[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 225 (Friday, November 20, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74260-74261]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25864]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No.: FAA-2019-0200]

 Operators of Boeing Company Model 737-8 and Boeing Company Model
737-9 Airplanes: Rescission of Emergency Order of Prohibition

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notification of Rescission of Emergency Order of Prohibition.

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

SUMMARY: The Emergency Order of Prohibition issued March 13, 2019,
which restricted the operation of Boeing Company Model 737-8 and Boeing
Company Model 737-9 airplanes, is rescinded, with effect as described
in the rescission.

DATES: The Rescission of the Emergency Order of Prohibition is
effective November 18, 2020 as to any Boeing Company Model 737-8 and
737-9 airplanes that hereafter receive FAA airworthiness certificates
and export certificates of airworthiness, and any foreign-registered
Boeing Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes operating in U.S.
airspace. The Rescission of the Emergency Order of Prohibition is
effective upon publication in the Federal Register of Airworthiness
Directive 2020-24-02 as to all U.S.-registered Boeing Company Model
737-8 and 737-9 airplanes.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian Won, Federal Aviation
Administration, Aircraft Certification Service, Seattle ACO Branch,
2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198 (Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The full text of the Rescission of the
Emergency Order of Prohibition issued November 18, 2020 is set forth
below:

Rescission of Emergency Order of Prohibition

    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Emergency Order of
Prohibition issued March 13, 2019, applicable to Boeing Company Model
737-8 and Boeing Company Model 737-9 airplanes, is rescinded with
effect as described below. This rescission enables operation of Boeing
Company Model 737-8 and Boeing Company Model 737-9 airplanes only upon
satisfaction of applicable requirements for return to service.

Background

    When the Administrator determines that an emergency exists related
to safety in air commerce and requires immediate action, the
Administrator may issue immediately effective orders to meet the
emergency. See 49 U.S.C. 46105(c). On March 13, 2019, upon receiving
information indicating the possibility of a shared cause for accidents
involving Boeing Model 737-8 airplanes operated by Lion Air (Flight
610) on October 29, 2018 and Ethiopian Airlines (Flight 302) on March
10, 2019, the FAA determined that an emergency existed and issued an
Emergency Order of Prohibition that restricted the operation of Boeing
Company Model 737-8 and Boeing Company Model 737-9 airplanes. See 84 FR
9705. Following issuance of such an order, the FAA is to begin a
proceeding immediately about the emergency and give preference, when
practicable, to the proceeding. See 49 U.S.C. 46105(c).

Basis for Rescission

    The FAA determined that the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines
accidents involved a common cause, identified an unsafe condition that
existed in the product and was likely to exist or

develop in other products of the same type design, and began
proceedings to address the unsafe condition. On August 6, 2020, the FAA
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing an
Airworthiness Directive that would apply to U.S.-registered Boeing
Company Model 737-8 and Boeing Company Model 737-9 airplanes and would
require owners and operators to complete certain corrective action
necessary to address the unsafe condition. See 85 FR 47698. On November
18, 2020, after considering public comments on the NPRM, the FAA issued
Airworthiness Directive 2020-24-02 as a final rule that requires
certain corrective action to address the unsafe condition before
further flight and conforms the aircraft to the amended Model 737-8 and
737-9 type designs that FAA approved on November 17, 2020. The
Airworthiness Directive will become effective upon its publication in
the Federal Register.
    Together, the Airworthiness Directive and the design approval
address the unsafe condition as to the existing U.S.-registered fleet
of Boeing Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes and as to any Model
737-8 and 737-9 airplanes for which The Boeing Company hereafter seeks
airworthiness certificates and export certificates of airworthiness. It
is now practicable for the FAA to give preference to the proceedings
that the FAA began in response to the emergency.
    First, the Emergency Order of Prohibition is no longer necessary as
to any Boeing Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes that hereafter
receive original FAA airworthiness certificates and export certificates
of airworthiness based on the amended type designs.
    Second, for any Boeing Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes not
falling into that first category, the Emergency Order of Prohibition is
unnecessary as to foreign-registered airplanes operating in U.S.
airspace. With respect to foreign-registered Boeing Company Model 737-8
and 737-9 airplanes, the FAA will apply Article 33 and Annex 8 of the
Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention) to
take appropriate action to restrict access to U.S. airspace and address
any non-compliance with U.S. laws where the foreign civil aviation
authority of the state of registry does not require conformance with
the newly amended type design or an alternative that achieves at least
an equivalent level of safety.
    Finally, upon the publication of Airworthiness Directive 2020-24-02
in the Federal Register, the legal force of that Airworthiness
Directive will supersede any need to apply the Emergency Order of
Prohibition as to the existing U.S.-registered fleet of Boeing Company
Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes that the FAA previously certificated.
With respect to those airplanes, Airworthiness Directive 2020-24-02
requires corrective action before further flight.
    Importantly, in the scenarios identified above, before returning
Boeing Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes to service, operators
must also meet all other applicable requirements, such as completing
new training for pilots and conducting maintenance activity.

Rescission

    For the foregoing reasons, the March 13, 2019 Emergency Order of
Prohibition is rescinded as follows:
    (1) Effective immediately as to any Boeing Company Model 737-8 and
737-9 airplanes that hereafter receive FAA airworthiness certificates
and export certificates of airworthiness;
    (2) Effective immediately as to any foreign-registered Boeing
Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes operating in U.S. airspace; and
    (3) Effective upon publication in the Federal Register of
Airworthiness Directive 2020-24-02 as to all U.S.-registered Boeing
Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 airplanes.

