[Federal Register: April 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 64)]
[Notices]
[Page 16771-16773]
[DOCID:fr04ap06-33]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ORD-2005-0530; FRL-8052-2]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Application for Reference or Equivalent Method
Determination; EPA ICR No. 0559.09 OMB Control No. 2080.0005

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
being revised in response to proposed revisions to the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter. Before submitting
the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 5, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
ORD-2005-0530, by one of the following methods:

     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: EPA-HQ-ORD-2005-0530, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460. Please include a total of 2 copies.''
     Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West
Building, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2005-0530. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal

information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site

is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert W. Vanderpool, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Human Exposure and Atmospheric
Sciences Division, Process Modeling Research Branch, Mail Drop D205-03,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
facsimile number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2005-0530, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of

Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/
DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Office of
Environmental Information Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft

collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested In?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.
    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
primarily manufacturers and vendors of ambient air quality monitoring
instruments that are used by state and local air quality monitoring
agencies in their federally required air surveillance monitoring
networks, and agents acting for such instrument manufacturers or
vendors. Other entities potentially affected may include state or local
air monitoring agencies, other users of ambient air quality monitoring
instruments, or any other applicant for a reference or equivalent
method determination.
    Title: Application for Reference and Equivalent Method
Determination (OMB Control No. 2080-0005; EPA ICR 0559.09.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 0559.08; OMB Control No. 2080-0005.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on January
2008. Revisions to the ICR are being made in response to proposed
revisions to the NAAQS for particulate matter. An Agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title
40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved,
are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related
collection instrument or

form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: To determine compliance with the NAAQS, State air
monitoring agencies are required to use, in their air quality
monitoring networks, air monitoring methods that have been formally
designated by the EPA as either reference or equivalent methods under
EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 53. A manufacturer or seller of an air
monitoring method (e.g. an air monitoring sampler or analyzer) that
seeks to obtain such EPA designation of one of its products must carry
out prescribed tests of the method. The test results and other
information must then be submitted to the EPA in the form of an
application for a reference or equivalent method determination in
accordance with 40 CFR part 53. The EPA uses this information, under
the provisions of part 53, to determine whether the particular method
should be designated as either a reference or equivalent method. After
a method is designated, the applicant must also maintain records of the
names and mailing addresses of all ultimate purchasers of all analyzers
or samplers sold as designated methods under the method designation. If
the method designated is a method for fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) and coarse particulate matter (PM10-2.5),
the applicant must also submit a checklist signed by an ISO-certified
auditor to indicate that the samplers or analyzers sold as part of the
designated method are manufactured in an ISO 9001-registered facility.
Also, an applicant must submit a minor application to seek approval for
any proposed modifications to previously designated methods.
    A response to this collection of information is voluntary, but it
is required to obtain the benefit of EPA designation under 40 CFR part
53. Submission of some information that is claimed by the applicant to
be confidential business information may be necessary to make a
reference or equivalent method determination. The confidentiality of
any submitted information identified as confidential business
information by the applicant will be protected in full accordance with
40 CFR 53.15 and all applicable provisions of 40 CFR part 2.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
    The EPA would like to solicit comment to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) evaluate the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used;
    (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) minimize the burden of the collection information on those who
are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average
approximately 7,492 hours during the next three years. Burden means the
total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to
generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or
for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements which have
subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 22.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 7,492.
    Estimated total annual costs: $650,494. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $517,831 and an estimated cost of $132,668 for capital
investment or maintenance and operational costs

Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval?

    There is an increase of 2,774 hours in the total estimated
respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase reflects EPA's estimate that an average
of 1.33 additional applications for reference or equivalent method
determinations, and an average of 1.67 additional minor applications
for approval of modifications, will be received annually following
promulgation of the proposed regulation changes. It is estimated that
there will be a corresponding increase in total respondent costs of
$219,112 for these additional applications and an increase in $4,415
for these additional minor modifications.

