[Federal Register: August 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 47856-47859]
[DOCID:fr18au06-138]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54312; File No. SR-Phlx-2006-28]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
and Amendments No. 1, 2, and 3 Thereto Relating to the Deletion of
Obsolete Provisions from Exchange Rules

 August 14, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on April 28, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Phlx. On June 15, 2006,
July 19, 2006, and August 10, 2006, the Exchange filed Amendments No.
1,\3\ 2,\4\ and 3,\5\ respectively. The Exchange has designated the
proposed rule change, as amended, as constituting a non-controversial
rule change under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the Act,\6\ which renders the
proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaced the original filing in its
entirety.
    \4\ Amendment No. 2 replaced the original filing and Amendment
No. 1 in their entirety.
    \5\ Amendment No. 3 made clarifying changes to the rule text by
retaining a description of Auto-X and clarifying that the term Auto-
X is currently applied to include Book Match and Book Sweep in the
Exchange's rules, including those rules concerning the engagement
and disengagement of Auto-X.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx proposes to amend various Exchange rules to delete
obsolete provisions relating to trading systems and practices that are
no longer in effect on the Exchange, particularly as the new options
system, Phlx XL, replaced the old ``AUTO-X'' provisions.\7\ The text of
the proposed rule change, as amended, is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.phlx.com, at the Exchange's Office of the

Secretary, and the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In July 2004, the Exchange began trading equity options on
Phlx XL, followed by index options in December 2004. Phlx XL was
completely rolled out by February 2005, such that all options are
now ``Streaming Quote Options.'' See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 50100 (July 27, 2004), 69 FR 46612 (August 3, 2004) (SR-Phlx-
2003-59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Phlx 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 Phlx 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
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to delete provisions in
the Exchange's rules that no longer apply because of technological
advancements or obsolete trading practices. Specifically, the following
amendments are proposed:
    Quotation Size: The Phlx XL rules originally provided in Exchange
Rule 1014(b) that electronic quotations submitted on Phlx XL could be
submitted with a quotation size of fewer than 10 contracts for a
specific period of time following the initial deployment of Phlx XL.
The maximum time period during which such a quotation size was
permitted was one year following the deployment of Phlx XL, after which
all electronic quotations submitted on Phlx XL had to be for a size of
at least 10 contracts. Because it has been more than one year since the
initial deployment of Phlx XL, the rule is now obsolete. Quotations
submitted on Phlx XL currently must have a size of at least 10
contracts. Additionally, quotations made by non-SQT ROTs in open outcry
in response to a request for a market were originally permitted to
quote with a size fewer than 10 contracts during this period. Non-SQT
ROTs must now provide such quotations with a size of at least 10
contracts.
    Continuous Open Outcry Quoting Obligation: Currently, Exchange Rule
1014(b)(ii)(E)(1)(C) describes the open outcry quoting obligation
applicable to non-SQT ROTs in response to a request for a quote by a
Floor Broker, specialist, Floor Official, or other ROT (including an
SQT). The Exchange proposes to delete the portion of the rule that
describes the minimum quote size for such a quotation during various
phases of the rollout of Phlx XL. Because Phlx XL is now deployed
floor-wide, and the rollout periods described in the rule have all
expired, that portion of the rule is no longer necessary.
    Definition of ``Remainder of the Order'': Currently, Exchange Rule
1014(g)(i)(A)(1) defines ``Remainder of the Order'' as, respecting non-
Streaming Quote Options, the portion of an Initiating Order that
remains following the allocation of contracts to customers that are on
parity in accordance with Rule 1014(g)(i). The term ``Remainder of the
Order'' is used in the Exchange's rules concerning the allocation of