Rescission Contact Official

    Direct any questions concerning this rescission, to Ian Won,
Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Certification Service,
Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198
exception occurred on : 2020-25864.htm
exception occurred on : 2020-25864.htm
(Email: 9/FAA/SACO/[email protected]; Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 18, 2020.
Steve Dickson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-25864 Filed 11-18-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 78 (Wednesday, April 22, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22512-22513]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08516]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2020-0027-N-8]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, FRA seeks approval of the Information
Collection Requests (ICRs) abstracted below. Before submitting these
ICRs to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, FRA is
soliciting public comment on specific aspects of the activities
identified below.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
June 22, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the ICRs activities by mail to
either: Ms. Hodan Wells, Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Office of Railroad Safety, Regulatory Analysis Division, Federal
Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590; or Ms. Kim Toone, Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Office of Administration, Office of Information Technology, Federal
Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. Commenters requesting FRA to acknowledge receipt of their
respective comments must include a self-addressed stamped postcard
stating, ``Comments on OMB Control Number 2130-XXXX,'' (the relevant
OMB control number for each ICR is listed below) and should also
include the title of the ICR. Alternatively, comments may be faxed to
202-493-6216 or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to Ms. Wells at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Ms. Toone at<PHONE_NUMBER>0c1717161d381c170c561f170e. Please refer to
the assigned OMB control number in any correspondence submitted. FRA
will summarize comments received in response to this notice in a
subsequent notice and include them in its information collection
submission to OMB for approval.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to
provide 60-days' notice to the public to allow comment on information
collection activities before seeking OMB approval of the activities.
See 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.8 through 1320.12. Specifically,
FRA invites interested parties to comment on the following ICRs
regarding: (1) Whether the information collection activities are
necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions, including whether
the activities will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's
estimates of the burden of the information collection activities,
including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (3) ways for FRA to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and (4) ways
for FRA to minimize the burden of information collection activities on
the public, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A); 5
CFR 1320.8(d)(1).
    FRA believes that soliciting public comment may reduce the
administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the collection of
information that Federal regulations mandate. In summary, FRA reasons
that comments received will advance three objectives: (1) Reduce
reporting burdens; (2) organize information collection requirements in
a ``user-friendly'' format to improve the use of such information; and
(3) accurately assess the resources expended to retrieve and produce
information requested. See 44 U.S.C. 3501.
    The summaries below describe the ICRs that FRA will submit for OMB
clearance as the PRA requires:
    Title: Locomotive Cab Sanitation.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0552.
    Abstract: FRA's locomotive cab sanitation standards, 49 CFR 229.137
and 229.139, prescribe minimum standards for the locomotive cab
sanitation compartment, including the toilet facility. FRA uses the
information collection associated with these provisions to promote rail
safety and locomotive crew member health by ensuring crew member access
to a functioning and sanitary toilet facility and that railroads timely
repair defective and unsanitary conditions in the sanitation
compartment.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of a currently approved
information collection.

    Affected Public: Businesses (railroads).
    Form(s): N/A.
    Respondent Universe: 746 railroads.
    Frequency of Submission: One-time.
    Reporting Burden:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Respondent       Total annual    Average time per  Total annual   Total cost
          CFR section               universe          responses         responses     burden hours   equivalent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
229.137(d)--Defective,          746 railroads...  11,700 tags.....  90 seconds......           293       $22,268
 unsanitary toilet facility;
 use in trailing position--
 Tagging.
229.137(e) Defective, sanitary  746 railroads...  7,956 tags......  90 seconds......           199        15,124
 toilet facility; use in
 switching, transfer service--
 Tagging.
229.139(d) Switching or         746 railroads...  93,600 notations  30 seconds......           780        59,280
 transfer service--defective
 locomotive toilet facility--
 Notation on daily inspection
 report.
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................  746 railroads...  113,256           N/A.............         1,272        96,672
                                                   responses.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 113,256.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 1,272 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent: $96,672.
    Title: Locomotive Crashworthiness.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0564.
    Abstract: Under 49 CFR part 229, subpart D, FRA prescribes minimum
crashworthiness standards for locomotives. These crashworthiness
standards are intended to help protect locomotive cab occupants in the
event of a train collision or derailment. FRA uses this collection of
information to ensure railroads operate locomotives that meet the
prescribed minimum performance standards and design load requirements
for newly manufactured and re-manufactured locomotives.
    Type of Request: Extension with change (revised estimates) of a
currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses/Public/Interested Parties.
    Form(s): N/A.
    Respondent Universe: 746 railroads/4 locomotive manufacturers.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion; one-time.
    Reporting Burden:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total annual
          CFR section              Respondent       Total annual    Average time per      burden     Total cost
                                    universe          responses         responses         hours      equivalent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
229.207(b)--Petitions for FRA   746 railroads/4   2 petitions.....  50 hours........           100        $7,600
 approval of new locomotive      locomotive
 crashworthiness design          manufacturers.
 standards.
--(c) Petition for FRA          746 railroads/4   1 petition......  50 hours........            50         3,800
 approval of substantive         locomotive
 changes to FRA-approved         manufacturers.
 locomotive crashworthiness
 design standard.
--(d) Petition for FRA          746 railroads/4   1 petition......  50 hours........            50         3,800
 approval of non-substantive     locomotive
 changes to existing FRA         manufacturers.
 approved locomotive
 crashworthiness design
 standard.
229.209(b)--Alternative         746 railroads/4   1 petition......  50 hours........            50         3,800
 locomotive crashworthiness      locomotive
 designs--Petition for FRA       manufacturers.
 approval.
229.211(b)(3)--Processing       746 railroads/4   1 hearing.......  24 hours........            24         1,824
 petitions--Additional           locomotive
 information for FRA to          manufacturers.
 appropriately consider the
 petition.
229.213(a)(3)--Locomotive       746 railroads...  500 records/      2 minutes.......          16.7         1,269
 manufacturing information:                        stickers/badge
 retention by railroads.                           plates.
229.215--(a) Retention and      4 locomotive      24 records......  8 hours.........           192        14,592
 inspection of designs--         manufacturers.
 Retention of records--
 Original designs.
--(b) Repairs and               746 railroads...  6 records.......  4 hours.........            24         1,824
 modifications--Records.
--(c) Inspection of records...  746 railroads...  10 records......  2 minutes.......            .3            23
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................  746 railroads...  546 responses...  N/A.............           507        38,532
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 546.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 507 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent: $38,532.
    Under 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b) and 1320.8(b)(3)(vi),
FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or sponsor,
and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

Brett A. Jortland,
Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2020-08516 Filed 4-21-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22259-22262]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07954]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94657; File No. SR-MEMX-2022-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MEMX LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Adopt on a
Permanent Basis the Pilot Program for Market-Wide Circuit Breakers