What Is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

    Dated: February 23, 2006.
Jewel F. Morris,
Acting Director, National Exposure Research Laboratory.
[FR Doc. E6-4859 Filed 4-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 53507]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21456]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: AVIATOR
Customer Satisfaction Survey

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for to renew an information
collection. This collection of information is necessary to determine
how satisfied applicants are with the automated staffing solution. The
information enables the FAA to improve and enhance its automated
staffing process.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by November 10, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0699.
    Title: AVIATOR Customer Satisfaction Survey.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA Forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The information will be collected via an online form.
It is part of an automated staffing tool. The data collected will be
analyzed by Human Resources, the AVIATOR Program Manager, and the
Enterprise Service Center (ESC) to determine the quality of our service
to our users and customers, to address any problems or issues found as
a result of the data analysis.
    Respondents: Approximately 131,000 applicants.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 7 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 4,585 hours.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Kathy
DePaepe, Room 126B, Federal Aviation Administration, ASP-110, 6500 S.
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 3, 2014.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2014-21456 Filed 9-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17468-17470]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7282]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64113; File No. SR-Phlx-2011-36]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC Relating
to the Equity Options Monthly Cap

March 23, 2011.
    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 March 17, 2011, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'')
the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below,
which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Fee Schedule to lower
the monthly cap applicable to Registered Options Traders (``ROTs'') \3\
and Specialists \4\ for equity options transactions. The Exchange also
proposes to assess a $0.05 per contract fee on ROTs and Specialists in
certain circumstances when they have reached the monthly cap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Registered Options Trader (``ROT'') includes a Streaming
Quote Trader (``SQT''), a Remote Streaming Quote Trader (``RSQT'')
and a Non-SQT ROT, which by definition is neither a SQT or a RSQT. A
ROT is defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b) as a regular member or a
foreign currency options participant of the Exchange located on the
trading floor who has received permission from the Exchange to trade
in options for his own account. See Exchange Rule 1014(b)(i) and
(ii).
    \4\ A Specialist is an Exchange member who is registered as an
options specialist pursuant to Rule 1020(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative on April 1, 2011.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, 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 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 purpose of this rule change is to reduce the monthly
transaction fee cap applicable to ROTs and Specialists for equity
options transactions (``Monthly Cap''). The Exchange believes that by
reducing the Monthly Cap, a greater number of members may benefit from
the Monthly Cap and the Exchange will attract additional order flow. In
addition, another purpose of this proposed rule change is to establish
a $0.05 per contract transaction fee when ROTs and Specialists
participate as the contra-side of a Customer complex order \5\
execution after they have reached the maximum Monthly Cap. The Exchange
proposes this amendment to defray the cost of paying Customer complex
order rebates, which attracts additional Customer order flow to the
Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A complex order is any order involving the simultaneous
purchase and/or sale of two or more different options series in the
same underlying security, priced at a net debit or credit based on
the relative prices of the individual components, for the same
account, for the purpose of executing a particular investment
strategy. Furthermore, a complex order can also be a stock-option
order, which is an order to buy or sell a stated number of units of
an underlying stock or exchange-traded fund (``ETF'') coupled with
the purchase or sale of options contract(s). See Exchange Rule 1080,
Commentary .08(a)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange currently applies a Monthly Cap of $600,000 on equity
option transaction fees to ROTs and Specialists, as set forth in
Section II of the Exchange's Fee Schedule titled ``Equity Options
Fees.'' The Exchange is proposing to reduce the Monthly Cap from
$600,000 to $550,000.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The trading activity of separate ROTs and Specialist member
organizations are aggregated in calculating the Monthly Cap if there
is at least 75% common ownership between the member organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is also proposing to assess ROTs and Specialists a
$0.05 per contract transaction fee when such ROTs and Specialists: (i)
participate as the contra-side of a Customer complex order; and (ii)
have reached the maximum Monthly Cap, which is proposed to be $550,000.
The Exchange currently pays a rebate of $0.05 per contract for Customer
complex orders that are electronically-delivered and executed against a
non-Customer such as a Specialist, ROT, SQT,\7\ RSQT,\8\
Professional,\9\ Firm or Broker-Dealer, contra-side complex order or if
any of the components of such Customer complex order are executed
against a non-Customer individual order or quote.\10\ The Exchange
proposes this fee to defray the cost of the aforementioned rebate. The
$.05 per contract transaction fee would only apply to those contracts
that are executed after the affected ROT or Specialist has reached the
Monthly Cap. For example, when a ROT or Specialist exceeds the proposed
$550,000 Monthly Cap, a $0.05 per contract fee would be added to the
Monthly Cap over those trades that were counted in reaching the
$550,000 Monthly Cap, when such ROT or Specialist is on the contra-side
of a Customer complex order. The ROT or Specialist would not be
assessed the $0.05 per contract fee until the Monthly Cap is exceeded.
The Exchange proposes to amend the current language in the Fee Schedule
at Section II to reflect the proposal. The Exchange also proposes to
make certain typographical and conforming changes to Section II of the
Fee Schedule to make the language consistent in that section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ An SQT is defined in Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A) as an ROT
who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit
option quotations electronically in options to which such SQT is
assigned.
    \8\ A RSQT is defined in Exchange Rule in 1014(b)(ii)(B) as an
ROT that is a member or member organization with no physical trading
floor presence who has received permission from the Exchange to
generate and submit option quotations electronically in options to
which such RSQT has been assigned. An RSQT may only submit such
quotations electronically from off the floor of the Exchange.
    \9\ The Exchange defines a ``professional'' as any person or
entity that (i) is not a broker or dealer in securities, and (ii)
places more than 390 orders in listed options per day on average
during a calendar month for its own beneficial account(s)
(hereinafter ``Professional'').
    \10\ See Exchange's Fee Schedule at Section II, Equity Options
Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposal to lower the Monthly Cap is
reasonable because it lowers potential transaction fees for ROTs and
Specialist providing liquidity on the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to lower the Monthly Cap is
equitable because it would uniformly apply to all ROTs and Specialists
transacting equity options.
    The Exchange believes that assessing a $0.05 per contract fee on
ROTs and Specialists who have reached the Monthly Cap and are on the
contra-side of a Customer complex order is reasonable because it would
serve to defray the cost of paying the Customer complex order rebate,
which is offered in certain circumstances. The Customer complex order
rebate serves to attract Customer order flow to the Exchange, thereby
benefiting all market participants.
    The Exchange believes that assessing a $0.05 per contract fee on
ROTs and Specialists who have reached the Monthly Cap and are on the
contra-side of a Customer complex order is equitable because this fee
would only be assessed once the Monthly Cap is reached and will
uniformly apply to all ROTs and Specialists that have reached the
Monthly Cap. In addition, this proposed transaction fee is based upon
the $0.05 per contract fee that the Exchange currently assesses Firms
who have reached the Firm Related Equity Option Cap and are on the
contra-side of a Customer complex order.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62518 (July 16,
2010), 75 FR 43219 (July 23, 2010) (SR-Phlx-2010-90). See also the
Exchange's Fee Schedule at Section II, Equity Options Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\14\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2011-36 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-Phlx-2011-36. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-
2011-36 and should be submitted on or before April 19, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-7282 Filed 3-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 140 (Monday, July 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 47496]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15613]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2021-0562; FRL-11038-01-ORD]

