	Study Title

	Notice of Filing to Establish

An Import Tolerance for Thiram in Bananas

	Guideline Requirement

	August 3, 1996 Food Quality Protection Act

	Author

	Vincent J. Piccirillo, Ph.D., DABT

	Consultant Toxicologist

	Sponsor

	Taminco Inc.

	Report Date

	November 15, 2006

	Study Identification Number

	Taminco Inc.

	Thiram1006b

	Page 1 of 6

	STATEMENT OF NO DATA CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIMS

STATEMENT OF NO DATA CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIMS

No claim of confidentiality is made for any information contained in this study on the basis of its falling within the scope of FIFRA 0(d)(1)(A), (B) or (C).

Company:  Taminco Inc.

Company Agent:  Vincent J. Piccirillo                                 Date:  November 22, 2006

	STATEMENT OF GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICES COMPLIANCE

Good Laboratory Practices and Quality Assurance statements are not relevant for this document.

Company Agent:   Vincent J. Piccirillo                                   Date: November 22, 2006

Title: Authorized Agent for Taminco

I.	Statutory Findings and Information Summary

Taminco is requesting the establishment of an import tolerance for the fungicide Thiram on bananas.  Thiram is currently registered for foliar treatments on strawberries and peaches, for seed treatment prior to planting for numerous vegetable and field crops and as a turf fungicide on golf course tees and greens and, with restrictions, as an animal repellent on residential ornamental plants. An import tolerance is being maintained for thiram on apples.

A. Residue Chemistry

1.  Plant metabolism.  The metabolism and chemical nature of residues of thiram in plants has been extensively evaluated and is adequately understood.

            2.  Analytical method.  Banana samples were analyzed according to Analytical   Method# Meth-100, Revision #4, "Determination of Thiram in Raw Agricultural Commodities, Processed Commodities and Other Plant Material."   Detection and quantitation for thiram (as CS2) were conducted using gas chromatography (GC) employing sulfur-specific flame photometric detection (FPD).  The limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.05 ppm.

3.  Magnitude of residues.  Banana residue trials were conducted in 5 countries that represent the major banana growing countries that export bananas to the United States.  Formulations containing either 42% thiram or 60% thiram were applied at a rate of 1.12 pounds thiram per acre.   Application began when the fruit had completely emerged from the flower, were trimmed and bagged.  The applications continued on a five to seven day basis until immediately prior to harvest maturity for a total of 10 applications.   Analytical results support the establishment of import tolerance of 0.5 ppm for whole bananas and 0.3 ppm for banana pulp. The LOQ for the analytical method was 0.05 ppm.

B.  Toxicology Profile

A Reregistration Eligibility Decision has been rendered for thiram.  The studies used for acute and chronic dietary risk assessments are summarized in the sections below.

ation LC50 for was ≥ 3.46 mg/L (Toxicity Category III).  Thiram is a moderate eye irritant, a very slight dermal irritant and may be a skin sensitizer.

2. Acute dietary toxicity endpoints.

An acute neurotoxicity study provided the endpoint for the acute dietary risk assessment for all populations.  In the acute neurotoxicity study, Sprague-Dawley rats/sex/dose were orally gavaged at 0, 5, 150, and 600 mg/kg, and were subsequently evaluated in functional observational batteries (FOB) and motor function observations.  Neuropathological evaluations were performed.  The Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) was 150 mg/kg based on FOB effects (lethargy, lower temperature, reduced startle response, no tail pinch response), reduced motor activity, and reduced brain weights. The No Observable Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) for neurotoxicity was 5 mg/kg.  The acute reference dose (ARfD) for the general population was 0.05 mg/kg.

	A developmental neurotoxicity study in rats provided the endpoint for the acute dietary risk assessment. In that study, 4 groups of 24 female Crl:CD(SD)BR IGS rats received diets containing 0, 20, 45 or 90 ppm thiram from gestation day 3 through postnatal day 20.  The maternal systemic and neurotoxicity LOAEL was 90 ppm based on decreased body weight, body weight gain and food consumption, clinical signs of toxicity and FOB findings.  The maternal NOAEL was 45 ppm.  The offspring systemic and neurotoxicity LOAEL was 45 ppm based on increased locomotor activity in females on PND 17.  The offspring NOAEL was 20 ppm.  The ARfD for females 13+ was 0.014 mg/kg/day.

3. Chronic dietary toxicity endpoints.

Two studies were selected to provide the endpoint for chronic dietary risk assessment.   These studies were a combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats and a chronic oral toxicity study in dogs.