April 8, 2022.
    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 April 7, 2022, MEMX LLC (``MEMX'' or the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II 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 is filing with the Commission a proposed rule change
to make permanent the pilot program related to the market-wide circuit
breaker in Rule 11.16. The text of the proposed rule change is provided
in Exhibit 5.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On March 16, 2022, the Commission approved the proposal of the New
York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE''), to adopt on a permanent basis the
pilot program for Market-Wide Circuit Breakers (``MWCB'') in NYSE Rule
7.12.\5\ The Exchange now proposes to adopt the same change to make
permanent the pilot program related to the market-wide circuit breaker
in Rule 11.16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94441 (March 16,
2022) (SR-NYSE-2021-40).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Pilot Rules
    The MWCB rules, which for the Exchange are contained in Exchange
Rule 11.16, provide an important, automatic mechanism that is invoked
to promote stability and investor confidence during periods of
significant stress when cash equities securities experience extreme
market-wide declines. The MWCB rules are designed to slow the effects
of extreme price declines through coordinated trading halts across both
cash equity and equity options securities markets.
    The cash equities rules governing MWCBs were first adopted in 1988
and, in 2012, all U.S. cash equity exchanges and FINRA amended their
cash equities uniform rules on a pilot basis (the ``Pilot Rules,''
i.e., Rule 11.16(a)-(d), (f)-(g)).\6\ The Pilot Rules currently provide
for trading halts in all cash equity securities during a severe market
decline as measured by a single-day decline in the S&P 500 Index
(``SPX'').\7\ Under the Pilot Rules, a market-wide trading halt will be
triggered if SPX declines in price by specified percentages from the
prior day's closing price of that index. The triggers are set at three
circuit breaker thresholds: 7% (Level 1), 13% (Level 2), and 20% (Level
3). A market decline that triggers a Level 1 or Level 2 halt after 9:30
a.m. and before 3:25 p.m. would halt market-wide trading for 15
minutes, while a similar market decline at or after 3:25 p.m. would not
halt market-wide trading. (Level 1 and Level 2 halts may occur only
once a day.) A market decline that triggers a Level 3 halt at any time
during the trading day would halt market-wide trading for the remainder
of the trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67090 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33531 (June 6, 2012) (SR-BATS-2011-038; SR-BYX-2011-
025; SR-BX-2011-068; SR-CBOE-2011-087; SR-C2-2011-024; SR-CHX-2011-
30; SR-EDGA-2011-31; SR-EDGX-2011-30; SR-FINRA-2011-054; SR-ISE-
2011-61; SR-NASDAQ-2011-131; SR-NSX-2011-11; SR-NYSE-2011-48; SR-
NYSEAmex-2011-73; SR-NYSEArca-2011-68; SR-Phlx-2011-129) (``Pilot
Rules Approval Order'').
    \7\ The rules of the equity options exchanges similarly provide
for a halt in trading if the cash equity exchanges invoke a MWCB
Halt. See, e.g., NYSE Arca Rule 6.65-O(d)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission approved the Pilot Rules, the term of which was to
coincide with the pilot period for the Plan to Address Extraordinary
Market Volatility Pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS (the ``LULD
Plan''),\8\ including any extensions to the pilot period for the LULD
Plan.\9\ In April 2019, the Commission approved an amendment to the
LULD Plan for it to operate on a permanent, rather than pilot,
basis.\10\ In conjunction with the proposal to make the LULD Plan
permanent, all U.S. cash equity exchanges and FINRA filed to untie the
Pilot Rules' effectiveness from that of the LULD Plan and to extend the
Pilot Rules' effectiveness to the close of business on October 18,
2019.\11\ On May 4, 2020, the Commission approved MEMX's Form 1
Application to register as a national securities exchange with rules
including, on a pilot basis expiring on October 18, 2020, the Pilot
Rules.\12\ The Exchange subsequently amended Rule 11.16 to extend the
Pilot Rules' effectiveness for an additional year to the close of
business on October 18, 2021,\13\ March 18, 2022,\14\ and April 18,
2022.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67091 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33498 (June 6, 2012). The LULD Plan provides a
mechanism to address extraordinary market volatility in individual
securities.
    \9\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67090 (May
31, 2012), 77 FR 33531 (June 6, 2012) (SR-NYSE-2011-48) (Approval
Order); and 68784 (January 31, 2013), 78 FR 8662 (February 6, 2013)
(SR-NYSE-2013-10).
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85623 (April 11,
2019), 84 FR 16086 (April 17, 2019).
    \11\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85560 (April
9, 2019), 84 FR 15247 (April 15, 2019) (SR-NYSE-2019-19).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Release No. 88806 (May 4, 2020), 85
FR 27451 (May 8, 2020).
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90159 (October 13,
2020), 85 FR 66373 (October 19, 2020) (SR-MEMX-2020-12).
    \14\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93362 (October 15,
2021), 86 FR 58364 (October 21, 2021) (SR-MEMX-2021-14).
    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 94449 (March 17,
2022), 87 FR 16535 (March 23, 2022) (SR-MEMX-2022-04).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MWCB Working Group Study
    Beginning in February 2020, at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic,
the markets experienced increased volatility, culminating in four MWCB