Availability of the Draft IRIS Toxicological Review of
Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) and Related Salts

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing a 60-
day public comment period associated with release of the draft IRIS
Toxicological Review of Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) and Related
Salts. The draft assessment was prepared by the Center for Public
Health and Environmental Assessment (CPHEA) within EPA's Office of
Research and Development (ORD). EPA is releasing this draft IRIS
assessment for public comment in advance of a contractor-led peer
review. Public comments received will be provided to the external peer
reviewers. ERG, a contractor to EPA, will convene a public meeting to
discuss the draft report during Step 4 of the IRIS Process. The
external peer reviewers will consider public comments submitted in
response to this notice and those provided at the public meeting when
reviewing this assessment. EPA will consider all comments received when
revising the assessment post-peer review. This draft assessment is not
final as described in EPA's information quality guidelines, and it does
not represent, and should not be construed to represent Agency policy
or views.

DATES: The 60-day public comment period begins July 24, 2023 and ends
September 22, 2023. Comments must be received on or before September
22, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The draft IRIS Toxicological Review of Perfluorohexane
Sulfonate (PFHxS) and Related Salts will be available via the internet
on the IRIS website at https://www.epa.gov/iris/iris-recent-additions
and in the public docket at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-ORD-2021-0562.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the public comment
period, contact the ORD Docket at the EPA Headquarters Docket Center;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email:
[email protected].
    For technical information on the draft IRIS Toxicological Review of
Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) and Related Salts, contact the IRIS
Hotline; email: [email protected]. The IRIS Program will provide
updates through the IRIS website (https://www.epa.gov/iris) and via
EPA's IRIS listserv. To register for the IRIS listserv, visit the IRIS
website (https://www.epa.gov/iris) or visit https://www.epa.gov/iris/forms/staying-connected-integrated-risk-information-system#connect.
    For questions about the peer review, please contact: Laurie Waite,
ERG, by email at [email protected] (subject line: EPA PFAS assessments
peer review); or by phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at https://www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2021-
0562 for the Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) and Related Salts IRIS
Assessment, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email: [email protected].
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center (ORD Docket), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For information on visiting the EPA Docket Center Public Reading
Room, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The public can submit comments via
www.Regulations.gov or email.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number EPA-HQ-ORD-
2021-0562 for Perfluorohexane Sulfonate (PFHxS) and Related Salts IRIS
Assessment.
    Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the closing date will be marked
``late,'' and may only be considered if time permits. It is EPA's
policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket without
change and to make the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information for which disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information through
www.regulations.gov or email that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials,
such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the ORD Docket in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center.

