the rule to be consistent
with how EDGX Options SUM process handles an All or None (``AON'')
order,\9\ which is currently an order type available on the Exchange.
Currently (and as proposed), any responses priced at the prevailing
NBBO or better, and any unrelated order or quote on the opposite side
of the market from the exposed order that could trade against the
exposed order at the prevailing NBBO or better, will immediately trade
against the exposed order, and the exposure period will continue. A SUM
(current HAL) exposure period will currently terminate upon the receipt
of a response (or unrelated order or quote) to trade the entire exposed
order at the NBBO or better. Because an AON order cannot partially
execute pursuant to its terms, the proposed rule change makes it
explicit that during the exposure of an AON order, the System will hold
responses priced at or better than the prevailing NBBO (rather than
trade against the exposed AON immediately) until there is sufficient
aggregate size to satisfy the AON order,\10\ and that a SUM exposure
period will terminate upon the receipt of multiple responses with
sufficient aggregate size to satisfy the AON order.\11\ This is the
manner in which the HAL system currently functions, and the proposed
change merely codifies this in the proposed rule. In addition to this,
the proposed rule change provides that if an AON order is exposed and
the Exchange receives an unrelated order or quote that would be
displayed at a price at or better than the NBBO with insufficient size
to satisfy the exposed order, the SUM exposure period terminates and
the exposed order is processed pursuant to the allocation of exposed
orders provision \12\ under the SUM process.\13\ This is consistent
with current HAL functionality, to which an order is eligible for the
process if its price is marketable against the Exchange's disseminated
quotation that is not at the NBBO. Because a SUM auction would not have
begun if the Exchange displayed a contra-side order at the NBBO, the
Exchange believes it is appropriate to terminate the exposure period if
that situation arises in connection with exposed AON orders during the
exposure period.\14\ As stated, this is consistent with the way in
which the current HAL system and SUM on EDGX Options function.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Pursuant to Rule 1.1 in shell Rulebook an ``All-or-None'' or
``AON'' order is an order to be executed in its entirety or not at
all. An AON order may be a market or limit order.
    \10\ See proposed Rule 5.35(c)(1).
    \11\ See proposed Rule 5.35(d).
    \12\ See proposed Rule 5.35(c).
    \13\ If an AON order is exposed and the Exchange receives an
unrelated AON order with a price at or better than the NBBO with
insufficient size to satisfy the exposed order the exposure period
will continue because the incoming AON order would not be displayed
at a price at or better than the NBBO.
    \14\ For example, suppose the NBBO is 1.00 x 1.20 and the Cboe
Options BBO is 1.00 x 1.25, and an AON order to buy 10 at 1.20 is
exposed at 1.20 pursuant to SUM. During the exposure period, the
Exchange receives an order to sell 5 at 1.20. The incoming order
cannot satisfy the size of the exposed AON order, so it would enter
the Cboe Options Book and would cause the Cboe Options BBO to become
1.00 x 1.20. Therefore, upon receipt of that order, the exposure
period terminates and the exposed AON order will be process pursuant
to proposed Rule 5.35(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange amends the other provisions in connection with early
termination of exposure period to be consistent with the EDGX Option's
SUM rule. The proposed rule change amends these provisions to include
early termination when the exposed order is no longer marketable
against the NBBO or if a resting order on the Exchange is locked or
crossed by another options exchange.\15\ In addition to aligning with
the reasons a SUM auction may currently terminate on EDGX Options, the
Exchange believes that these scenarios are reasonable to terminate the
SUM process because if an order is no longer marketable, then it cannot
be executed through the SUM process and no longer benefit from
exposure, and continuing to expose a resting order resting in a locked
or crossed market may likely presents difficulties with respect to the
handling of the resting order, particularly if an exposed, routable
order should be routed for potential price improvement to another
options exchange that has published a crossing quotation. The proposed
rule change also removes current early termination provisions which
would terminate an exposure period when a same-side order is received
by the Exchange and if the underlying security enters a limit up limit
down state. The Exchange believes because a User will have the ability
to cancel its order after the SUM process is initiated coupled with the
fact that the Exchange will only execute an order that has been exposed
via the SUM process to the extent the order is marketable against the
NBBO (as proposed below) will mitigate any potential concern in
removing these early termination provisions. As stated, this is
consistent with the scenarios for early termination currently on EDGX
Options and the Exchange does not believe that the proposed updates
present any new or novel changes or significantly impact functionality
of the step up process as it will operate in substantially the same
manner as it currently does.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See proposed Rule 5.35(d)(1)-(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes other proposed changes such as making explicit
that bulk messages will not be eligible for SUM. Cboe Options intends
to implement bulk message functionality upon migration, therefore now
proposes to reflect this functionality in its proposed SUM rule (as
well as in proposed Rule 5.36 for order routing, described in detail
below).\16\ Bulk messages are the equivalent of the Exchange's current
quoting functionality. Currently, quotes do not route to other
exchanges, and thus are not eligible for HAL. Therefore, the proposed
rule change is consistent with current functionality. EDGX Options Rule
21.18 also states that bulk messages are not eligible for SUM. The
proposed change also includes a few additional details that are
consistent with EDGX Options SUM rule and the manner in which the HAL
process currently functions but are not made explicit in the current
HAL rule. This