Level 1 halts on March 9, 12, 16, and 18, 2020. In each instance,
pursuant to the Pilot Rules, the markets halted as intended upon a 7%
drop in SPX and did not start the process to resume trading until the
prescribed 15-minute halt period ended.
    On September 17, 2020, the Director of the Commission's Division of
Trading and Markets asked the SROs to conduct a study of the design and
operation of the Pilot Rules and the LULD Plan during the period of
volatility in March 2020. In response to the request, the SROs created
a MWCB ``Working Group'' composed of SRO representatives and industry
advisers that included members of the advisory committees to both the
LULD Plan and the NMS Plans governing the collection, consolidation,
and dissemination of last-sale transaction reports and quotations in
NMS Stocks. The Working Group met regularly from September 2020 through
March 2021 to consider the Commission's request, review data, and
compile its study.
    On March 31, 2021, the MWCB Working Group submitted its study (the
``Study'') to the Commission.\16\ The Study included an evaluation of
the operation of the Pilot Rules during the March 2020 events and an
evaluation of the design of the current MWCB system. In the Study, the
Working Group concluded: (1) The MWCB mechanism set out in the Pilot
Rules worked as intended during the March 2020 events; (2) the MWCB
halts triggered in March 2020 appear to have had the intended effect of
calming volatility in the market, without causing harm; (3) the design
of the MWCB mechanism with respect to reference value (SPX), trigger
levels (7%/13%/20%), and halt times (15 minutes) is appropriate; (4)
the change implemented in Amendment 10 to the LULD Plan did not likely
have any negative impact on MWCB functionality; and (5) no changes
should be made to the mechanism to prevent the market from halting
shortly after the opening of regular trading hours at 9:30 a.m.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Report of the Market-Wide Circuit Breaker (``MWCB'')
Working Group Regarding the March 2020 MWCB Events, submitted March
31, 2021 (the ``Study''), available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/Report_of_the_Market-Wide_Circuit_Breaker_Working_Group.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of those conclusions, the MWCB Working Group also made
several recommendations, including that (1) the Pilot Rules should be
made permanent without any changes, and (2) SROs should adopt a rule
requiring all designated Regulation SCI firms to participate in at
least one Level 1/Level 2 MWCB test each year and to verify their
participation via attestation.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See id. at 46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal To Make the Pilot Rules Permanent
    On July 16, 2021, NYSE proposed a rule change to make the Pilot
Rules permanent, consistent with the Working Group's
recommendations.\18\ On March 16, 2022, the Commission approved NYSE's
proposal to make the Pilot Rules permanent.\19\ Consistent with the
Commission's approval of NYSE's proposal, the Exchange now proposes
that the Pilot Rules (i.e., paragraphs (a)-(d) and (f)-(g) of Rule
11.16) be made permanent. To accomplish this, the Exchange proposes to
remove the preamble to Rule 11.16, which currently provides that the
rule is in effect during a pilot period that expires at the close of
business on April 18, 2022. The Exchange does not propose any changes
to paragraphs (a)-(d) or (f)-(g) of the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92428 (July 16,
2021), 86 FR 38776 (July 22, 2021) (SR-NYSE-2021-40).
    \19\ See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further consistent with the Commission's approval of NYSE's
proposal, the Exchange proposes to add new paragraphs (h), (i), and (j)
to Rule 11.16, as follows:
    (h) Market-Wide Circuit Breaker (``MWCB'') Testing.
    (1) The Exchange will participate in all industry-wide tests of the
MWCB mechanism. Members designated pursuant to paragraph (a) of Rule
2.4 to connect to the Exchange/s backup systems and participate in
testing of such systems are required to participate in at least one
industry-wide MWCB test each year and to verify their participation in
that test by attesting that they are able to or have attempted to:
    (A) Receive and process MWCB halt messages from the securities
information processors (``SIP'');
    (B) receive and process resume messages from the SIPs following a
MWCB halt;
    (C) receive and process market data from the SIPs relevant to MWCB
halts; and
    (D) send orders following a Level 1 or Level 2 MWCB halt in a
manner consistent with their usual trading behavior.
    (2) To the extent that a Member participating in a MWCB test is
unable to receive and process any of the messages identified in
paragraph (h)(1)(A)-(D) of this Rule, its attestation should notify the
Exchange which messages it was unable to process and, if known, why.
    (3) Members not designated pursuant to standards established in
paragraph (a) of Rule 2.4 are permitted to participate in any MWCB
test.
    (f)[sic] In the event that a halt is triggered under this Rule
following a Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3 Market Decline, the Exchange,
together with other SROs and industry representatives (the ``MWCB
Working Group''), will review such event. The MWCB Working Group will
prepare a report that documents its analysis and recommendations and
will provide that report to the Commission within 6 months of the
event.
    (g)[sic] In the event that there is (1) a Market Decline of more
than 5%, or (2) an SRO implements a rule that changes its reopening
process following a MWCB Halt, the Exchange, together with the MWCB
Working Group, will review such event and consider whether any
modifications should be made to this Rule. If the MWCB Working Group
recommends that a modification should be made to this Rule, the MWCB
Working Group will prepare a report that documents its analysis and
recommendations and provide that report to the Commission.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to make the Pilot Rules
permanent is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,\20\ in general,
and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\21\ in
particular, in that it is designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general
to protect investors and the public interest. The Pilot Rules set out
in Rule 11.16(a)-(d) and (f)-(g) are an important, automatic mechanism
that is invoked to promote stability and investor confidence during
periods of significant market stress when securities markets experience
broad-based declines. The four MWCB halts that occurred in March 2020
provided the Exchange, the other SROs, and market participants with
real-world experience as to how the Pilot Rules actually function in
practice. Based on the Working Group's Study and the Exchange's own
analysis of those events, the Exchange believes that making the Pilot
Rules permanent would benefit market participants, promote just and
equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and

perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that making the Pilot Rules
permanent would benefit market participants, promote just and equitable
principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system, and protect
investors and the public interest, because the Pilot Rules worked as
intended during the March 2020 events. As detailed above, the markets
were in communication before, during, and after each of the MWCB Halts
that occurred in March 2020. All 9,000+ equity symbols were
successfully halted in a timely manner when SPX declined 7% from the
previous day's closing value, as designed. The Exchange believes that
market participants would benefit from having the Pilot Rules made
permanent because such market participants are familiar with the design
and operation of the MWCB mechanism set out in the Pilot Rules, and
know from experience that it has functioned as intended on multiple
occasions under real-life stress conditions. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that making the Pilot Rules permanent would enhance investor
confidence in the ability of the markets to successfully halt as
intended when under extreme stress.
    The Exchange further believes that making the Pilot Rules permanent
would benefit market participants, promote just and equitable
principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system, and protect
investors and the public interest, because the halts that were
triggered pursuant to the Pilot Rules in March 2020 appear to have had
the intended effect of calming volatility in the market without causing
harm. As detailed above, after studying a variety of metrics concerning
opening and reopening auctions, quote volatility, and other factors,
the Exchange concluded that there was no significant difference in the
percentage of securities that opened on a trade versus on a quote for
the four days in March 2020 with MWCB Halts, versus the other periods
studied. In addition, while the post-MWCB Halt reopening auctions were
smaller than typical opening auctions, the size of those post-MWCB Halt
reopening auctions plus the earlier initial opening auctions in those
symbols was on average equal to opening auctions in January 2020. The
Exchange believes this indicates that the MWCB Halts on the four March
2020 days did not cause liquidity to evaporate. Finally, the Exchange
observes that while quote volatility was generally higher on the four
days in March 2020 with MWCB Halts as compared to the other periods
studied, quote volatility stabilized following the MWCB Halts at levels
similar to the January 2020 levels, and LULD Trading Pauses worked as
designed to address any additional volatility later in the day. From
this evidence, the Exchange concludes that the Pilot Rules actually
calmed volatility on the four MWCB Halt days in March 2020, without
causing liquidity to evaporate or otherwise harming the market. As
such, the Exchange believes that making the Pilot Rules permanent would
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and protect investors and the
public interest.
    The Exchange believes that that making the Pilot Rules permanent
without any changes would benefit market participants, promote just and
equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and
protect investors and the public interest, because the current design
of the MWCB mechanism as set out in the Pilot Rules remains
appropriate. As detailed above, the Exchange considered whether SPX
should be replaced as the reference value, whether the current trigger
levels (7%/13%/20%) and halt times (15 minutes for Level 1 and 2 halts)
should be modified, and whether changes should be made to prevent the
market from halting shortly after the opening of regular trading hours
at 9:30 a.m., and concluded that the MWCB mechanism set out in the
Pilot Rules remains appropriate, for the reasons cited above. The
Exchange believes that public confidence in the MWCB mechanism would be
enhanced by the Pilot Rules being made permanent without any changes,
given investors' familiarity with the Pilot Rules and their successful
functioning in March 2020.
    The Exchange believes that proposed paragraph (h) regarding MWCB
testing is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general to protect
investors and the public interest. The Working Group recommended that
all cash equities exchanges adopt a rule requiring all designated
Regulation SCI firms to participate in MWCB testing and to attest to
their participation. The Exchange believes that these requirements
would promote the stability of the markets and enhance investor
confidence in the MWCB mechanism and the protections that it provides
to the markets and to investors. The Exchange further believes that
requiring firms participating in a MWCB test to identify any inability
to process messages pertaining to such MWCB test would contribute to a
fair and orderly market by flagging potential issues that should be
corrected. The Exchange would preserve such attestations pursuant to
its obligations to retain books and records of the Exchange.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 17 CFR 240.17a-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that proposed paragraph (i) would benefit
market participants, promote just and equitable principles of trade,
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and protect investors and the
public interest. Having the MWCB Working Group review any halt
triggered under Rule 11.16 and prepare a report of its analysis and
recommendations would permit the Exchange, along with other market
participants and the Commission, to evaluate such event and determine
whether any modifications should be made to Rule 11.16 in the public
interest. Preparation of such a report within 6 months of the event
would permit the Exchange, along with the MWCB Working Group,
sufficient time to analyze such halt and prepare their recommendations.
    The Exchange believes that proposed paragraph (j) would benefit
market participants, promote just and equitable principles of trade,
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and protect investors and the
public interest. Having the MWCB Working Group review instances of a
Market Decline of more than 5% or an SRO implementing a rule that
changes its reopening process following a MWCB Halt would allow the
MWCB Working Group to identify situations where it recommends that Rule
11.16 be modified in the public interest. In such situations where the
MWCB Working Group recommends that a modification should be made to
Rule 11.16, the MWCB Working Group would prepare a report that
documents its analysis and recommendations and provide that report to
the Commission, thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system while
protecting investors and the public interest.