contracts traded in open outcry and allocated in the crowd.\8\ During
the rollout period of Phlx XL, some options traded as ``Streaming Quote
Options'' on the Phlx XL platform, while others continued to trade as
``non-Streaming Quote Options.'' Currently, all options traded on the
Exchange are traded on Phlx XL as ``Streaming Quote Options.'' Exchange
Rule 1014(g)(i)(A)(1) originally contemplated that non-Streaming Quote
Options would generally be traded and allocated in open outcry. Thus,
now that there are no longer any non-Streaming Quote Options, the
Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 1014(g)(i)(A)(1) such that the
definition of ``Remainder of the Order,'' in that sub-paragraph would
apply only to transactions that are executed and allocated in open
outcry by a participant other than the specialist.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Exchange Rule 1014(g)(v).
    \9\ The Exchange notes that both Streaming Quote Options and
Non-Streaming Quote Options have been executed in open outcry since
the initial deployment of Phlx XL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The term ``Remainder of the Order'' also appears in Exchange Rule
1014(g)(i)(A)(2) respecting orders that are executed manually by the
specialist. Because the specialist is responsible as agent for limit
orders on the limit order book, Exchange Rule 1014(g)(i)(A)(2) requires
the specialist to allocate to customer orders, and next to off-floor
broker-dealer limit order first. ``Remainder of the Order'' in this
situation means the portion of the initiating order that after the
specialist makes such an allocation. The Exchange is proposing a
corresponding amendment to Options Floor Procedure Advice (``OFPA'') B-
6, Priority of Options Orders for Equity Options and Index Options by
Account Type.
    ROT Access: Prior to the deployment of Phlx XL, Exchange
specialists and ROTs were permitted to submit price improving limit
orders onto the limit order book electronically in non-Streaming Quote
options. Specialists and ROTs that submitted such price-improving limit
orders were entitled to receive a special allocation. The program,
known as ``ROT Access'' and codified in Exchange Rule 1014(g)(i)(B),
applied to options that did not trade on Phlx XL because it was, before
Phlx XL, the only way for ROTs to enter trading interest independently
and electronically. Currently, all options traded on the Exchange are
traded on Phlx XL, thus obviating the need for ROT Access.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change would not
affect the ability of a non-SQT ROT (i.e., an on-floor Exchange ROT
that does not submit electronic quotes) to place limit orders onto
the limit order book via electronic interface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 1014(g)(i)(B) is therefore proposed to be deleted.
The introductory phrase ``[r]especting Streaming Quote Options'' in
Exchange Rule 1014(g)(i)(A)(2) and the caption ``Assignment in
Streaming Quote Options'' in Exchange Rule 1014 Commentary .05(b) are
deleted as unnecessary because all equity and index options now trade
as Streaming Quote Options.
    During the development and deployment of Phlx XL, the Exchange
adopted Commentary .04 to Exchange Rule 1080, which among other things
describes when Phlx XL would be deployed following Commission approval
of the rules applicable to Phlx XL, and actions to be taken by the
Exchange in the event that Phlx XL was not deployed for all options
trading on the Exchange by April 30, 2005. Because Phlx XL was deployed
for all options trading on the Exchange prior to April 30, 2005, these
portions of Commentary .04 are moot and thus proposed to be deleted.
    Assignment in Non-Streaming Quote Options: Exchange Rule 1014,
Commentary .05(a) currently describes assignments in non-Streaming
Quote Options. Because all options on the exchange currently trade on
Phlx XL (and thus there are no non-Streaming Quote Options), Exchange
Rule 1014, Commentary .05(a) is proposed to be deleted.
    AUTO-X: Exchange Rule 1080(c) currently includes references to the
antiquated notion of an artificial ``AUTO-X guarantee'' and a minimum
and maximum guaranteed AUTO-X size. Because the Exchange's Phlx XL
automatic execution features (Book Match \11\ and Book Sweep \12\ )
currently provide for automatic executions up to the disseminated size
(for which the responsible brokers or dealers that are quoting are
firm), there is no longer an artificial ``AUTO-X guarantee'' for which
the Exchange will provide automatic executions. Therefore, the Exchange
proposes to delete the relevant sections of Rule 1080(c) discussing an
artificial AUTO-X guarantee. In addition, the Options Committee's
ability to restrict the use of AUTO-X and increase the size of eligible
orders is being deleted, as automatic execution processes, Book Match
and Book Sweep, are described in other parts of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Book Match is an automatic execution feature of the
Exchange's systems that automatically executes inbound marketable
orders against limit orders on the book or specialist, RSQT and/or
SQT electronic quotes (``electronic quotes'') at the disseminated
price where: (1) The Exchange's disseminated size includes limit
orders on the book and/or electronic quotes at the disseminated
price; and (2) the disseminated price is the National Best Bid or
Offer. See Exchange Rule 1080(g)(i)(B).
    \12\ Book Sweep is an automatic execution feature of the
Exchange's systems that, respecting non-Streaming Quote Options,
allowed certain orders resting on the limit order book to be
automatically executed when the bid or offer generated by the
Exchange's system or by the specialist's proprietary quoting system
locks (i.e., $1.00 bid, $1.00 offer) or crosses (i.e., $1.05 bid,
$1.00 offer) the Exchange's best bid or offer in a particular series
as established by an order on the limit order book. Orders in non-
Streaming Quote Options executed by the Book Sweep feature were
allocated among crowd participants participating on the Wheel. Book
Sweep is being retained for Streaming Quote Options. See Exchange
Rule 1080(c)(iii). Telephone conversation between Richard Rudolph,
Vice President and Counsel, Exchange, and Terri Evans, Special
Counsel, Division, Commission, on August 9, 2006 (clarifying that
Book Sweep is being retained).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 1080(c)(iii)(A) currently describes the Exchange's
``Book Sweep'' automatic execution and Wheel allocation functionality
respecting non-Streaming Quote Options. Because there are no longer any
non-Streaming Quote Options and the Wheel is obsolete, the Exchange
proposes to delete the current text of Exchange Rule 1080(c)(iii)(A).
The current text of Exchange Rule 1080(c)(iii)(B) respecting the Book
Sweep functionality applicable to Streaming Quote Options, which are
allocated automatically pursuant to Exchange Rule 1014(g)(vii), and not
on the ``Wheel,'' would be retained and renumbered accordingly.
    The Wheel: Prior to the floor-wide deployment of Phlx XL, contra-
side participation for AUTO-X automatic execution in non-Streaming
Quote Options rotated among Wheel participants (the specialist and ROTs
signed onto the Wheel) in accordance with Exchange Rule 1080(g)(i)(A).
Trades executed on the Wheel were allocated in accordance with the
algorithm set forth in OFPA F-24. Because all options on the Exchange
are traded on Phlx XL, and because the Wheel is no longer in use in the
Exchange's trading system, Exchange Rule 1080(g)(i)(A) and OFPA F-24
are proposed to be deleted.
    Additionally, Exchange Rule 1080(g)(i) currently provides that the
contra-side to automatically executed orders may be a Wheel
Participant. There are no longer any Wheel Participants on the
Exchange; therefore the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule
1080(g)(i) to provide that the contra-side to automatically executed
orders may be an electronic quotation,\13\ which reflects the current