includes making clear that responses are ``cancelled back'' at the end
of the exposure period if unexecuted,\17\ that responses may become
executable based on changes to the prevailing NBBO,\18\ and that the
Exchange will not initiate the SUM process if the NBBO is crossed.\19\
These updates do not alter the manner in which HAL currently functions
but merely make explicit in the rules the operation of the proposed SUM
process.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Rule 5.5(c).
    \17\ See proposed Rule 5.35(b)(3).
    \18\ See proposed Rule 5.35(c)(3).
    \19\ See proposed Rule 5.35(a). The Exchange notes that this is
current EDGX Rule 21.18.02.
    \20\ The Exchange also removes Interpretation and Policy .01
which provides that all pronouncements regarding determinations by
the Exchange pursuant to Rule 6.14A and the Interpretations and
Policies thereunder will be announced to Trading Permit Holders via
Regulatory Circular as upon migration all Exchange determinations
under the Rules will automatically be made pursuant to
specifications, Notices, or Regulatory Circulars with appropriate
advanced notice, which are posted on the Exchange's website, or
electronic message. See Rule 1.5 in the shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule 5.36
    The Exchange proposes to adopt the order routing rule of its
affiliated options exchange, C2 Rule 6.15, under proposed Rule 5.36 in
the shell Rulebook. The Exchange will continue to support orders that
are designated to be routed to the NBBO as well as orders that will
execute only within Cboe Options.
    Proposed Rule 5.36(a) states for System securities, the order
routing process is available to Users from 9:30 a.m. until market
close. Users can designate an order as either available or not
available for routing. Orders designated as not available for routing
and bulk messages, which will not be for routing, are processed
pursuant to Rule 5.32 \21\ (which will be the rule governing order and
quote Book processing, display, priority, and execution upon
migration). For an order designated as available for routing, the
System first checks for the Book for available contracts for execution
against the order pursuant to Rule 5.32. Unless otherwise instructed by
the User, the System then designates the order (or unexecuted portion)
as Immediate-or-Cancel (``IOC'') \22\ and routes it to one or more
options exchanges for potential execution, per the User's instructions.
After the System receives responses to the order, to the extent it was
not executed in full through the routing process, the System processes
the order (or unexecuted portion) as follows, depending on parameters
set by the User when the incoming order was originally entered:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Rule 5.32 in the shell Rulebook.
    \22\ Pursuant to Rule 1.1 in the shell Rulebook, the terms
``Immediate-or-Cancel'' and ``IOC'' mean, for an order so
designated, a limit order that must execute in whole or in part as
soon as the System receives it; the System cancels and does not post
to the Book an IOC order (or unexecuted portion) not executed
immediately on the Exchange or another options exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) Cancels the order (or unexecuted portion) back to the User;
posts the unfilled balance of the order to the Book, subject to the
Price Adjust process described in proposed Rule 5.32(b), if applicable;
    (ii) repeats the process described above by executing against the
Book and/or routing to the other options exchanges until the original,
incoming order is executed in its entirety;
    (iii) repeats the process described above by executing against the
Book and/or routing to the other options exchanges until the original,
incoming order is executed in its entirety, or, if not executed in its
entirety and a limit order, posts the unfilled balance of the order on
the Book if the order's limit price is reached; or
    (iv) to the extent the System is unable to access a Protected
Quotation and there are no other accessible Protected Quotations at the
NBBO, cancels or rejects the order back to the User, provided, however,
that this provision does not apply to Protected Quotations published by
an options exchange against which the Exchange has declared self-help.
    Currently, the Exchange automatically routes intermarket sweep
orders, consistent with the definition in current Rule 6.80(8).\23\
This routing process is functionally equivalent to the current Exchange
routing process, and, as proposed, referred to as SWPA and is
specifically described in proposed Rule 5.36(a)(2)(B), which is a
routing option (and will be the default routing option following
migration, and thus, if no other routing option is specified by a User,
a User's order subject to routing will be handled in the same way it is
today). Following the migration, the Exchange will offer additional
routing options identical to the routing options offered by C2 Rule
6.15, as well as by EDGX Options and BZX Options Rule(s) 21.9. Under
proposed Rule 5.36(a)(2), routing options may be combined with all
available Order Instructions \24\ and Times-in-Force, with the
exception of those whose terms are inconsistent with the terms of a
particular routing option. The System considers the quotations only of
accessible markets. The term ``System routing table'' refers to the
proprietary process for determining the specific options exchanges to
which the System routes orders and the order in which it routes them.
The Exchanges reserves the right to maintain a different System routing
table for different routing options and to modify the System routing
table at any time without notice. These additional routing options are
ROUT, destination specific, and directed ISO:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Pursuant to Rule 6.80(8), an ``Intermarket Sweep Order
(``ISO'')'' means a Limit Order for an options series that,
simultaneously with the routing of the ISO, one or more additional
ISOs, as necessary, are routed to execute against the full displayed
size of any Protected Bid, in the case of a limit order to sell, or
any Protected Offer, in the case of a limit order to buy, for the
options series with a price that is 290 superior to the limit price
of the ISO. See also Rule 1.1 in the shell Rulebook. The Exchange
relies on the marking of an order by a User as an ISO order when
handling such order, and thus, it is the entering User's
responsibility, not the Exchange's responsibility, to comply with
the requirements relating to ISOs.
    \24\ See Rule 5.6 in shell Rulebook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) ROUT is a routing option under which the System checks the Book
for available contracts to execute against an order and then sends it
to destinations on the System routing table. A User may select either
Route To Improve (``RTI'') or Route To Fill (``RTF'') for the ROUT
routing option. RTI may route to multiple destinations at a single
price level simultaneously while RTF may route to multiple destinations
and at multiple price levels simultaneously.
    (ii) Destination specific is a routing option under which the
System checks the Book for available contracts to execute against an
order and then sends it to a specific away options exchange.
    (iii) Directed ISO is a routing option under which the System does
not check the Book for available contracts and sends the order to
another options exchange specified by the User. It is the entering
User's responsibility, not the Exchanges responsibility, to comply with
the requirements relating to Intermarket Sweep Orders.
    Proposed Rule 5.36(a)(3) offers two options for Re-Route
instructions, Aggressive Re-Route and Super Aggressive Re-Route, either
of which can be assigned to routable orders:
    (i) Pursuant to the Aggressive Re-Route instruction, if the
remaining portion of a routable order has been posted to the Book
pursuant proposed subparagraph (a)(1) (i.e., routing away to options
exchanges), if the order's price is subsequently crossed by the quote
of another accessible options exchange, the System routes the order to
the crossing options exchange if the User has selected the Aggressive
Re-Route instruction.
    (ii) Pursuant to the Super Aggressive Re-Route instruction, to the
extent the unfilled balance of a routable order has been posted to the
Book pursuant to