    For the foregoing reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed
change is consistent with the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change is not
intended to address competition, but rather, makes permanent the
current MWCB Pilot Rules for the protection of the markets. The
Exchange believes that making the current MWCB Pilot Rules permanent
would have no discernable burden on competition at all, since the Pilot
Rules have already been in effect since 2012 and would be made
permanent without any changes. Moreover, because the MWCB mechanism
contained in the Pilot Rules requires all exchanges and all market
participants to cease trading at the same time, making the Pilot Rules
permanent would not provide a competitive advantage to any exchange or
any class of market participants.
    Further, the Exchange understands that the other SROs will submit
substantively identical proposals to the Commission. Thus, the proposed
rule change will help to ensure consistency across SROs without
implicating any competitive issues.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \23\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\24\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \25\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\26\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange asked
that the Commission waive the 30 day operative delay so that the
proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. Waiver of the
30-day operative delay would allow the Exchange to immediately provide
the protections included in this proposal in the event of a MWCB halt,
which is consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative
delay and designates the proposed rule change as operative upon
filing.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \26\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \27\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MEMX-2022-08 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-MEMX-2022-08. 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-MEMX-2022-08
and should be submitted on or before May 5, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\28\
Jill Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-07954 Filed 4-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 238 (Thursday, December 10, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79446-79448]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1103; Airspace Docket No. 20-ACE-21]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of V-72, V-132, V-190, and V-289, and
Revocation of V-238 in the Vicinity of Maples, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR)
Federal airways V-72, V-132, V-190, and V-289; and remove VOR Federal
airway V-238 in the vicinity of Maples, MO. The VOR Federal airway
modifications are necessary due to the planned decommissioning of the
VOR portion of the Maples, MO, VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC)
navigation aid (NAVAID) which provides navigation guidance for portions
of the affected airways listed above. The Maples VOR is being
decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network
(MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 25, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2020-1103; Airspace Docket No. 20-ACE-21 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the route structure as necessary to
preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National
Airspace System (NAS).

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2020-1103; Airspace Docket No. 20-ACE-21) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.

    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2020-1103; Airspace Docket No. 20-ACE-21.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Central
Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX, 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

Background

    The FAA is planning to decommission the VOR portion of the Maples,
MO, VORTAC in August 2021. The Maples, MO, VOR is a candidate VOR
identified for discontinuance by the FAA's VOR MON program and listed
in the final policy statement notice, ``Provision of Navigation
Services for the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)
Transition to Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) (Plan for Establishing
a VOR Minimum Operational Network),'' published in the Federal Register
of July 26, 2016 (81 FR 48694), Docket No. FAA-2011-1082.
    Although the VOR portion of the Maples VORTAC is planned for
decommissioning, the co-located DME portion of the NAVAID is being
retained.
    The existing Air Traffic Service (ATS) route dependencies to the
Maples, MO, VORTAC NAVAID are VOR Federal airways V-72, V-132, V-190,
V-238, and V-289. With the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion
of the Maples VORTAC, the remaining ground-based NAVAID coverage in the
area is insufficient to enable the continuity of V-72, V-190, and V-
238. As such, proposed modifications to these affected airways would
result in a gap in two of the airways (V-72 and V-190) and removing the
third airway completely (V-238). However, the remaining ground-based
NAVAID coverage in the area is sufficient to retaining two of the
airways (V-132 and V- 289) as they are charted today by redefining the
affected airway points in each of the airways.
    To overcome the gaps created in V-72 and V-190, and the loss of V-
238, instrument flight rules (IFR) traffic could use adjacent ATS
routes, including VOR Federal airways V-14, V-88, V-132, V-175, V-178,
and V-289, or request air traffic control (ATC) radar vectors to fly
through or circumnavigate the affected area. Additionally, IFR pilots
equipped with RNAV PBN capabilities could also navigate point to point
using the existing fixes that will remain in place to support continued
operations though the affected area. Visual flight rules (VFR) pilots
who elect to navigate via the airways through the affected area could
also take advantage of the adjacent VOR Federal airways or ATC services
listed previously.
    To retain V-132 as charted, the FAA is proposing to redefine the
airway point defined by the intersection of the Forney, MO, VOR
086[deg] and Maples, MO, VORTAC 052[deg] radials (LENOX fix)
by using the existing Forney, MO, VOR 086[deg] radial and replacing the
Maples, MO, radial with a new Vichy, MO, VOR/Distance Measuring
Equipment (VOR/DME) 156[deg](T)/150[deg](M) radial. As a result, the V-
132 airway would remain unchanged and as currently charted.
    To retain V-289 as charted, the FAA is proposing to redefine the
airway point defined by the intersection of the Maples, MO, VORTAC
236[deg] and Vichy, MO, VOR/DME 204[deg] radials (GOBEY fix) by
replacing the Maples, MO, VORTAC radial with a new Dogwood, MO, VORTAC
058[deg](T)/057[deg](M) radial and using the existing Vichy, MO, VOR/
DME 204[deg] radial. As a result, the V-289 airway would remain
unchanged and as currently charted.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying VOR Federal airways V-72, V-
132, V-190, and V-289, and removing V-238 in its entirety. The planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Maples, MO, VORTAC has made
this action necessary.
    The proposed VOR Federal airway changes are outlined below.
    V-72: V-72 currently extends between the Razorback, AR, VORTAC and
the Bible Grove, IL, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the airway
segment overlying the Maples, MO, VORTAC between the Dogwood, MO,
VORTAC and the Farmington, MO, VORTAC. The unaffected portions of the
existing airway would remain as charted.
    V-132: V-132 currently extends between the Medicine Bow, WY, VOR/
DME and the intersection of the Forney, MO, VOR 086[deg] and Maples,
MO, VORTAC 052[deg] radials (LENOX fix). The airway excludes
that portion within restricted areas R-4501A, R-4501B, R-4501C and R-
4501D during their time of activation. The FAA proposes to redefine the
LENOX fix as the intersection of the existing Forney, MO,
VOR 086[deg] radial and new Vichy, MO, VOR/DME 156[deg](T)/150[deg](M)
radial. The existing airway would remain as charted and the exclusion
language would remain unchanged.
    V-190: V-190 currently extends between the Phoenix, AZ, VORTAC and
the Pocket City, IN, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the airway
segment overlying the Maples, MO, VORTAC between the Springfield, MO,
VORTAC and the Farmington, MO, VORTAC. Additional changes to other
portions of the airway have been proposed in a separate NPRM. The
unaffected portions of the existing airway would remain as charted.
    V-238: V-238 currently extends between the Maples, MO, VORTAC and
the Troy, IL, VORTAC. The FAA