system that has been in place for Streaming Quote Options since the
deployment of Phlx XL. Finally, for accuracy, the Exchange proposes to
delete the reference to AUTO-X from the title of Exchange Rule 1080(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Collective Crowd Quote/Firm Quotations: Exchange Rule 1080,
Commentary .01(b)(ii) currently provides that, respecting non-Streaming
Quote Options, specialists determine which model to select per option
and may change models during the trading day, and that the specialist
may, but is not required to (a) consult with and/or (b) agree with the
trading crowd in setting these parameters or selecting a model, but the
members of the trading crowd are not required to provide input in these
decisions, and in all cases, the specialist has the responsibility and
authority to make the final determination. Because all options on the
Exchange trade on Phlx XL, and each Phlx XL participant submits
independent quotations, the rule is obsolete and is proposed to be
modified.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Telephone conversation between Richard Rudolph, Vice
President and Counsel, Exchange, and Terri Evans, Special Counsel,
Division, Commission, on August 9, 2006 (clarifying that the rule is
being modified and not deleted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rule 1080, Commentary .01(c) states that with respect to
non-Streaming Quote Options, the disseminated market (whether by Auto-
Quote or specialized quote feed) is deemed to represent the quotations
of all ROTs in that option unless a ROT has expressly indicated
otherwise in a clear and audible manner, respecting either a specific
series, the class or the option (specifying LEAPS), and with sufficient
time for the specialist to take action to update the quote if
necessary. Because there are no longer any non-Streaming Quote Options
and there is no collective quote (rather, there are independent
quotations), the Exchange proposes to modify Exchange Rule 1080,
Commentary .01, to reflect that specialists, SQTs and RSQTs submit
individual quotations. For the same reason, a similar modification
concerning a collective quoting requirement is proposed to Exchange
Rule 1082.
    Disseminated Size: Exchange Rule 1082(a)(ii)(A) defines
``disseminated size'' as it applies to non-Streaming Quote Options.
Because there are no longer any non-Streaming Quote Options, Exchange
Rule 1082(a)(ii)(A) is proposed to be deleted. The phrase ``[w]ith
respect to non-Streaming Quote Options'' is deleted from Exchange Rule
1082(b)(i) as obsolete.\15\ The introductory phrases ``respecting
Streaming Quote Options'' and ``[w]ith respect to Streaming Quote
Options'' are deleted from Exchange Rule 1082(a)(ii)(B) and Exchange
Rule 1082(b)(ii) respectively as unnecessary, since all equity and
index options are now Streaming Quote Options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The remaining text of Exchange Rule 1082(b) concerning the
firm quote obligations of a responsible broker or dealer acting as
agent on behalf of a limit order would be retained, since Floor
Brokers still may represent limit orders in the crowd and would be
the ``responsible broker or dealer'' in that situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing a corresponding amendment to OFPA F-7,
Size of Exchange's Disseminated Bid or Offer.
    Firm Quote Rule Citation: Exchange Rule 1082(a)(iii) currently
provides that the term ``SEC Quote Rule'' shall mean Rule 11Ac1-1 under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act'').
Recently, Regulation NMS under the Act was promulgated, and the SEC
Quote Rule was re-designated as Rule 602 of Regulation NMS.\16\ The
proposal would amend Rule 1082(a)(iii) accordingly.
    Specified Disengagement Size: Commentary .07 to Exchange Rule 1080
contains references to the ``specified disengagement size'' that
applied to the Exchange's ``rapid fire'' mechanism prior to the
deployment of Phlx XL. Because that ``rapid fire'' program no longer
exists and has been replaced with Exchange Rule 1093, Phlx XL Risk
Monitor Mechanism,\17\ Commentary .07 is proposed to be deleted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 242.602.
    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53166 (January 23,
2006) 71 FR 4625 (January 27, 2006) (SR-Phlx-2006-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\18\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\19\ 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, by removing rule provisions which have become obsolete due to
changes in technology, trading practices, or other changes that make
such provisions obsolete. According to the Exchange, eliminating the
obsolete provisions is in the public interest because it will eliminate
possible confusion regarding the Exchange's current practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \19\ 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
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change: (1) Does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) does not
impose any significant burden on competition; and (3) does not become
operative for 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
\20\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 5-day pre-
filing notice requirement \22\ and the 30-day operative delay. The
Commission has determined to waive the 5-day pre-filing notice
requirement. Also, the Commission, consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, has determined to waive the 30-day
operative delay to allow the deletion of obsolete or unnecessary rules
to take effect immediately, which should allow the Exchange to
immediately reflect the currently applicable rules in its rule book.
Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposal to be effective and
operative upon filing with the Commission.\23\ At any time within 60
days of the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission may
summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors,

or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Telephone conversation between Richard Rudolph, Vice
President and Counsel, Exchange, and Terri Evans, Special Counsel,
Division, Commission, on August 9, 2006.
    \23\ For purposes of waiving the operative date of this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \24\ For purposes of calculating the 60-day abrogation period,
the Commission considers the proposed rule change, as amended, to
have been filed on August 10, 2006, when Amendment No. 3 was filed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2006-28 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-28. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change, as
amended, that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change, as amended,
between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be
withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's
Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Phlx. 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-Phlx-2006-28 and should be
submitted on or before September 8, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-13640 Filed 8-17-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 182 (Monday, September 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56985-56986]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23557]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0084; FRL-9934-29-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Coke Oven Pushing, Quenching, and
Battery Stacks (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NESHAP for Coke Oven Pushing,
Quenching, and Battery Stacks (40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCC)
(Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 1995.06, OMB Control No. 2060-0521) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through September 30, 2015. Public comments were previously requested
via the Federal Register (79 FR 30117) on May 27, 2014, during a 60-day
comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. 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.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 21,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2014-0084, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, and any changes,
or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart
CCCCC. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit
initial notification, performance tests, and periodic reports and
results. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of
the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in
the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required
semiannually.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of coke oven
batteries at a coke plant that is a major source of HAP.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart CCCCC).
    Estimated number of respondents: 17 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, quarterly, and
semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 24,400 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $2,600,000 (per year), includes $152,000
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an overall decrease in the
respondent and Agency burden, including a decrease in labor hours,
labor cost, O&M cost, and estimated number of responses. The decrease
from the previous ICR occurred because two U.S. Steel facilities have
closed in the past three years. These two facilities operated 5 by-
product batteries. The facility closure information was obtained
through EPA OAQPS, trade associations, and facility representatives.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-23557 Filed 9-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 11606]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4403]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66430; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-178]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Stock Execution Clerks