Wayne Cascio,
Director, Center for Public Health & Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2023-15613 Filed 7-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 175 (Friday, September 9, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62368-62371]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21757]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0513]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Area; Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, ME
and Portsmouth, NH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary regulated
navigation area (RNA) on the Piscataqua River near the Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard, Kittery, ME between Henderson Point Light on Seavey Island
and the Memorial Bridge. This RNA establishes speed restrictions to
eliminate vessel wake which could endanger the lives of divers and
support crews working at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. The speed
restrictions apply to all vessels transiting the regulated area unless
authorized by the First Coast Guard District Commander or the

Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector Northern New England.

DATES: This rule is effective from 12:01 a.m. on September 19, 2016
through 11:59 p.m. on November 2, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0513 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Craig Lapiejko, Waterways Management, First Coast
Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may also call or email Chief Petty
Officer Chris Bains, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Northern New England; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
RNA Regulated Navigation Area
COTP Captain of the Port

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The
Coast Guard was recently notified of the need for this rule. This late
notice did not give the Coast Guard enough time to publish a NPRM, take
public comments, and issue a final rule before the rule is necessary.
Delaying implementation of this rule would be impracticable and inhibit
the Coast Guard's ability to provide for the safety of divers and
workers completing ship construction at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Without the rule, wake from passing vessels could cause the ship to
move erratically and unexpectedly, potentially injuring divers and
support crews.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. For reasons stated in
the preceding paragraph, delaying the implementation of this rule would
be impracticable and would endanger workers.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, the Coast Guard has the
authority to establish regulated navigation areas in defined water
areas that are determined to have hazardous conditions and in which
vessel traffic can be regulated in the interest of safety. See 33
U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, and 160.5; and
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    As part of a ship construction project at the Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard, divers will be working on the hull of a vessel from September
19, 2016 through November 2, 2016. The Coast Guard First District
Commander has determined that unexpected and uncontrolled movement of
the vessel and associated equipment due to a wake puts the divers and
their support crews at significant risk for serious injury or death. In
order to ensure the safety of workers during the construction period,
the Coast Guard is establishing an RNA to limit the speed, thus wake,
of all vessels operating near the shipyard.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule places speed restrictions on all vessels transiting the
navigable waters of the Piscataqua River, Kittery, ME near the
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard between Henderson Point Light on Seavey
Island and the Memorial Bridge from 12:01 a.m. on September 19, 2016
through 11:59 p.m. on November 2, 2016. The vessels operating within
the RNA are subject to a ``Slow-No Wake'' speed limit. More
specifically, vessels may not produce a wake and may not attain speeds
greater than five (5) knots unless a higher minimum speed is necessary
to maintain bare steerageway.
    The COTP Sector Northern New England will cause notice of
enforcement or suspension of enforcement of this regulated navigation
area to be made by all appropriate means in order to affect the widest
distribution among the affected segments of the public. Such means of
notification will include, but are not limited to, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners. In addition, COTP Northern New
England maintains a telephone line that is staffed at all times. The
public can obtain information concerning enforcement of the regulated
navigation area by contacting the Sector Northern New England Command
Center at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-year of the regulated navigation area.
The public impact of this rule will be minimal as the temporary speed
restrictions only apply to a small designated area of the Piscataqua
River, causing minimal delay to a vessel's transit.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

Fairness Act of 1996 (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.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969(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 an RNA lasting 45 days that will limit vessel speed on
the Piscataqua River in vicinity of the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard while
construction work is being completed. 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 will be
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.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-0513 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0513  Regulated Navigation Area; Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard, Kittery, ME and Portsmouth, NH.