subparagraph (a)(1), if the order's price is subsequently locked or
crossed by the quote of another accessible options exchange, the System
routes the order to the locking or crossing options exchange if the
User has selected the Super Aggressive Re-Route instruction.
    Proposed Rule 5.36(b) states the System does not rank or maintain
in the Book pursuant to Rule 5.32 orders it has routed to other options
exchanges, and therefore those orders are not available to execute
against incoming orders. Once routed by the System, an order becomes
subject to the rules and procedures of the destination options exchange
including, but not limited to, order cancellation. If a routed order
(or unexecuted portion) is subsequently returned to the Exchange, the
order (or unexecuted portion), the order receives a new time stamp
reflected the time the System receives the returned order. Proposed
Rule 5.36(c) states Users whose orders are routed to other options
exchanges must honor trades of those orders executed on other options
exchanges to the same extent they would be required to honor trades of
those orders if they had executed on the Exchange. These provisions are
consistent with the corresponding rules of its affiliated options
exchanges, they are substantively identical to the current rule text
and functionality of C2 Rule 6.15 and also substantively the same as
EDGX Options and BZX Options Rule(s) 21.9.
    Proposed Rule 5.36(d) and (f) make explicit certain requirements in
connection with Cboe Trading, which, pursuant to current Exchange
rules,\25\ is an affiliate of the Exchange that provides inbound and
outbound routing services, which currently apply to Cboe Trading today.
Proposed Rule 5.36(d) states that the Exchange will route orders in
options via Cboe Trading, which currently serves as the Outbound Router
of the Exchange. The Outbound Router will route orders in options
listed and open for trading on the Exchange to other options exchanges
pursuant to Exchange Rules solely on behalf of the Exchange. The
Outbound Router is subject to regulation as a facility of the Exchange,
including the requirement to file proposed rule changes under Section
19 of the Exchange Act. Use of Cboe Trading or Routing Services (under
current Rule 6.14B and proposed Rule 5.36(e)) to route orders to other
market centers is optional. Parties that do not desire to use Cboe
Trading or other Routing Services provided by the Exchange must
designate orders as not available for routing. Proposed Rule 5.35(f)
states that in addition to the Rules regarding routing to away options
exchanges, Cboe Trading has, pursuant to Rule 15c3-5 under the Exchange
Act, implemented certain tests designed to mitigate the financial and
regulatory risks associated with providing Trading Permit Holders with
access to away options exchanges. Pursuant to the policies and
procedures developed by Cboe Trading to comply with Rule 15c3-5, if an
order or series of orders are deemed to be erroneous or duplicative,
would cause the entering Trading Permit Holder's credit exposure to
exceed a preset credit threshold, or are noncompliant with applicable
pre-trade regulatory requirements, Cboe Trading will reject the orders
prior to routing and/or seek to cancel any orders that have been
routed. As stated, these provisions are the same as C2 Rule 6.15(d) and
(f) and EDGX Options and BZX Options Rule(s) 21.9(f), and currently
apply to Cboe Trading, therefore the proposed change just makes these
provisions in connection with Cboe Trading explicit as well as
harmonizes its order routing rules with that of its affiliated options
exchanges' routing rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Rule 3.11(c), Rule 3.12; and Rule 3.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change moves current Rule 6.14B which governs the
routing services provided by non-affiliated routing brokers, to
proposed Rule 5.36(e) which is consistent with the corresponding rules
of the Exchanges' affiliated options exchanges, C2, EDGX Options, and
BZX Options. The Exchange does not proposed any substantive changes to
the rule. The Exchange deletes current Interpretation and Policy .01
which states that a routing broker is not prohibited from designating a
preferred market-maker at the other exchange to which the order is
being routed, which is consistent with the agreements currently in
place between the Exchange and its routing brokers, which do not allow
for routing broker discretion in connection with order flow. The
Exchange also notes that this proposed change is consistent with the
corresponding order routing rules of the Exchange's affiliated options
exchanges, C2, EDGX Options, and BZX Options.
    Finally, the Exchange deletes current Rule 6.6A and current Rule
6.14C because they are duplicative of Exchange Rules and/or routing
broker agreements already in place. Current Rule 6.6A provides for the
Exchange to cancel or release orders as it deems necessary to maintain
fair and orderly markets if a technical or systems issue occurs. These
provisions are already covered under other Exchange Rules: Rule 6.6A(a)
and (b) are already provided for under current Rule 3.12(a)(6) \26\ and
current Rule 6.14B(f) (proposed Rule 5.36(e)(6)); and Rule 6.6A(c) is
already provided for under current Rule 3.12(a)(7)(C). Current Rule
6.14C provides for rules in connection with Routing Service Error
Accounts. The provisions in connection with the Exchange's Error
Account are currently provided for under Rule 3.12(7), which already
requires Cboe Trading, as the Exchange's affiliated outbound router, to
maintain an Error Account, provides the Exchange with the authority to
assign resulting Error Positions to TPHs or have resulting Error
Positions liquidated, and prohibits Cboe Trading from accepting any
positions in its error account from an account of a TPH, or permitting
any TPH to transfer any positions from the TPH's account to Cboe
Trading's error account. The provisions regarding a routing broker's
Error Account are already in place in all contracts between the
Exchange and its routing brokers pursuant to current Rule 6.14B(a) and
(h) (proposed Rule 5.36(e)(1) and (8)). As a result, the proposed rule
change deletes current Rules 6.6A and 6.14C as they are duplicative of
the current Exchange Rules. The Exchange also notes that this proposed
change aligns the Exchange's Rules with that of its affiliated options
exchanges, C2, EDGX Options, and BZX Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The Exchange notes that the Exchange's discretion to cancel
orders as either it deems necessary to maintain fair and orderly
markets if a technical or systems issue occurs pursuant to Rule
3.12(a)(6) entails its discretion to ``release'' orders being held
awaiting an away exchange execution, that is such orders are
cancelled back to Users if a technical or systems issue occurs at
the Exchange, a routing broker, or another exchange to which an
Exchange order has been routed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\27\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \28\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
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. Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \29\ requirement that the rules