February 21, 2012.
    On December 20, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to eliminate the
stock execution clerk registration category from the Exchange's rules.
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on January 9, 2012.\3\ The Commission received no comments on
the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66079 (January 3,
2012), 77 FR 1099.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to eliminate the
category of stock execution clerk from the Exchange's rules. Exchange
Rule 1090 currently defines a stock execution clerk as any clerk other
than a specialist clerk on the Exchange trading floor who functions as
an intermediary in a transaction (i) consummated on the Exchange; (ii)
entered verbally for execution other than on the Exchange; or (iii)
entered into a third party system designed to execute transactions
other than on the Exchange.\4\ A stock execution clerk is intended to
provide a service to Exchange members on the Options Floor by accepting
orders for the purchase and sale of securities underlying options
transactions. Once such orders are accepted, the stock execution clerk
forwards such orders to the appropriate marketplace for execution.
According to the Exchange, the transactions executed are typically
hedging transactions in underlying stocks for Exchange specialists and
Registered Options Traders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Exchange Rule 1090, Commentary .01(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has represented that this registration capacity is
outdated and no longer necessary. According to the Exchange, the
function of a stock execution clerk has become largely automated, as
transactions that were handled by stock execution clerks now take place
off-floor and mostly occur electronically. As such, the type of
business conducted by stock execution clerks is not conducted on the
Exchange's trading floor today. The Exchange stated that there are not
currently any registered stock execution clerks on the Exchange, and
there have not been for some time.
    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange \5\
and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.\6\
Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal will eliminate the stock execution clerk registration
category from the Exchange's rules. There are no clerks currently
registered as a stock execution clerks on the Exchange's trading floor,
and there have not been for some time. Given that there are currently
no stock execution clerks registered with the Exchange, and that
transactions that were previously handled by stock execution clerks now
take place off-floor and mostly occur electronically, this registration
category is no longer necessary. As such, deleting this category of
clerks is reasonably designed to provide clarity to members, and to
keep the Exchange's rules updated. For the foregoing reasons, the
Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\7\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2011-178) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-4403 Filed 2-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67838-67841]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21618]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98527; File No. SR-PEARL-2023-46]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; MIAX PEARL LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend the MIAX
Pearl Options Fee Schedule

September 26, 2023.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 12, 2023, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX Pearl'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Pearl Options
Fee Schedule (``Fee Schedule'').
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at https://www.miaxglobal.com/markets/

us-options/pearl-options/rule-filings at MIAX Pearl's principal office,
and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange originally filed this proposal on August 31, 2023 (SR-
PEARL-2023-41). On September 12, 2023, the Exchange withdrew SR-PEARL-
2023-41 and refiled this proposal. The Exchange proposes to amend
Section 1)a) of the Fee Schedule, Exchange Rebates/Fees--Add/Remove
Tiered Rebates/Fees, that applies to the MIAX Pearl Market Maker \3\
origin, to modify the volume criteria thresholds applicable to Tier 5
and Tier 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Market Maker'' means a Member registered with the Exchange
for the purpose of making markets in options contracts traded on the
Exchange and that is vested with the rights and responsibilities
specified in Chapter VI of Exchange Rules. See the Definitions
Section of the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    The Exchange currently assesses transaction rebates and fees to all
market participants which are based upon the total monthly volume
executed by the Member \4\ on MIAX Pearl in the relevant, respective
origin type (not including Excluded Contracts) \5\ (as the numerator)
expressed as a percentage of (divided by) TCV \6\ (as the denominator).
In addition, the per contract transaction rebates and fees are applied
retroactively to all eligible volume for that origin type once the
respective threshold tier (``Tier'') has been reached by the Member.
The Exchange aggregates the volume of Members and their Affiliates.\7\
Members that place resting liquidity, i.e., orders resting on the book
of the MIAX Pearl System,\8\ are paid the specified ``maker'' rebate
(each a ``Maker''), and Members that execute against resting liquidity
are assessed the specified ``taker'' fee (each a ``Taker''). For
opening transactions and ABBO \9\ uncrossing transactions, per contract
transaction rebates and fees are waived for all market participants.
Finally, Members are assessed lower transaction fees and receive lower
rebates for order executions in standard option classes in the Penny
Interval Program \10\ (``Penny Classes'') than for order executions in
standard option classes which are not in the Penny Interval Program
(``Non-Penny Classes''), where Members are assessed higher transaction
fees and receive higher rebates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Member'' means an individual or organization that is
registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of the Exchange
Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See the Definitions Section of
the Fee Schedule and Exchange Rule 100.
    \5\ ``Excluded Contracts'' means any contracts routed to an away
market for execution. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
    \6\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
total national volume in those classes listed on MIAX Pearl for the
month for which the fees apply, excluding consolidated volume
executed during the period time in which the Exchange experiences an
``Exchange System Disruption'' (solely in the option classes of the
affected Matching Engine (as defined below)). The term ``Exchange
System Disruption,'' which is defined in the Definitions section of
the Fee Schedule, means an outage of a Matching Engine or collective
Matching Engines for a period of two consecutive hours or more,
during trading hours. The term ``Matching Engine,'' which is also
defined in the Definitions section of the Fee Schedule, is a part of
the MIAX Pearl electronic system that processes options orders and
trades on a symbol-by-symbol basis. Some Matching Engines will
process option classes with multiple root symbols, and other
Matching Engines may be dedicated to one single option root symbol
(for example, options on SPY may be processed by one single Matching
Engine that is dedicated only to SPY). A particular root symbol may
only be assigned to a single designated Matching Engine. A
particular root symbol may not be assigned to multiple Matching
Engines. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable and appropriate
to select two consecutive hours as the amount of time necessary to
constitute an Exchange System Disruption, as two hours equates to
approximately 1.4% of available trading time per month. The Exchange
notes that the term ``Exchange System Disruption'' and its meaning
have no applicability outside of the Fee Schedule, as it is used
solely for purposes of calculating volume for the threshold tiers in
the Fee Schedule. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \7\ ``Affiliate'' means (i) an affiliate of a Member of at least
75% common ownership between the firms as reflected on each firm's
Form BD, Schedule A, or (ii) the Appointed Market Maker of an
Appointed EEM (or, conversely, the Appointed EEM of an Appointed
Market Maker). An ``Appointed Market Maker'' is a MIAX Pearl Market
Maker (who does not otherwise have a corporate affiliation based
upon common ownership with an EEM) that has been appointed by an EEM
and an ``Appointed EEM'' is an EEM (who does not otherwise have a
corporate affiliation based upon common ownership with a MIAX PEARL
Market Maker) that has been appointed by a MIAX Pearl Market Maker,
pursuant to the process described in the Fee Schedule. See the
Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \8\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
    \9\ ``ABBO'' means the best bid(s) or offer(s) disseminated by
other Eligible Exchanges (defined in Exchange Rule 1400(g) and
calculated by the Exchange based on market information received by
the Exchange from OPRA. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule and Exchange Rule 100.
    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88992 (June 2,
2020), 85 FR 35142 (June 8, 2020) (SR-PEARL-2020-06).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal To Amend the Volume Criteria Thresholds in Tier 5 and Tier 6
for the Market Maker Origin
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Add/Remove Tiered Rebates/Fees
set forth in Section 1)a) of the Fee Schedule that apply to the MIAX
Pearl Market Maker origin, to modify the volume criteria thresholds for
Tiers 5 and 6. The Market Maker origin currently provides certain
volume criteria thresholds in Tier 5 that is based upon the total
monthly volume executed in all option classes by a Market Maker on MIAX
Pearl as a percent of TCV. Pursuant to the Market Maker origin table,
Market Makers will qualify for the following Maker rebates and Taker
fees in Tier 5 if the Market Maker executes above 1.25% to at least
1.50% of TCV: (i) Maker rebates of ($0.48), against origins other than
Priority Customer in Penny Classes; (ii) Maker rebates of ($0.45),
against the Priority Customer origin in Penny Classes; (iii) Taker fees
of $0.50, against origins other than Priority Customer in Penny
Classes; (iv) Taker fees of $0.50, against the Priority Customer origin
in Penny Classes; (v) Maker rebates of ($0.70), against all origins in
Non-Penny Classes; and (vi) Taker fees of $1.08, against all origins in
Non-Penny Classes.
    The Market Maker origin currently provides certain volume criteria
thresholds in Tier 6 that is based upon the total monthly volume
executed in all option classes by a Market Maker on MIAX Pearl as a
percent of TCV. Pursuant to the Market Maker origin table, Market
Makers will qualify for the following Maker rebates and Taker fees in
Tier 6 if the Market Maker executes above 1.50% of TCV: (i) Maker
rebates of ($0.48), against origins other than Priority Customer in
Penny Classes; (ii) Maker rebates of ($0.46), against the Priority
Customer origin in Penny Classes; (iii) Taker fees of $0.50, against
origins other than Priority Customer in Penny Classes; (iv) Taker fees
of $0.50, against the Priority Customer origin in Penny Classes; (v)
Maker rebates of ($0.85), against all origins in Non-Penny