proposes to remove the airway in its entirety.
    V-289: V-289 currently extends between the Beaumont, TX, VORTAC and
the Vichy, MO, VOR/DME. The FAA proposes to remove the airway point
defined by the intersection of the Dogwood, MO, VORTAC 058[deg] and
Maples, MO, VORTAC 236[deg] radials (MUPIE fix) and redefine the airway
point defined by the intersection of the Maples, MO, VORTAC 236[deg]
and Vichy, MO, VOR/DME 204[deg] radials (GOBEY fix) as the intersection
of the new Dogwood, MO, VORTAC 058[deg](T)/057[deg](M) radial and
existing Vichy, MO, VOR/DME 204[deg] radial. The existing airway would
remain as charted.
    All radials in the VOR Federal airway descriptions below that do
not reflect True (T)/Magnetic (M) degree radial information are
unchanged and stated in True degrees.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
7400.11E dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The ATS routes listed in
this document would be subsequently published in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

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

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-72 [Amended]

    From Razorback, AR; to Dogwood, MO. From Farmington, MO;
Centralia, IL; to Bible Grove, IL.
* * * * *

V-132 [Amended]

    From Medicine Bow, WY; INT Medicine Bow 106[deg] and Cheyenne,
WY, 330[deg] radials; Cheyenne; Akron, CO; 17 miles, 49 miles, 59
MSL, Goodland, KS; 50 miles, 97 miles, 65 MSL, Hutchinson, KS; INT
Hutchinson 078[deg] and Chanute, KS, 293[deg] radials; Chanute; INT
Chanute 100[deg] and Springfield, MO, 276[deg] radials; Springfield;
INT Springfield 058[deg] and Forney, MO, 266[deg] radials; Forney;
INT Forney 086[deg] and Vichy, MO, 156[deg](T)/150[deg](M) radials,
excluding that portion within R-4501A, R-4501B, R-4501C, and R-4501D
during their time of activation.
* * * * *

V-190 [Amended]

    From Phoenix, AZ; St. Johns, AZ; Albuquerque, NM; Fort Union,
NM; Dalhart, TX; Mitbee, OK; INT Mitbee 059[deg] and Pioneer, OK,
280[deg] radials; Pioneer; INT Pioneer 094[deg] and Bartlesville,
OK, 256[deg] radials; Bartlesville; INT Bartlesville 075[deg] and
Oswego, KS, 233[deg] radials; Oswego; INT Oswego 085[deg] and
Springfield, MO, 261[deg] radials; to Springfield. From Farmington,
MO; Marion, IL; to Pocket City, IN.
* * * * *

V-238 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-289 [Amended]

    From Beaumont, TX; INT Beaumont 323[deg] and Lufkin, TX,
161[deg] radials; Lufkin; Gregg County, TX; Texarkana, AR; Fort
Smith, AR; Harrison, AR; Dogwood, MO; INT Dogwood 058[deg](T)/
057[deg](M) and Vichy, MO, 204[deg] radials; to Vichy.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 7, 2020.
George Gonzalez,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-27111 Filed 12-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 55497]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22015]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-1288]

Draft Guidance for Industry: Electronic Submission of Lot
Distribution Reports; Availability; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration is correcting a notice
entitled ``Draft Guidance for Industry: Electronic Submission of Lot
Distribution Reports; Availability'' that appeared in the Federal
Register of August 29, 2014 (79 FR 51576). The document announced the
availability of a draft guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry:
Electronic Submission of Lot Distribution Reports'' dated August 2014.
The document was published with the incorrect docket number. This
document corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori J. Churchyard, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
240-402-7911.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of Friday, August
29, 2014, in FR Doc. 2014-20635, on page 51576, the following
correction is made:
    1. On page 51576, in the first column, in the Docket No. heading,
``[FDA-2014-S-0009]'' is corrected to read ``[FDA-2014-D-1288]''.