of an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule changes are generally intended to add or align
certain system functionality currently offered by the Exchange and the
Cboe Affiliated Exchanges in order to provide a consistent technology
offering for the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. A consistent technology
offering, in turn, will simplify the technology implementation, changes
and maintenance by Users of the Exchange that are also participants on
Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. The proposed rule change does not propose to
implement new or unique functionality that has not been previously
filed with the Commission, found to be consistent with the Act, or is
not available on Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. The Exchange notes that the
proposed rule text is primarily based on EDGX Options Rules, as well as
substantially the same as BZX and C2 Options rules, and is different
only to the extent that it makes non-substantive changes to retain some
Exchange-specific language/definitions, simplify language and make the
rule provisions plain English. The Exchange believes that consistent
rules will simplify the regulatory requirements and increase the
understanding of the Exchange's operations for Trading Permit Holders
that are also participants on the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. The
proposed rule change seeks to provide greater harmonization between the
rules of the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges, which would result in greater
uniformity and less burdensome and more efficient regulatory
compliance. As such, the proposed rule change would foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities and would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system. The Exchange also
believes that the proposed amendments will contribute to the protection
of investors and the public interest by making the Exchange's rules
easier to understand.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to make the
current HAL process consistent with the EDGX Options SUM process will
serve to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and national market system and facilitate transactions in
securities because the current HAL process is already equivalent to the
EDGX Options SUM process and the proposed rule changes do not raise any
new or significant policy concerns, but instead serve to harmonize
functionality and the rules across the affiliate exchanges so as to
provide market participants with the same product offerings and bolster
collective understanding of the rules upon migration.
    In addition to protecting and benefitting market participants by
providing consistent functionality and rules, the proposed change will
continue to allow all Users to submit responses to the exposure message
during the exposure period, which the Exchange already does, which will
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
national market system in that it will continue to provide all Users
with the opportunity to improve their prices and ``step up'' to meet
the NBBO and interact with exposure messages and allow the market
participant sending an order to the Exchange to increase its chances of
receiving an execution on the preferred venue in which it has chosen to
participate (i.e., Cboe Options), thereby benefitting all market
participants. In addition to this, the proposed rule change that allows
for a User to opt out of having the remaining portion of their exposed
order routed to other exchanges following the exposure period will
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
national market system by providing Users with additional control
regarding the execution of their orders and by providing them with
consistent opportunities and functionality across the affiliated
exchanges upon migration.
    The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change regarding the
handling of AON orders exposed in a SUM auction will protect investors
because it is identical to the handling of AON orders exposed in the
EDGX Options SUM process. Additionally, the proposed rule change will
provide AON orders with execution opportunities when the Exchange is
not at the NBBO in a manner consistent with the current SUM process and
makes it explicit that the exposure period for an AON order will
terminate when there is sufficient aggregate contra-side interest to
satisfy the exposed AON order (except it will not execute any incoming
contra-side interest immediately against the exposed AON order, unless
it has sufficient size which will prevent a partial execution in
conflict with the AON size contingency), which is the manner in which
the current HAL process already functions. This benefits market
participants by providing them with rules that accurately reflect
current functionality (as well as functionality that will be provided
on the Exchange upon migration). The proposed rule change regarding an
early termination of the exposure period of an AON order is consistent
with current reasons that will cause an exposure period to terminate;
it will prevent an exposure period from continuing when new conditions
arise that would have prevented an exposure period from initiating in
the first place. The proposed rule change will remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of free and open market and a national market
system, because it ensures an AON order will be handled in a manner
consistent with the current SUM process.
    The proposed rule changes to the other provisions in connection
with early termination of exposure period align with the reasons a SUM
auction may currently terminate on EDGX Options and will remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
national market system by terminating an orders that would no longer
benefit from exposure or would likely present order handling
difficulties, which could impact market participants. In addition to
this, because a User will have the ability to cancel its order after
the SUM process is initiated coupled with the fact that the Exchange
will only execute an order that has been exposed via the SUM process to
the extent the order is marketable against the NBBO will mitigate any
potential concern in removing other early termination provisions. The
Exchange believes that the other updates proposed to align the
Exchange's proposed rule with that of the EDGX Options SUM process do
not alter the manner in which HAL currently functions but merely make
explicit in the rules the operation of the proposed SUM process.
    The proposed change to adopt C2's order routing rules (which are
also substantially the same as the routing rules on EDGX Options and
BZX Options) will likewise serve to protect and benefit market
participants by providing consistent functionality and rules in
connection with order routing. As stated, the order routing rule of the
Exchange's affiliated options exchanges have previously been filed with
the Commission. Proposed Rule 5.36 will serve to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and national market
system because it will allow Users to route orders in much the same way
in which