Classes; and (vi) Taker fees of $1.07, against all origins in Non-Penny
Classes.
    The Exchange proposes to reduce the upper threshold for the volume
criteria in Tier 5 of the Market Maker origin from 1.50% to 1.40%.
Accordingly, with the proposed change, Market Makers will qualify for
the following Maker rebates and Taker fees in Tier 5 if the Market
Maker executes above 1.25% to at least 1.40% of TCV: (i) Maker rebates
of ($0.48), against origins other than Priority Customer in Penny
Classes; (ii) Maker rebates of ($0.45), against the Priority Customer
origin in Penny Classes; (iii) Taker fees of $0.50,against origins
other than Priority Customer in Penny Classes; (iv) Taker fees of
$0.50, against the Priority Customer origin in Penny Classes; (v) Maker
rebates of ($0.70), against all origins in Non-Penny Classes; and (vi)
Taker fees of $1.08, against all origins in Non-Penny Classes.
    The Exchange also proposes to modify the volume criteria threshold
for Tier 6 of the Market Maker origin from above 1.50% to now be above
1.40% in light of the proposed change to the volume criteria in Tier 5,
above. Accordingly, with the proposed change to the volume criteria in
Tier 6, Market Makers will qualify for the following Maker rebates and
Taker fees in Tier 6 if the Market Maker executes above 1.40% of TCV:
(i) Maker rebates of ($0.48),against origins other than Priority
Customer in Penny Classes; (ii) Maker rebates of ($0.46), against the
Priority Customer origin in Penny Classes; (iii) Taker fees of $0.50,
against origins other than Priority Customer in Penny Classes; (iv)
Taker fees of $0.50, against the Priority Customer origin in Penny
Classes; (v) Maker rebates of ($0.85), against all origins in Non-Penny
Classes; and (vi) Taker fees of $1.07, against all origins in Non-Penny
Classes.
    The purpose of this proposed change is for business and competitive
reasons. With the proposed change, Market Makers should more easily
qualify for the higher rebates and lower fees associated with obtaining
the volume criteria in Tier 6. The Exchange believes the proposed
change would incentivize Market Makers to improve their posted
liquidity to the benefit of the entire market, which should increase
order flow sent to the Exchange, benefitting all market participants
through increased liquidity, tighter markets and order interaction.
Additionally, as the amount and type of volume that is executed on the
Exchange has shifted since it first established the volume criteria
thresholds for Tiers 5 and 6, the Exchange has determined to level-set
this threshold amount so that it is more reflective of the current type
and amount of volume executed on the Exchange.
    The Exchange has designated these changes to be immediately
effective.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \11\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \12\ in that it
is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its Exchange members and issuers and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to modify the volume criteria
thresholds for Tiers 5 and 6 of the Market Maker origin provides for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues and fees and is not
unfairly discriminatory for the following reasons. The Exchange
operates in a highly competitive market. The Commission has repeatedly
expressed its preference for competition over regulatory intervention
in determining prices, products, and services in the securities
markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission highlighted the importance
of market forces in determining prices and SRO revenues and, also,
recognized that current regulation of the market system ``has been
remarkably successful in promoting market competition in its broader
forms that are most important to investors and listed companies.'' \13\
There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for order
flow. Based on publicly available information, and excluding index-
based options, no single exchange has more than approximately 13-14% of
the market share of executed volume of multiply listed equity and
exchange-traded fund (``ETF'') options trades as of August 23, 2023,
for the month of August 2023.\14\ Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity
and ETF options order flow. More specifically, as of August 23, 2023,
the Exchange had a market share of approximately 6.21% of executed
volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options for the month of
August 2023.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
    \14\ See the ``Market Share'' section of the Exchange's website,
available at https://www.miaxglobal.com/ (last visited August 23,
2023).
    \15\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting market shares among
the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market participants
can shift order flow, or discontinue or reduce use of certain
categories of products, in response to transaction and/or non-
transaction fee changes. For example, on February 28, 2019, the
Exchange filed with the Commission a proposal to increase Taker fees in
certain Tiers for options transactions in certain Penny classes for
Priority Customers and decrease Maker rebates in certain Tiers for
options transactions in Penny classes for Priority Customers (which fee
was to be effective March 1, 2019).\16\ The Exchange experienced a
decrease in total market share between the months of February and March
of 2019, after the fees were in effect. Accordingly, the Exchange
believes that the March 1, 2019 fee change may have contributed to the
decrease in the Exchange's market share and, as such, the Exchange
believes competitive forces constrain options exchange transaction fees
and market participants can shift order flow based on fee changes
instituted by the exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85304 (March 13,
2019), 84 FR 10144 (March 19, 2019) (SR-PEARL-2019-07).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to modify the volume criteria
thresholds for Tiers 5 and 6 of the Market Maker origin is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory because Market Makers should
more easily qualify for the higher Maker rebates and lower Taker fees
associated with those tiers. The Exchange believes the proposed change
is reasonable because it should incentivize Market Makers to increase
order flow sent to the Exchange, benefiting all market participants
through increased liquidity, tighter markets and order interaction.
Additionally, as the amount and type of volume that is executed on the
Exchange has shifted since it first established the volume criteria
thresholds for Tiers 5 and 6 of the Market Maker origin, the Exchange
has determined to level-set this threshold amount so that it is more
reflective of the current type and amount of volume executed on the
Exchange. The Exchange also believes the proposed change is not
unfairly discriminatory because it is designed to encourage Market
Makers to increase their order flow to the Exchange in order to qualify
for the higher Maker rebates and lower Taker fees in Tier 6, which
should benefit all Members by providing greater execution opportunities
on the Exchange and contribute to a deeper, more liquid market, to the
benefit of all investors and market participants.