    Dated: September 10, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-22015 Filed 9-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 151 (Friday, August 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51918-51919]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18592]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001]

National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee; Notice
of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming
public advisory committee meeting of the National Mammography Quality
Assurance Advisory Committee. The general function of the committee is
to provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory

issues. The meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will be held Thursday, September 15, 2016, from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Hilton Washington, DC North/Gaithersburg, Salons A, B, C and
D, 620 Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD 20877. The hotel's telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Answers to commonly asked questions including
information regarding special accommodations due to a disability,
visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: S.J. Anderson, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1643, Silver Spring, MD 20993,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>301-796-7047, or FDA Advisory Committee
Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC
area). A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications
that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot
always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore,
you should always check the Agency's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate
advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee
information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to
the meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The Committee will discuss and make recommendations on:
     Compliance Analysis. This presentation will be focused on
Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) current compliance trends,
such as how most compliance cases originate. Input from the committee
on any trends seen in the analysis, why the trends may be occurring,
and possible actions will be sought.
     Inspection Enhancement Project. This presentation will
describe a proposal to use the inspection program to enhance image
quality. FDA is seeking committee input on anticipated facility
questions related to the proposal.
     The approved alternative standard American College of
Radiology Full Field Digital Mammography Quality Control Manual. The
manual's contents will be explained and FDA will ask the committee's
advice on facility roll-out strategies.
     Issues related to breast density. A presentation of
current issues followed by a committee discussion on how these issues
might effect a possible MQSA requirement for reporting breast density.
     Future challenges for MQSA, such as the role of
synthesized 2D images. FDA is seeking committee input on this challenge
as well as what future challenges MQSA might encounter.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before
September 7, 2016. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled
between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Those individuals interested in
making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and
submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or
arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed
participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to
make their presentation on or before August 30, 2016. Time allotted for
each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants
requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated
during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a
lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing
session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding
their request to speak by August 31, 2016.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Artair Mallett at<PHONE_NUMBER> at least 7 days in advance of
the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: August 1, 2016.
Janice M. Soreth,
Acting Associate Commissioner, Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2016-18592 Filed 8-4-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


                                 ATTACHMENT H                                             Survey to Test Awareness and Perceptions of EPA's Safer Choice Label:                         General Adult Population Survey                                                                                OMB Control No. 2070-NEW                          Approval expires x/xx/xxxx                                                    This collection of information is approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. (OMB Control No. 2070-NEW). Responses to this collection of information are voluntary. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to be 0.33 hours per response. Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden to the Regulatory Support Division Director, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2821T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed form to this address.                           Survey for EPA Safer Choice                Awareness and Perceptions of Safer Choice Label                          General Adult Population Survey

The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated at 0.33 hours per response. Responses will be private to the extent permitted by law. This is a voluntary collection; respondents do not have to respond if there is no OMB control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 2070-0189. Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed application to this address.

The survey below is designed to test awareness and perceptions of the primary Safer Choice label.  In the event that EPA needs to test awareness and perceptions of the alternate fragrance-free label, the same survey will be used, with the addition of four questions.

 Are you familiar with a certification program implemented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that helps shoppers and buyers find products that can help protect the environment and are safer for people, families, and pets?

 Yes  No [SKIP to Q3]

 What is the name of the certification program? [Open-ended]

 For more than 15 years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has implemented a voluntary certification program that helps shoppers and buyers find products that can help protect the environment and are safer for people, families, and pets. This certification program, called "Safer Choice," evaluates human health and environmental concerns associated with chemicals in a variety of products, including commonly used household cleaning products. Products that meet EPA's Safer Choice Standard are allowed to carry the Safer Choice label. When you see the Safer Choice label on a product it means the Safer Choice scientific review team has screened each ingredient for potential human health and environmental effects and has determined the product contains only safer ingredients.

   Now that you have heard more about the certification program, do you recall hearing or seeing anything about this program?

 Yes  No

 A.	Have you seen this visual mark on any products on store shelves?

 Yes  No

 Have you seen this visual mark on any products you have purchased?

 Yes  No

 Based on what you now know about the certification program, how likely are you to use the Safer Choice label to help you select a product to purchase?

 Extremely likely  Very likely  Somewhat likely  Slightly likely  Not at all likely

Please answer the following questions about the program name and visual design of the Safer Choice label (show image of label).

  On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates that you "strongly disagree," and 5 indicates that you "strongly agree," please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.

                                                                       Strongly Disagree                                        1                                Somewhat Disagree                                        2 Neutral - don't agree or disagree                                        3                                 Somewhat Agree                                        4                                 Strongly Agree                                        5 1 I would notice this label if I saw it on a product or packaging

2 The label is attractive and appealing

3 The visual design is effective in showing that the product is safer for people and families

4 The visual design is effective in showing that the product helps protect the environment

5 The name "Safer Choice" is effective in showing that the product is safer for people and families

6 The name "Safer Choice" is effective in showing that the product helps protect the environment

7 The tagline "Meets U.S. EPA Safer Product Standards" is credible

8 This label is a useful resource for shoppers

9 I would use this label to help me decide which product to buy

 Have you seen products with this label in stores where you shop for household goods?      YES  NO  I don't know

 Have you purchased a product with this label in the past six months?

 YES  NO  I don't know

 What would most motivate you to purchase products with this label? [PLEASE SELECT ONE RESPONSE ONLY]

 If it was cost competitive  If it was easy to locate on store shelves  If there was scientific information readily available to support claims  If I had a coupon to encourage me to buy the product  If it was proven to be safer for children and animals  I would not purchase products with this label

OPTIONAL QUESTIONS ON LABEL VARIATION (could be fragrance free version, industrial version, or pesticides version).

In addition to the general design, there is a variation of the Safer Choice label. Please answer the following questions as they relate to this variation.

LABEL VARIATION                                      Label                                      Label

On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates that you "strongly disagree," and 5 indicates that you "strongly agree," please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.

                               Strongly Disagree                                        1                                Somewhat Disagree                                        2                       Neutral - don't agree or disagree                                        3                                 Somewhat Agree                                        4                                 Strongly Agree                                        5 1 I prefer to buy [fragrance free] products for my [family or workplace]

2 I buy [fragrance free] products on a regular basis (at least once a month)

3 The label is effective in showing that the product is [fragrance free]

4 I would use this label to help me decide which product to buy

OPTIONAL FRAGRANCE FREE DESIGN QUESTIONS

In addition to the general design, there is a "fragrance free" label for products.  Please answer the following questions as they relate to the fragrance free design.   FRAGRANCE FREE DESIGN

On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates that you "strongly disagree," and 5 indicates that you "strongly agree," please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.

                                                                       Strongly Disagree                                        1                                Somewhat Disagree                                        2 Neutral - don't agree or disagree                                        3                                 Somewhat Agree                                        4                                 Strongly Agree                                        5 1 I prefer to buy fragrance free products for my family

2 I buy fragrance free products on a regular basis (at least once a month)

3 The label is effective in showing that the product is fragrance free

4 I would use this label to help me decide which product to buy


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29795-29797]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12035]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69576; File No. SR-BX-2013-036]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc ; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change for Permanent Approval of a Pilot To
Permit BX Options To Accept Inbound Options Orders From NASDAQ OMX PHLX
LLC and NASDAQ Options Services LLC

May 15, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)C(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on May 7, 2013, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange has submitted a proposal for the permanent approval of
the Exchange's pilot program to permit the BX Options System to accept
inbound options orders routed by Nasdaq Options Services LLC (``NOS'')
from NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'') and The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC's
NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM'').