In the combined chronic/oncogenicity study, Thiram technical was administered to albino rats Crl:CD®(SD)BR (60/sex/dose) in the diet at concentrations of 0, 16.3, 119, 262 ppm.for 104 weeks.  The LOAEL was 119 ppm (based on a reduction in body weight gain, changes in hematology and clinical chemistry parameters, and an increased incidence of bile duct hyperplasia.  The NOAEL was 16.3 ppm (1.8 mg/kg/day for females and 1.5 mg/kg/day males).

Thiram was administered to 6 beagle dogs/sex/dose in the diet at levels of 0, 30, 90, and 250 ppm for 52 weeks.  The LOAEL was 90 ppm (2.6 mg/kg/day) based on elevated cholesterol levels and increases in liver-to-body weight ratio. The NOAEL was 30 ppm (0.84 mg/kg/day).

These studies were considered co-critical in establishing the cRfD.  Based on the overall results, the Agency determined that the NOAEL for chronic toxicity was 1.5 mg/kg;day. The chronic reference dose (cRfd) was  0.015 mg/kg/day.

C.  Aggregate Exposure

	An aggregate risk assessment was performed by USEPA during the RED process to encompass the domestic uses of thiram.  There will not be any domestic applications to bananas so an aggregate risk assessment including this use is not appropriate.

D.  Cumulative Effects

The USEPA is developing methodologies for assessing cumulative risks for chemicals having common mechanisms of toxicity.   No available data indicate that the toxic effects produced by thiram would be cumulative with those of any other chemical compounds.

E.  Safety Determination

	Dietary safety determinations were performed by addition of the dietary exposures derived from imported bananas to the dietary exposures calculated by the USEPA in its dietary risk assessments during the RED process.

1.  Acute dietary safety determination.  The acute dietary exposure for the General U.S. Population was 32.9% of the ARfD.  The most highly exposed population was Children 1-2 years of age with dietary exposure of 87.9% of the ARfD.  The dietary exposure of Females 13+ was 74.8% of the appropriate ARfD.

2. Chronic dietary safety determination.  Chronic dietary exposure for the General U.S. Population and the multiple population subgroups was at or below 3.7% of the CRfD, with the most highly exposed population group being Children 1-2 years of age (3.7%).

F. International Tolerances

,

_

`

b

c

d

g

j

#

$

%

&

g

h

i

j

ž

Ÿ

¡

¢

£

¤

¥

Ø

Ù

Ú

摧㺟@ᬀj

£

¥

¦

Ù

"

#

S

T

~

¸

Â

Ü

ü

#

$

R

S

hiocarbamate), ferbam, propineb, polycarbamate, mancozeb, maneb and metiram which are calculated as carbon disulfide.  Applicable MRLs (Codex, February 2006) for thiram are apples (5 ppm), bananas(2 ppm), stone fruits ( 7 ppm) and strawberries (5 ppm).

                                                  Thiram 1006b

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38495-38497]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15820]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0355]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Village of Sodus Point Fireworks Display, Sodus Bay,
Sodus Point, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Sodus Bay, Sodus Point, NY. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of Sodus Bay during the Village of Sodus Point
Fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect
spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with a fireworks
display.

DATES: This rule will be effective from 9:30 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. on
July 3, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2012-0355]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box, and click ``Search.'' You may
visit the Docket Management Facility, Department of Transportation,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email LT Christopher Mercurio, Chief of
Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716-
843-9343, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and
contrary to the public interest. The final details for this event were
not known to the Coast Guard until there was insufficient time
remaining before the event to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying the
effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run would
be both impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it
would inhibit the Coast Guard's ability to protect spectators and
vessels from the hazards associated with a maritime fireworks display,
which are discussed further below.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for 30 day notice period run would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Between 10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on July 3, 2012, a fireworks
display will be held on Sodus Bay near Sodus Point, NY. The Captain of
the Port Buffalo has determined that fireworks launched proximate to a
gathering of watercraft pose a significant risk to public safety and
property. Such hazards include premature and accidental detonations,
dangerous projectiles, and falling or burning debris.

C. Discussion of Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Buffalo has determined that this temporary safety zone is necessary to
ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the Village of Sodus
Point Fireworks. This zone will be effective and enforced from 9:30
p.m. until 11:00 p.m. on July 3, 2012. This zone will encompass all
waters of Sodus Bay, Sodus Point, NY within a 1,120 foot radius of
position 43[deg]16'27'' N, and 076[deg]58'27'' W (NAD 83).
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. It is not
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is
not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will
have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other
agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan
recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The
safety zone created by this rule will be relatively small and enforced
for a relatively short time. Also, the safety zone is designed to
minimize its impact on navigable waters. Furthermore, the safety zone
has been designed to allow vessels to transit around it. Thus,
restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in a portion of Sodus Bay on the evening of July 3,
2012.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for