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.
Intra-Market Competition
    The Exchange believes its proposal to modify the volume criteria
thresholds for Tiers 5 and 6 of the Market Maker origin will not impose
any burden on intra-market competition because the Exchange believes
that it will not place any category of Exchange market participant at a
competitive disadvantage because it will apply to all Market Makers
equally. The proposal to modify the volume criteria thresholds for
Tiers 5 and 6 of the Market Maker origin is intended to improve market
quality. The Exchange believes that its proposal will encourage Market
Makers to improve market quality by making it easier for Market Makers
to achieve higher tiers, resulting in higher rebates and lower fees,
which should result in narrower bid-ask spreads and increased depth of
liquidity. This in turn will attract additional order flow to the
Exchange, increasing trading opportunities to the benefit of all market
participants. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the proposed
changes will continue to attract order flow to the Exchange, thereby
encouraging additional volume and liquidity to the benefit of all
market participants.
Inter-Market Competition
    The Exchange believes its proposal will not impose any burden on
inter-market competition because, as described above, the Exchange
notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market
participants can readily favor competing venues if they deem fee levels
at a particular venue to be excessive, or rebate opportunities
available at other venues to be more favorable. In such an environment,
the Exchange must continually adjust its fees to remain competitive
with other options exchanges. Because competitors are free to modify
their own fees in response, and because market participants may readily
adjust their order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the
degree to which fee changes in this market may impose any burden on
competition is extremely limited. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule changes reflect this competitive environment because they
modify the Exchange's fees in a manner that encourages market
participants to continue to provide liquidity and to send order flow to
the Exchange.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\17\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \18\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-PEARL-2023-46 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-PEARL-2023-46. 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 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying
at the principal office of the Exchange. Do not include personal
identifiable information in submissions; you should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. We may redact in
part or withhold entirely from publication submitted material that is
obscene or subject to copyright protection. All submissions should
refer to file number SR-PEARL-2023-46 and should be submitted on or
before October 23, 2023.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-21618 Filed 9-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29823-29825]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10555]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0347; Airspace Docket No. 22-AWA-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class B Airspace; Kansas City, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Kansas City, MO, Class B airspace
description to update the Kansas City International Airport airport
reference point (ARP) geographic coordinates information, the Noah's
Ark Private Airport airport name, and the Fort Leavenworth, Sherman
Army Airfield airport name and ARP geographic coordinates information
to match the FAA's aeronautical database. Additionally, this action
amends the Class B airspace header information and

sub-area descriptions for clarity and readability and to match the
charted airspace. This action does not change the Class B airspace's
boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, July 14, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, 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:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Policy Directorate, 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 updates airport names and ARP geographic coordinates
information contained in the Kansas City, MO, Class B airspace
description, and corrects the Class B subarea descriptions.