they may already route ISO orders on the Exchange today, and in the
same manner as Users may already route orders on the Exchange's
affiliated options exchanges, C2, EDGX Options, and BZX Options. Under
the proposed rules the System will still process, display and
prioritize orders as it currently does as well as ensure the same price
protections currently in place, thereby protecting investors. The
additional routing options that the proposed rule change offers are the
same routing options already available to Users on the Exchange's
affiliated options exchange, therefore these options do not raise any
new or novel functionality for market participants but ensure that upon
migration market participants across the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges will
have access to the same functionality and product offerings.
    The proposed provisions regarding Cboe Trading will benefit market
participants by making explicit certain rules that already apply to
Cboe Trading on the Exchange, as well as serve to harmonize the
Exchange's routing rules with the corresponding rules of C2 and EDGX
Options, as well as BZX Options. The other proposed changes will also
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
national market system by removing rules that are duplicative of other
Exchange rules that currently provide for the same and are already
effectively provided for in the contracts between the Exchange and its
non-affiliated routing brokers. This, in turn, provides market
participants with up-to-date, streamlined rules with are easy to
understand, and mirror the corresponding rules of C2 and EDGX Options,
as well as BZX Options.
    The proposed rule change makes other various non-substantive
changes throughout the rules that will protect investors and benefit
market participants as these changes simplify the rules and use plain
English throughout the rules.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange reiterates that
the proposed rule change is being proposed in the context of a
technology migration of the Cboe Affiliated Exchanges. As stated, the
proposed changes to the rules that reflect functionality that will be
in place come October 7, 2019 provide clear, consistent rules for
market participants upon the completion of migration. The Exchange
believes the proposed rule change will benefit Exchange participants in
that it will provide a consistent technology offering for Users by the
Cboe Affiliated Exchanges.
    The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on intramarket competition. The proposed SUM process and
order routing functionality will apply to all Users and order and
quotes submitted by Users in the same manner. Like HAL currently, the
Exchange's proposed SUM is open to all Users. Additionally, all Users
will have the option to route orders to away exchanges, and apply the
different proposed routing instructions, under the proposed order
routing provisions.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rules change will
impose any burden on intermarket competitions. As discussed above, the
basis for the proposed rule changes in this filing are the rules of C2
and EDGX Options, as well as substantial similarities to the approved
rules of BZX Options, which have already been filed with the
Commission. The Exchange also notes that market participants on other
exchanges are welcome to become participants on the Exchange if they
determine that this proposed rule change has made Cboe Options a more
attractive or favorable venue.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. 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 \30\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \31\ thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the
filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \31\ 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-CBOE-2019-050 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-CBOE-2019-050. 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-CBOE-2019-050 and