the following reasons: This safety zone would be activated, and thus
subject to enforcement, for only an hour and a half late in the day.
Traffic may be allowed to pass through the zone with the permission of
the Captain of the Port. The Captain of the Port can be reached via VHF
channel 16. Before the activation of the zone, we would issue local
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapters 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0355 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0355  Safety Zone; Village of Sodus Point Fireworks,
Sodus Bay, Sodus Point, NY.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Sodus
Bay, Sodus Point, NY within a 1,120 foot radius of position
43[deg]16'27'' N, and 076[deg]58'27'' W (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective and Enforcement Period. This regulation is effective
and will be enforced on July 3, 2012 from 9:30 p.m. until 11:00 p.m.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port

Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 12, 2012.
S.M. Wischmann,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2012-15820 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 56643]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19969]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP19-351-006.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2022 Settlement Rates Docket No.
RP19-351-006 to be effective 11/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 9/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20220909-5034.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1065-001.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Compliance filing: 9.9.22 Compliance Filing
Implementing Approved 2022 Rate Settlement to be effective 10/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 9/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20220909-5008.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/22.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: PR22-62-000.
    Applicants: The East Ohio Gas Company.
    Description: Sec.  284.123 Rate Filing: Operating Statement of The
East Ohio Gas Company 9/1/22 to be effective 9/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 9/8/22.
    Accession Number: 20220908-5068.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1207-000.
    Applicants: Eastern Gas Transmission and Storage, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: EGTS--September 9, 2022
Negotiated Rate and Nonconforming Service Agreement to be effective 10/
11/2022.
    Filed Date: 9/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20220909-5013.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/21/22.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at:
    http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other
information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: September 9, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-19969 Filed 9-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 51 (Thursday, March 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14790-14792]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05555]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91308; File No. SR-CFE-2021-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice
of a Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Order Information

March 12, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on March 4, 2021 Cboe Futures
Exchange, LLC (``CFE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by
CFE.\2\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on
the proposed rule change from interested persons. CFE also has filed
this proposed rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(``CFTC''). CFE filed a written certification with the CFTC

under Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') \3\ on
March 1, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
    \2\ The Commission notes that the Exchange originally filed its
proposed rule change regarding order information on March 1, 2021
(SR-CFE-2021-003). SR-CFE-2021-003 was subsequently withdrawn and
replaced by this filing in order to correct certain technical errors
with the filing and typographical errors in the Exhibit 1.
    \3\ 7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule
Change