History

    The primary purpose of a Class B airspace area is to reduce the
potential for midair collisions in the airspace surrounding airports
with high density air traffic operations by providing an area in which
all aircraft are subject to certain operating rules and equipment
requirements. The configuration of each Class B airspace area is
individually tailored and consists of a surface area and two or more
airspace shelves, and is designed to contain all published instrument
procedures. An air traffic control (ATC) clearance is required for all
aircraft to operate in the area, and all aircraft that receive
clearance receive separation services within the area.
    During a recent review of the Kansas City, MO, Class B airspace,
the FAA identified that the Kansas City International Airport ARP
geographic coordinates information are incorrect, the Noah's Ark
Private Airport name is incorrect, and the Fort Leavenworth, Sherman
Army Airfield name and ARP geographic coordinates are incorrect in the
Class B airspace description. This action updates the ARP geographic
coordinates information and airport names to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database information. There are no changes to the Class B
airspace's boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements.
    Class B airspace areas are published in paragraph 3000 of FAA Order
JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class B airspace
listed in this document will be published subsequently in FAA Order JO
7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending the Kansas City, MO,
Class B airspace description to update the incorrect ARP geographic
coordinates information and airport names contained in the description.
The Kansas City International Airport ARP geographic coordinate
information for the airport are changed from ``lat. 39[deg]17'57'' N,
long. 94[deg]43'05'' W'' to ``lat. 39[deg]17'51'' N, long.
094[deg]42'50'' W'' the airport name ``Noah's Ark Private Airport'' is
changed to ``Noah's Ark Airport''; and the airport name ``Fort
Leavenworth, Sherman Army Airfield'' is changed to ``Sherman Army
Airfield'' with the associated ARP geographic coordinates information
for the airport changed from ``lat. 39[deg]22'06'' N, long.
94[deg]54'53'' W'' to ``lat. 39[deg]22'03'' N, long. 094[deg]54'52''
W''. These changes to the ARP geographic coordinates information and
airport names reflect the current information in the FAA's aeronautical
database. Finally, this action amends the Class B airspace header
information and subarea descriptions for clarity and readability and to
match the charted airspace.
    Accordingly, since this is an administrative change, and does not
affect the boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the
airspace, notice and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
unnecessary. FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15th.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this 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 only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action making administrative edits
to the Kansas City, MO, Class B airspace description qualifies for
categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part
1500, and in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts:
Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes
from further environmental impact review rulemaking actions that
designate or modify classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and
reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D,
and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting
Points). As such, this action is not expected to result in any
potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA
Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the
FAA has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have

a significant environmental impact requiring further analysis. The FAA
has determined that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant
preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact
study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 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 14 CFR 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 JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 3000 Class B Airspace.

ACE MO B Kansas City, MO

Kansas City International Airport, MO (Primary Airport)
    (Lat. 39[deg]17'51'' N, long. 094[deg]42'50'' W)
Noah's Ark Airport, MO (Pvt)
    (Lat. 39[deg]13'50'' N, long. 094[deg]48'16'' W)
Sherman Army Airfield, KS
    (Lat. 39[deg]22'03'' N, long. 094[deg]54'52'' W)

    Boundaries.
    Area A. That airspace extending upward from the surface to and
including 8,000 feet MSL within a 6-mile radius of the Kansas City
International Airport, excluding that airspace within a 1-mile
radius arc of Noah's Ark Airport and that airspace between the 4-
mile radius arc and 6-mile radius arc of the Kansas City
International Airport, bounded on the south by a line parallel to,
and 2 miles north of the Kansas City International Airport Runway 9
ILS localizer course, and on the north by a line parallel to, and 2
miles west of the Kansas City International Airport Runway 19R ILS
localizer course.
    Area B. That airspace extending upward from 2,400 feet MSL to
and including 8,000 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of the Kansas
City International Airport, excluding that airspace designated as
Area A, that airspace within a 1\1/2\-mile radius arc of Sherman
Army Airfield, and that airspace bounded by lat. 39[deg]08'00'' N,
long. 94[deg]40'34'' W located on the 10-mile radius arc of the
Kansas City International Airport, then northeastward to lat.
39[deg]11'30'' N, long. 94[deg]37'00'' W, then eastward to lat.
39[deg]12'04'' N, long. 94[deg]32'20'' W located on the 10-mile
radius arc of the Kansas City International Airport, then clockwise
along the 10-mile radius arc of the Kansas City International
Airport to lat. 39[deg]08'00'' N, long. 94[deg]40'34'' W.
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to
and including 8,000 feet MSL within a 15-mile radius of the Kansas
City International Airport, excluding that airspace designated as
Area A and Area B, and that airspace bounded by lat. 39[deg]02'56''
N, long. 094[deg]40'44'' W located at the intersection of Interstate
Highway 635 and the 15-mile radius arc of the Kansas City
International Airport, then northward to lat. 39[deg]08'00'' N,
long. 94[deg]40'34'' W located on the 10-mile radius arc of the
Kansas City International Airport, then northeastward to lat.
39[deg]11'30'' N, long. 94[deg]37'00'' W, then eastward over lat.
39[deg]12'04'' N, long. 94[deg]32'20'' W located on the 10-mile
radius arc of the Kansas City International Airport to lat.
39[deg]13'00'' N, long. 094[deg]24'34'' W located on the 15-mile
radius arc of the Kansas City International Airport, then clockwise
along the 15-mile radius arc of the Kansas City International
Airport to lat. 39[deg]02'56'' N, long. 094[deg]40'44'' W.
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from 4,000 feet MSL to
and including 8,000 feet MSL within a 20-mile radius of the Kansas
City International Airport excluding that airspace designated as
Area A, Area B, and Area C.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2022-10555 Filed 5-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 239 (Thursday, December 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 86644]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27405]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0474; FRL-11384-02-OCSPP]

Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP); Near-Term
Strategies for Implementation; Notice of Availability and Request for
Comment; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: In the Federal Register of October 27, 2023, EPA announced the
availability of and solicited comment on near-term strategies to help
the Agency meet its obligations and commitments under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), which requires, that EPA screen for and
protect against endocrine disrupting effects in humans. This document
extends the comment period, which was scheduled to end on December 26,
2023, for 60 days.