should be submitted on or before October 2, 2019.

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

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-19610 Filed 9-10-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34282-34283]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12721]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0197; FRL-9945-05]

Fluazinam; Pesticide Tolerances; Technical Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; technical correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of April 8,
2016, concerning the addition of certain commodities to 40 CFR 180.574.
Vegetable cucurbit, group 9 was inadvertently omitted. This document
corrects that omission.

DATES: This final rule correction is effective May 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0197, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 305-7090; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the April 8, 2016 final rule a list of those
who may be potentially affected by this action.

II. What does this technical correction do?

    EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of April 8, 2016
(81 FR 20545) (FRL-9942-99) that was adding commodities including
Vegetable cucurbit, group 9 to 40 CFR 180.574(a)(1). EPA inadvertently
omitted the language in the codified text, which would have added
Vegetable cucurbit, group 9.

III. Why is this correction issued as a final rule?

    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B)) provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may issue a final rule without
providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. EPA has
determined that there is good cause for making this technical
correction final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment,
because this is correcting a typographical error. EPA finds that this
constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

IV. Do any of the statutory and executive order reviews apply to this
action?

    No. For a detailed discussion concerning the statutory and
executive order review, refer to Unit VI. of the April 8, 2016 final
rule.

V. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pest, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 24, 2016.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is corrected as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In the table in Sec.  180.574(a)(1), alphabetically add the entry
``Vegetable cucurbit, group 9'' to read as follows:

Sec.  [emsp14]180.574  Fluazinam; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Parts  per
                        Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9............................            0.07

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-12721 Filed 5-27-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 189 (Friday, September 30, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 59408]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-2925-000]

Jicarilla Solar 1 LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Jicarilla Solar 1 LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is October 17, 2022.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 26, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-21256 Filed 9-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Amendment to DER for MRID 43115201 - Acute Neurotoxicity Screening Battery [Rat]
[2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID]

This amendment provides an EXECUTIVE SUMMARY to upgrade the original DER [Document No. 011273].

EPA Reviewer: Linda L. Taylor, Ph.D.
Reregistration Branch I, Health Effects Division (7509C)
EPA Secondary Reviewer: Whang Phang, Ph.D.
Reregistration Branch I, Health Effects Division (7509C)
TXR# 0051360

                        AMENDED DATA EVALUATION RECORD

STUDY TYPE: acute neurotoxicity - rat 	§ 82-7/OPPTS 870.6200
P.C. CODE: 030001	REREGISTRATION CASE NO.: 818706
CASWELL NO.: 315	CAS NO.: 94-75-7
TEST MATERIAL (PURITY): 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid [96.7%]
SYNONYMS: 2,4-D
SPONSOR: Industry Task Force II on 2,4-D Research Data

CITATION: Mattsson, J. L., McGuirk, R. J., Yano, B. L. (1994).  2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid: Acute Neurotoxicity Study in Fischer 344 Rats. The Toxicology Research Laboratory, Dow Chemical Co.; Study No. K-002372-066, January 5, 1994. MRID 43115201. Document No. 011273. Unpublished.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In an acute neurotoxicity study [MRID 43115201], Fischer 344 rats (10/sex/dose) were orally gavaged once with 2,4-D [96.6% a.i.] at doses of 0 (corn oil), 15, 75, or 250 mg/kg (actual: 0, 13, 67 or 227 mg/kg).  Neurobehavioral evaluations, consisting of Functional Observational Battery (FOB) and motor activity, were conducted at Day -1 (prestudy), Day 1 (approximately 5-6 hrs postdosing, peak time of effect) and Days 8 and 15.  At terminal sacrifice (Day 15), animals were euthanized and neuropathological examination performed on control and treated animals (5/sex/dose).

There were no treatment-related mortalities, and no significant differences were noted in the mean body weights or mean body-weight gains. Treatment-related, clinical signs [uncoordinated movement/behavior] were observed in the high-dose rats only. During the Day 2 and 3 clinical examinations, incoordination was noted in high-dose animals of both sexes [Day 2, 2/10 males and 5/10 females; Day 3, 2/10 males, 1/10 females; Day 4, 0/10 males, 1/10 females]. The incidence of incoordination decreased to control levels by Day 4 in males and Day 5 in females.
Neurobehavioral evaluation revealed treatment-related changes. During the Day 1 FOB evaluations, increased incidences of incoordination (6/10, males; 4/10, females) and slight gait abnormalities, described as forepaw flexing or knuckling, were observed in high-dose animals (8/10, males; 8/10 females).  Slight gait abnormalities, observed in a single mid-dose female, were not judged to be treatment-related since no other signs of toxicity were evident.  Minimal [equivocal] gait abnormalities, not judged to be treatment-related, were observed in one low-dose female and one each mid- and high-dose male. In high-dose animals, total motor activity was significantly lower at Day 1 only. No treatment-related gross or neuropathological findings were present at any dose level in either sex.