    CFE Trading Privilege Holders (``TPHs'') may interface with CFE's
trading system (``CFE System'') by utilizing either the Financial
Information Exchange (``FIX'') protocol or the Binary Order Entry
(``BOE'') protocol. CFE plans to enhance the BOE protocol by
implementing a new version of the Binary Order Entry protocol (``BOE
Version 3''). In reviewing its rules in connection with the preparation
for the implementation of BOE Version 3, the Exchange identified
proposed rule updates to further clarify how certain existing system
attributes function which are not changing as a result of the
implementation of BOE Version 3. The proposed rule change includes rule
updates of this type that the Exchange is making in connection with
CFE's implementation of BOE Version 3.
    The scope of this filing is limited solely to the application of
the rule amendments to security futures that may be traded on CFE.
Although no security futures are currently listed for trading on CFE,
CFE may list security futures for trading in the future.
    CFE is making the rule amendments included in this proposed rule
change in conjunction with other rule amendments being made by CFE in
connection with its implementation of the BOE Version 3 that are not
required to be submitted to the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(7)
of the Act \4\ and thus are not included as part of this rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rule amendments included as part of this proposed rule change
are to apply to all products traded on CFE, including both non-security
futures and any security futures that may be listed for trading on CFE.
CFE is submitting these rule amendments to the Commission under Section
19(b)(7) of the Act \5\ because they relate to reporting requirements
that would apply with respect to any security futures that may be
traded on CFE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The text of the proposed rule change is attached as Exhibit 4 to
the filing but is not attached to the publication of this notice.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CFE 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. CFE 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
    CFE Rule 403 (Order Entry and Maintenance of Front-End Audit Trail
Information) currently requires that single Orders, Bulk Messages, and
Quotes submitted to the CFE System must contain specified information
or they will be rejected or canceled back to the sender. CFE is
proposing to amend Rule 403 to further clarify certain of its
provisions.
    Specifically, CFE is proposing to amend Rule 403 in the following
ways:
    Current Rule 403(b) enumerates the information that a single Order
is required to contain. CFE is proposing to revise Rule 403(b) to
clarify that the provisions of Rule 403(b) do not apply to Cancel
Orders or to Cancel Replace/Modify Orders.
    CFE is proposing to add new Rule 403(c) to address the information
that a Cancel Order is required to contain. Specifically, proposed new
Rule 403(c) provides that each Cancel Order must contain (i) the Client
Order ID of the Order to be canceled; (ii) the Executing Firm ID
(``EFID''); (iii) the Order Entry Operator ID; (iv) a manual Order
indicator; and (v) any additional information as may be prescribed from
time to time by the Exchange.
    Similarly, CFE is proposing to add new Rule 403(d) to address the
information that a Cancel Replace/Modify Order is required to contain.
In particular, proposed new Rule 403(d) provides that each Cancel
Replace/Modify Order must contain (i) a Client Order ID; (ii) the
Client Order ID of the Order to be canceled; (iii) the EFID; (iv) the
Order Entry Operator ID; (v) a manual Order indicator; (vi) the Order
type; (vii) the price or premium; (viii) the quantity; and (ix) any
additional information as may be prescribed from time to time by the
Exchange.
    To account for the proposed addition of paragraphs (c) and (d) to
Rule 403, CFE proposes to change the paragraph lettering of current
paragraphs (c) through (g) of Rule 403 to be paragraphs (e) through (i)
of Rule 403.
    Current Rule 403(e) (which is now proposed to be Rule 403(g))
provides that any single Order, Bulk Message, or Quote that does not
contain required information in a form and manner prescribed by the
Exchange will be rejected or canceled back to the sender by the CFE
System. CFE proposes to revise this provision to make clear that any
single Order, Bulk Message, or Quote that does not contain required or
permitted information in a form and manner prescribed by the Exchange
will be rejected or canceled back to the sender by the CFE System or
the match capacity allocation through which the single Order, Bulk
Message, or Quote was submitted will be disconnected by the CFE System.
    For example, with the implementation of BOE Version 3, any Order
submitted through a unit match capacity allocation must be for a CFE
contract processed by the matching unit for that unit match capacity
allocation. If the Order contains a contract identifier for a contract
processed by a different matching unit, it would contain information
that is not permitted to be included in an Order from that unit match
capacity allocation. Accordingly, the Order would rejected or canceled
back to the sender by the CFE System.
    In other more limited situations, there may be invalid information
included in an Order message submitted by a TPH which triggers the
match capacity allocation through which the Order was submitted to be
disconnected by the CFE System. For example, if a TPH submits an Order
with a message type that is not a documented message type for CFE, the
match capacity allocation through which the Order was submitted would
be disconnected. Disconnecting a match capacity allocation in these
situations allows the TPH to ascertain why an invalid message was
submitted before the TPH reconnects the match capacity allocation and
recommences sending Orders through the match capacity allocation.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\6\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections

6(b)(1) \7\ and 6(b)(5) \8\ in particular in that it is designed:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     To enable the Exchange to enforce compliance by its TPHs
and persons associated with its TPHs with the provisions of the rules
of the Exchange,
     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 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.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change serves to
strengthen CFE's ability to carry out its responsibilities as a self-
regulatory organization. First, the proposed rule change provides
guidance to TPHs regarding the type of information that must be
included within Cancel Orders and Cancel Replace/Modify Orders. Second,
the proposed rule change contributes to enhancing the effectiveness of
CFE's audit trail program by helping to assure that required
information is included within Cancel Orders and Cancel Replace/Modify
Orders and that single Orders, Bulk Messages, and Quotes without
required information or with non-permitted information are not accepted
by the CFE System. Third, the proposed rule change furthers CFE's
ability to enforce compliance with CFE rules since the Exchange plans
to utilize this audit trail information in connection with its
surveillance of CFE's market and in connection with reviewing trading
activity on CFE's market for rule compliance. The Exchange believes
that the proposed rule change is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory in that the rule amendments included in the proposed
rule change would apply equally to all TPHs.

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

    CFE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on inter-market competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, in that the proposed rule
change will enhance CFE's ability to carry out its responsibilities as
a self-regulatory organization. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change will not impose any undue burden on intra-market
competition because the rule amendments included in the proposed rule
change would apply equally to all TPHs.

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

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

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

    The proposed rule change will become operative on March 15, 2021.
At any time within 60 days of the date of effectiveness of the proposed
rule change, the Commission, after consultation with the CFTC, may
summarily abrogate the proposed rule change and require that the
proposed rule change be refiled in accordance with the provisions of
Section 19(b)(1) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-CFE-2021-004 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-CFE-2021-004. 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-CFE-2021-004, and should be submitted on
or before April 8, 2021.

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

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(73).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-05555 Filed 3-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P