    (a) Location. The following area is a regulated navigation area
(RNA): All navigable waters on the Piscataqua River, Kittery, ME and
Portsmouth, NH near Portsmouth Naval Shipyard from a line drawn between
Henderson Point Light ``10'' (LLNR 8375) at 43[deg]04'29.3'' N.,
070[deg]44'10.2'' W. on Seavey Island and Pierce Island Range Front
Light (LLNR 8355) at 43[deg]04'25.4'' N., 070[deg]44'25.2'' W. to the
Memorial Bridge at 43[deg]04'46.8'' N., 070[deg]45'09.6'' W.
    (b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.10, 165.11 and 165.13 apply.
    (2) In accordance with the general regulations, vessel movement
within the RNA is subject to a ``Slow-No Wake'' speed limit. No vessel
may produce a wake and may not attain speeds greater than five (5)
knots unless a higher minimum speed is necessary to maintain
steerageway.
    (3) All vessels operating within the RNA must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Sector
Northern New England or his on-scene representative. The ``on-scene
representative'' of the COTP is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer who has been designated by the COTP to act on his
behalf. The on-scene representative may be on a Coast Guard vessel,
state marine patrol vessel, another other designated craft, or may be
on shore and will communicate with vessels via VHF-FM radio or
loudhailer. Members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary or Naval Harbor
Security Patrol may be present to inform vessel operators of this
regulation.
    (4) All other relevant regulations, including but not limited to
the Inland Navigation Rules (33 CFR subchapter E), remain in effect
within the RNA and must be strictly followed at all times.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced 24 hours a
day from September 19, 2016 through November 2, 2016.
    (d) Notifications. Violations of this section may be reported to
the COTP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on VHF-Channel 16.

    Dated: August 19, 2016.
S.D. Poulin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-21757 Filed 9-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 244 (Monday, December 21, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79392-79394]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31932]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76645; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2015-74]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change Regarding a Change to the Underlying Index of the
Market Vectors Short High Yield Municipal Index ETF

December 15, 2015.

I. Introduction

    On August 26, 2015, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
reflect a change to the reference index relating to the Market Vectors
Short High Yield Municipal Index ETF (``Fund''). The Commission
published notice of the proposed rule change in the Federal Register on
September 16, 2015.\3\ On October 16, 2015, the Commission designated a
longer period within which to approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change.\4\ The
Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 75888 (September 10,
2015), 80 FR 55701 (``Notice'').
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76174, 80 FR 64027
(October 22, 2015). The Commission determined that it was
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action
on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to
consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the Commission
designated December 15, 2015 as the date by which it should approve,
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The Exchange's Description of the Proposal

    The Commission approved listing and trading on the Exchange of
shares (``Shares'') of the Fund under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(3), which governs the listing and trading of Investment Company
Units (``Units'').\5\ Currently, the Shares are listed and traded on
the Exchange. The Exchange submitted this proposed rule change because
the underlying index will be changed and the index as modified would
continue not to meet the ``generic'' listing requirement of Commentary
.02(a)(2) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3) in that, as of June 30,
2015, only 30.10% of the weight of the Revised Index components had a
minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or
more.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71232 (January 3,
2014), 79 FR 1662 (January 9, 2014 (SR-NYSEArca-2013-118) (order
approving listing and trading of shares of the Market Vectors Short
High Yield Municipal Index ETF) (``Order''). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 70871 (November 14, 2013), 78 FR 69503
(November 19, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-118) (notice of proposed rule
change relating to listing and trading of shares of the Market
Vectors Short High Yield Municipal Index ETF and, together with the
Order, the ``Release''). The Exchange submitted that proposed rule
change to permit listing and trading of the Shares because the index
underlying the Fund did not meet all of the ``generic'' listing
requirements of Commentary .02(a) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(3) that are applicable to the listing of Units based on fixed
income securities indexes. More specifically, the Index met all of
the criteria except for those set forth in Commentary .02(a)(2),
which requires that components that in the aggregate account for at
least 75% of the weight of the index or portfolio each shall have a
minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or
more.
    \6\ The Exchange states that the other generic listing criteria
are satisfied. See Notice, supra note 3, 80 FR at 55703.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The investment objective of the Fund is to seek to replicate as
closely as possible, before fees and expenses, the price and yield
performance of the Barclays Municipal High Yield Short Duration Index
(``Short High Yield Index'' or ``Index''). The Fund is a series of the
Market Vectors ETF Trust. Van Eck Associates Corporation is the
investment adviser and the

administrator for the Fund. Van Eck Securities Corporation is the
Fund's distributor. The Bank of New York Mellon is the custodian of the
Fund's assets and provides transfer agency and fund accounting services
to the Fund.