The NOAEL for neurotoxicity is 67 mg/kg, based on an increased incidence of incoordination and slight gait abnormalities [described as forepaw flexing or knuckling] and decreased total motor activity at the LOAEL of 227 mg/kg. The NOAEL for systemic toxicity was 227 mg/kg [the highest dose tested] in males and females.

This acute neurotoxicity study in the rat is classified ACCEPTABLE/Guideline, and it satisfies the guideline requirement [OPPTS 870. 6200] for an acute neurotoxicity study in the rat.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 11, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15499-15501]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07451]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0291]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Ohio River, Cincinnati, OH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters of the Ohio River, extending the entire width of
the river, from mile marker (MM) 490.0 to MM 491.5. This safety zone is
necessary to

provide for the safety of life and vessels during the Miami Fort Static
Wire Crossing operation taking place near Cincinnati, OH. Entry into,
transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP)
or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from April 12, 2018 through April 22,
2018 during daylight hours only, or until the operation is complete,
whichever occurs first.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0291 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Joshua Herriott, Sector Ohio Valley, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
MM Mile marker
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. We must
establish this regulation by April 12, 2018 and lack sufficient time to
provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments
before issuing this rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is necessary to protect persons and property
from the dangers associated with the marine event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) has determined
that potential hazards associated with the Miami Fort Static Wire
Crossing operation, occurring from April 12, 2018 through April 22,
2018, will be a safety concern for all navigable waters on the Ohio
River from mile marker (MM) 490.0 to MM 491.5. The purpose of this rule
is to ensure the safety of life and vessels on these navigable waters
before, during, and after the event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone during daylight hours each day
from April 12, 2018 through April 22, 2018 for all navigable waters of
the Ohio River, extending the entire width of the river, from MM 490.0
to MM 491.5. Transit into and through this area is prohibited during
periods of enforcement between April 12, 2018 through April 22, 2018.
The periods of enforcement will be prior to, during, and 30 minutes
after any vessel movement and wire transfer operations at Miami Fort.
The Coast Guard was informed that the operations would take place
during daylight hours only. A safety vessel will coordinate all vessel
traffic during the enforcement periods. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through Broadcast Notice to
Mariners (BNM), Local Notices to Mariners (LNM), or through other means
of public notice at least 1 hour in advance of each enforcement period.
    The duration of the safety zone is intended to ensure the safety of
life and vessels on these navigable waters before, during, and after
the scheduled event. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the
safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. A designated representative is a commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard assigned to units under the
operational control of Sector Ohio Valley. They may be contacted on
VHF-FM Channel 16 or by telephone at 1-800-253-7465. Persons and
vessels permitted to enter this regulated area must transit at their
slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful directions issued by the
COTP or the designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. This safety
zone will be in place on a one and a half mile stretch of the Ohio
River during daytime hours only for eleven days. The Coast Guard will
issue Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners via
VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the temporary safety zone. This rule
also allows vessels to seek permission from the COTP or a designated
representative to enter the safety zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.
A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a determination that this
action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a safety zone that prohibits entry on a one and a half
mile stretch of the Ohio River during daytime hours only for eleven
days. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01,
Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0291 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0291  Safety zone; Ohio River, Cincinnati, OH.

    (a) Location. All navigable waters of the Ohio River between mile
marker (MM) 490.0 and MM 491.5 in Cincinnati, OH.
    (b) Effective date. This section is effective from April 12, 2018
through April 22, 2018, or until the wire crossing operation is
completed, whichever occurs first.
    (c) Periods of enforcement. This section will be enforced during
daylight hours from April 12, 2018 through April 22, 2018, prior to,
during, and 30 minutes after any vessel movement and wire transfer
operations at Miami Fort. The Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley
(COTP) or a designated representative will inform the public through
Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM), Local Notices to Mariners (LNM), or
through other means of public notice at least 1 hour in advance of each
enforcement period. A safety vessel will coordinate all vessel traffic
during the enforcement of this safety zone.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley
(COTP) or a designated representative. Persons or vessels desiring to
enter into or pass through the zone must request permission from the
COTP or a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM
radio channel 16 or phone at 1-800-253-7465.
    (2) Persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone must
transit at the slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful directions
issued by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (e) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to
mariners BNMs, LNMs, and other means of the enforcement period for the
temporary safety zone as well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: April 6, 2018.
M.A. Wike,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Sector Ohio
Valley.
[FR Doc. 2018-07451 Filed 4-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1674-1675]
[DOCID:fr13ja09-38]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

December 19, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC09-31-000.
    Applicants: Snowflake White Mountain Power, LLC, Renegy Holdings,
LLC, AZ Biomass, LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization of Proposed
Transaction under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, and Request for
Waiver of Certain Filing Requirements and Confidential Treatment.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-5094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 8, 2009.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1581-000.
    Applicants: Mint Farm Energy Center LLC.
    Description: Puget Sound Energy, Inc submits Revised Cancelled
Tariff Sheet reflecting 12/5/08 as the effective date under ER08-1581.