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 conjunction with PHLX and NOM providing outbound routing
services to all options markets using its affiliated routing broker,
NOS,\4\ BX proposed that NOS be permitted to route orders from PHLX and
NOM to BX Options on a pilot basis, subject to certain limitations and
conditions, as described below.\5\ The current pilot program expires
June 26, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59995 (May 28,
2009), 74 FR 26750 (June 3, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-32); and 57478
(March 12, 2008), 73 FR 14521 (March 18, 2008) (order approving File
Nos. SR-NASDAQ-2007-004 and SR-NASDAQ-2007-080).
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67256 (June 26, 2012),
77 FR 39277 (July 2, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-030).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NOS is a broker-dealer and member of NASDAQ, PHLX and BX. NOS
provides all routing functions for NOM, BX Options and PHLX. BX,
NASDAQ, NOM, PHLX and NOS are affiliates.\6\ Accordingly, the affiliate
relationship between BX and NOS, its member, raises the issue of an
exchange's affiliation with a member of such exchange. Specifically, in
connection with prior filings, the Commission has expressed concern
that the affiliation of an exchange with one of its members raises the
potential for unfair competitive advantage and potential conflicts of
interest between an exchange's self-regulatory obligations and its
commercial interests.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58324 (August 7,
2008), 73 FR 46936 (August 12, 2008) (SR-BSE-2008-02; SR-BSE-2008-
23; SR-BSE-2008-25; SR-BSECC-2008-01) (order approving NASDAQ OMX's
acquisition of BX); and 58179 (July 17, 2008), 73 FR 42874 (July 23,
2008) (SR-Phlx-2008-31) (order approving NASDAQ OMX's acquisition of
PHLX).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 59153 (December 23,
2008), 73 FR 80485 (December 31, 2008) (SR-NASDAQ-2008-098); and
62736 (August 17, 2010), 75 FR 51861 (August 23, 2010) (SR-NASDAQ-
2010-100). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58135 (July
10, 2008), 73 FR 40898 (July 16, 2008)(SR-NASDAQ-2008-
061)(Permitting NOS to be affiliated with PHLX).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recognizing that the Commission has previously expressed concern
regarding the potential for conflicts of interest in instances where a
member firm is affiliated with an exchange of which it is a member, the
Exchange previously proposed, and the Commission approved, limitations
and conditions on

NOS's affiliation with the Exchange.\8\ Also recognizing that the
Commission has expressed concern regarding the potential for conflicts
of interest in instances where a member firm is affiliated with an
exchange to which it is routing orders, the Exchange previously
proposed, and the Commission approved,\9\ NOS's affiliation with the
Exchange to permit the Exchange to accept inbound orders that NOS
routes in its capacity as a facility of PHLX and NOM, subject to the
certain limitations and conditions. The Exchange now proposes to permit
BX to accept inbound options orders that NOS routes in its capacity as
a facility of PHLX and NOM on a permanent basis, subject to the
limitations and conditions of this pilot:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67256 (June 26, 2012),
77 FR 39277 (July 2, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-030).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     First, the Exchange and FINRA maintain a Regulatory
Contract, as well as an agreement pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act
(``17d-2 Agreement'').\10\ Pursuant to the Regulatory Contract and the
17d-2 Agreement, FINRA is allocated regulatory responsibilities to
review NOS's compliance with certain Exchange rules.\11\ Pursuant to
the Regulatory Contract, however, BX retains ultimate responsibility
for enforcing its rules with respect to NOS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
    \11\ NOS is also subject to independent oversight by FINRA, its
designated examining authority, for compliance with financial
responsibility requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Second, FINRA monitors NOS for compliance with the
Exchange's trading rules, and collects and maintains certain related
information.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Pursuant to the Regulatory Contract, both FINRA and the
Exchange collect and maintain all alerts, complaints, investigations
and enforcement actions in which NOS (in its capacity as a facility
of PHLX and NOM routing orders to BX) is identified as a participant
that has potentially violated applicable Commission or Exchange
rules. The Exchange and FINRA retain these records in an easily
accessible manner in order to facilitate any potential review
conducted by the Commission's Office of Compliance Inspections and
Examinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Third, FINRA provides a report to the Exchange's chief
regulatory officer (``CRO''), on a quarterly basis, that: (i)
Quantifies all alerts (of which FINRA is aware) that identify NOS as a
participant that has potentially violated Commission or Exchange rules,
and (ii) lists all investigations that identify NOS as a participant
that has potentially violated Commission or Exchange rules.
     Fourth, the Exchange has in place BX Rule 2140(c), which
requires The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., as the holding company owning both
the Exchange and NOS, to establish and maintain procedures and internal
controls reasonably designed to ensure that NOS does not develop or
implement changes to its system, based on non-public information
obtained regarding planned changes to the Exchange's systems as a
result of its affiliation with the Exchange, until such information is
available generally to similarly situated Exchange members, in
connection with the provision of inbound order routing to the
Exchange.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See SR-BX-2013-035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has met all the above-listed conditions. By meeting
the above conditions, the Exchange has set up mechanisms that protect
the independence of the Exchange's regulatory responsibility with
respect to NOS, as well as demonstrate that NOS cannot use any
information advantage it may have because of its affiliation with the
Exchange. Because the Exchange has met all the above-listed conditions,
it now seeks permanent approval of this inbound routing relationship.
The Exchange will continue to comply with the conditions 1-4 stated
above.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\14\ in general, and with
Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in that the proposal is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest, because the
proposed rule change will allow the Exchange to continue to receive
inbound orders from NOS, acting in its capacity as a facility of PHLX
and NOM, in a manner consistent with prior approvals and established
protections. The Exchange believes that these conditions establish
mechanisms that protect the independence of the Exchange's regulatory
responsibility with respect to NOS, as well as ensure that NOS cannot
use any information it may have because of its affiliation with the
Exchange to its advantage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
Permanent approval of the current pilot program does not raise any
issues of intra-market competition because it involves inbound routing
from an affiliated exchange. Nor does it result in a burden on
competition among exchanges, because there are many competing options
exchanges that provide routing services, including through an
affiliate.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission shall: (a) By order approve
or disapprove such proposed rule change, or (b) institute proceedings
to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.

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-BX-2013-036 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2013-036. This file
number should be included on the

subject line if email is used. To help the Commission process and
review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The
Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site
(http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all
subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the
proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all
written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 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 will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-BX-2013-036 and should be submitted on or before June
11, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-12035 Filed 5-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P