DATES: The comment period for the document published in the Federal
Register of October 27, 2023, at 88 FR 73841 (FRL-11384-01-OCSPP) is
extended. Comments must be received on or before February 26, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0474, through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional
instructions on commenting and visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Aubee, Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program (7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    To give stakeholders additional time to review materials and
prepare comments, EPA is hereby extending the comment period
established in the Federal Register document of October 27, 2023, at 88
FR 73841 (FRL-11884-01-OCSPP) for 60 days, from December 26, 2023, to
February 26, 2023. More information on the action can be found in the
Federal Register of October 27, 2023.
    To submit comments or access the docket, please follow the detailed
instructions provided under ADDRESSES. If you have questions, consult
the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

(Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. and 21 U.S.C. 346a)

    Dated: December 6, 2023.
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2023-27405 Filed 12-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 25 (Thursday, February 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7271-7273]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02499]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-71453; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-13]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Its Price List
To Increase the Fee for Executions in New York Stock Exchange Crossing
Session II

January 31, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on January 23, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE MKT'') 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 proposes to amend its Price List to increase the fee
for

executions in New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') Crossing Session II.
The Exchange proposes to implement the fee change effective February 1,
2014. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Price List increase the fee for
executions in NYSE Crossing Session II. The Exchange proposes to
implement the fee change effective February 1, 2014.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange notes that it has previously filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission a proposed rule change to amend
the Price List (File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-11). Exhibit 5 to SR-
NYSEMKT-2014-11 specified an effective date for the revised Price
List of January 27, 2014 (changed from December 16, 2013). Exhibit 5
to the instant proposed rule change specifies an effective date of
February 1, 2014 (changed from December 16, 2013). On January 27,
2014, subject to effectiveness of SR-NYSEMKT-2014-11, the Exchange
will update the Price List to reflect the fee change reflected in
SR-NYSEMKT-2014-11, with an effective date of January 27, 2014. On
February 1, 2014, the Exchange will further update the Price List to
reflect the changes set forth in the instant proposed rule change,
with an effective date of February 1, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A fee of $0.0002 per share currently applies to executions in NYSE
Crossing Session II. The Exchange proposes to increase the fee to
$0.0004. Fees for executions in NYSE Crossing Session II would continue
to be capped at $50,000 per month per member organization.
    The proposed change is not otherwise intended to address any other
issues, and the Exchange is not aware of any problems that member
organizations would have in complying with the proposed change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) and 6(b)(5) of the Act,\6\ in
particular, because it provides for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members, issuers and
other persons using its facilities and does not unfairly discriminate
between customers, issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed increase in the fee for
NYSE Crossing Session II transactions is reasonable because it would
more closely align the rate with the other rates within the Price List.
The increase would also align the rate with the corresponding fee in
the NYSE Price List for Crossing Session II transactions, which NYSE
has also proposed to increase from $0.0002 to $0.0004.\7\ The Exchange
also believes that the proposed increase in the fee for NYSE Crossing
Session II transactions is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because such fees would apply to executions of all member organizations
in NYSE Crossing Session II and because such fees would continue to be
capped at $50,000 per member organization per month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See SR-NYSE-2014-06.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

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

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

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

    The increase in the fee for executions in NYSE Crossing Session II
would not burden competition because it would apply to all member
organizations and because fees for member organizations that are
particularly active in NYSE Crossing Session II would continue to be
capped at $50,000 per member organization per month. The proposed
increase would also align the fee with the corresponding fee in the
NYSE Price List that is applicable to Crossing Session II
transactions.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive or rebate opportunities available at other venues to be more
favorable. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust
its fees and rebates to remain competitive with other exchanges and
with alternative trading systems that have been exempted from
compliance with the statutory standards applicable to exchanges.
Because competitors are free to modify their own fees and credits in
response, and because market participants may readily adjust their
order routing practices, the Exchange believes that the degree to which
fee changes in this market may impose any burden on competition is
extremely limited. As a result of all of these considerations, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the
ability of member organizations or competing order execution venues to
maintain their competitive standing in the financial markets.

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 foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \10\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \11\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \12\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule

change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-13 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-NYSEMKT-2014-13. 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 Section, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090, 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 NYSE's principal office and
on its Internet Web site at www.nyse.com. 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-NYSEMKT-2014-13 and should be submitted
on or before February 27, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-02499 Filed 2-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 208 (Wednesday, October 28, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 65980]
[FR Doc No: 2015-27474]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 131

[EPA-HQ-OW-2015-0174; FRL-9936-29-OW]

Extension of Public Comment Period for the Revision of Certain
Federal Water Quality Criteria Applicable to Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is extending the
comment period for the proposed rule, ``Revision of Certain Federal
Water Quality Criteria Applicable to Washington.'' In response to
stakeholder requests, EPA is extending the comment period for an
additional 45 days, from November 13, 2015, to December 28, 2015. EPA
will offer virtual public hearings on the proposed rule via the
Internet in December 2015.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published September 14,
2015 (80 FR 55063) is extended. Comments must be received on or before
December 28, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2015-0174, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erica Fleisig, Office of Water,
Standards and Health Protection Division (4305T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 14, 2015, EPA published the
proposed rule, ``Revision of Certain Federal Water Quality Criteria
Applicable to Washington'' in the Federal Register (80 FR 55063). EPA
proposes to revise the current federal Clean Water Act human health
criteria applicable to waters under the state of Washington's
jurisdiction to ensure that the criteria are set at levels that will
adequately protect Washington residents, including tribes with treaty-
protected rights, from exposure to toxic pollutants.
    The original deadline to submit comments on the proposed rule was
November 13, 2015. This action extends the comment period for 45 days.
Written comments must now be received by December 28, 2015.
    Additionally, EPA will offer virtual public hearings on the
proposed rule via the Internet in December 2015. For details on these
public hearings, such as the date and time as well as registration
information, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/wqs-tech/water-quality-standards-regulations-washington.

    Dated: October 20, 2015.
Kenneth J. Kopocis,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2015-27474 Filed 10-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P