    Filed Date: 12/15/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0190.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 5, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-185-001.
    Applicants: Weyerhaeuser NR Company.
    Description: Weyerhaeuser NR Company submits their revised Rate
Schedule 1 in connection with the petition for market based rate
authority etc under ER09-185.
    Filed Date: 12/18/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081219-0112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 29, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-201-001.
    Applicants: Gilroy Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Gilroy Energy Center, LLC submits a revision to Tariff
Sheet 145, which is contained in the Rate Schedules of its Reliability
Must-Run Agreement with the California Independent System Operator
Corporation.
    Filed Date: 12/16/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0221.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 6, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-417-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Company submits revised
sheets to the Interconnection Facilities Agreement with the County
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles etc.
    Filed Date: 12/16/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0213.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 6, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-418-000.
    Applicants: Startrans IO, L.L.C.
    Description: Startrans IO, LLC submits First Revised Sheet No. 24
et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, to become
effective 1/1/09.
    Filed Date: 12/16/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0216.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 6, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-419-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator C.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corp submits
its Transmission Access Charge Informational Filing.
    Filed Date: 12/16/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 6, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-420-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Public Service Company of New
Hampshire
    Description: ISO New England Inc. et al. submits an executed non-
confirming Standard Large Generator Interconnection Agreement.
    Filed Date: 12/16/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0214.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 6, 2009.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA08-101-002.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits errata filing in
response to a request from Commission Staff for clarification revisions
in Attachment C of the PJM Tariff regarding references to coordination
agreements etc.
    Filed Date: 12/16/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081218-0219.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 6, 2009

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings 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) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-485 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 76 (Tuesday, April 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22223-22224]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09077]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0197]

Occupational Safety and Health State Plans; 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 request for an
extension of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of
the information collection requirements associated with its regulations
and program regarding State Plans for the development and enforcement
of state occupational safety and health standards (29 CFR parts 1902,
1952, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1956).

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
June 22, 2015.

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, Docket No. OSHA-2011-0197,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of
Labor, 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., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2011-0197) 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 Eric Lahaie at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Lahaie, Directorate of
Cooperative and State Programs, Office of State Programs, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-
3700, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone:
(202) 693-2215; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., the State Plans) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accord 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 cost)
is minimized, collection instruments are understandable, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. Currently,
OSHA is soliciting comments concerning the extension of the information
collection requirements contained in the series of regulations
establishing requirements for the submission, initial approval,
continuing approval, final approval, monitoring and evaluation of OSHA-
approved State Plans:
     29 CFR part 1902, State Plans for the Development and
Enforcement of State Standards;
     29 CFR part 1952, Approved State Plans for Enforcement of
State Standards;
     29 CFR part 1953, Changes to State Plans for the
Development and Enforcement of State Standards;
     29 CFR part 1954, Procedures for the Evaluation and
Monitoring of Approved State Plans;
     29 CFR part 1955, Procedures for Withdrawal of Approval of
State Plans; and
     29 CFR part 1956, State Plans for the Development and
Enforcement of State Standards Applicable to State and Local Government
Employees in States without Approved Private Employee Plans.
    Section 18 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 U.S.C.
667) offers an opportunity to the states to assume responsibility for
the development and enforcement of state standards through the
mechanism of an OSHA-approved State Plan. Absent an approved plan,
states are precluded from enforcing occupational safety and health
standards in the private sector with respect to any issue for which
Federal OSHA has promulgated a standard. Once approved and operational,
the state adopts standards and provides most occupational safety and
health enforcement and compliance assistance in the state, under the
authority of its plan, instead of Federal OSHA. States also must extend
their jurisdiction to cover state and local government employees and
may obtain approval of State Plans limited in scope to these workers.
To obtain and maintain State Plan approval, a state must submit various
documents to OSHA describing its program structure and operation,
including any modifications thereto as they occur, in accordance with
the identified regulations. OSHA funds 50 percent of the costs required
to be incurred by an approved State Plan with the state at least
matching and providing additional funding at its discretion.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
    [ssquf] Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
    [ssquf] 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;
    [ssquf] The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
    [ssquf] Ways to minimize the burden on participating states who
must comply;

for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the collection
of information requirements associated with its State Plan regulations.
The Agency is requesting an adjustment increase of 173 burden hours,
from 11,196 to 11,369 hours. This burden hour increase is the result of
the anticipated increase in the submission of state plan changes
associated with one state (Maine) actively implementing a new State
Plan. The burden hour increase was partially offset by the decrease in
the estimated number of state-initiated state plan changes. The Agency
will summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice and
will include this summary in its request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Occupational Safety and Health State Plans.
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0247.
    Affected Public: Designated state government agencies that are
seeking or have submitted and obtained approval for State Plans for the
development and enforcement of occupational safety and health
standards.
    Number of Respondents: 28.
    Frequency: On occasion; quarterly; annually.
    Total Responses: 1,279.
    Average Time per Response: Varies from 30 minutes (.5 hour) to
respond to an information inquiry to 80 hours to document state annual
performance goals.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 11,369.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

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-2011-0197). 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 OSHA 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 their social security number
and date 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 from 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 from 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 April 15, 2015.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2015-09077 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-26-P