A. The Current Index

    The Index is a market-size-weighted index composed of publicly
traded municipal bonds that cover the U.S. dollar-denominated high-
yield short-term tax-exempt bond market. A majority of the Index's
constituents are from the revenue sector, with some constituents being
from the general obligation sector. The revenue sector is divided into
industry sectors that consist of, but may not be limited to, electric,
health care, transportation, education, water and sewer, resource
recovery, leasing, and special tax. The Index is calculated using a
market-value weighting methodology, provided that the allocation to
issuers from the territories of the United States, including: Puerto
Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa and the Northern
Mariana Islands, each individually does not exceed 8%.

B. The Revised Index

    The Index Provider plans to revise the Index methodology as
follows. The revised Short High Yield Index (``Revised Index'') will
have a targeted 40% weight in the Muni High Yield/$100 Million Deal
Size Index (reduced from a 50% weight). In addition, the Revised Index
will have a 10% weight in the Muni A-Rated Index, which comprises
investment grade components, as described below. The Revised Index will
continue to have a 25% weight in the Muni High Yield/Under $100 Million
Deal Size Index and a 25% weight in the Muni Baa-Rated/$100 Million
Deal Size Index, as described in the Release.
    The Revised Index will comprise four total-return, market-size-
weighted benchmark indexes with target weights as follows:
     40% weight in Muni High Yield/$100 Million Deal Size
Index. To be included in the Muni High Yield/$100 Million Deal Size
Index, bonds must be unrated or rated Ba1/BB+ or lower by at least two
of the following rating agencies, if all three rate the bond: Moody's
Investors Service, Inc. (``Moody's''), Standard & Poor's, Inc.
(``S&P''), and Fitch, Inc. (``Fitch''). If only two of the three
agencies rate the security, the lower rating is used to determine index
eligibility. If only one of the three agencies rates a security, the
rating must be Ba1/BB+ or lower. Bonds in the Muni High Yield/$100
Million Deal Size Index must have an outstanding par value of at least
$3 million and be issued as part of a transaction of at least $100
million.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As described in the Release, currently 50% of the Index
weight is in the Muni High Yield/$100 Million Deal Size Index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     25% weight in Muni High Yield/Under $100 Million Deal Size
Index. To be included in the Muni High Yield/Under $100 Million Deal
Size Index, bonds must be unrated or rated Ba1/BB+ or lower by at least
two of the following rating agencies, if all three rate the bond:
Moody's, S&P, and Fitch. If only two of the three agencies rate the
security, the lower rating is used to determine index eligibility. If
only one of the three agencies rates a security, the rating must be
Ba1/BB+ or lower. Bonds in the Muni High Yield/Under $100 Million Deal
Size Index must have an outstanding par value of at least $3 million
and be issued as part of a transaction of under $100 million but over
$20 million.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The 25% weighting in the Muni High Yield/Under $100 Million
Deal Size Index is identical to the weighting set forth in the
Release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     25% weight in Muni Baa-Rated/$100 Million Deal Size Index.
To be included in the Muni Baa-Rated/$100 Million Deal Size Index,
bonds must have a Barclays credit-quality classification between Baa1/
BBB+ and Baa3/BBB-. Barclays credit-quality classification is based on
the three rating agencies, Moody's, S&P, and Fitch. If two of the three
agencies rate the bond equivalently, then that rating is used. If all
three rate the bond differently, the middle rating is used. If only two
of the three agencies rate the security, the lower rating is used to
determine index eligibility. If only one of the three agencies rates a
security, the rating must be Baa1/BBB+, Baa2/BBB, or Baa3/BBB-. The
bonds must have an outstanding par value of at least $7 million and be
issued as part of a transaction of at least $100 million.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The 25% weighting in the Muni Baa-Rated/$100 Million Deal
Size Index is identical to the weighting set forth in the Release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     10% weight in Muni A-Rated Index. To be included in the
Muni A-Rated Index, bonds must have a Barclays credit-quality
classification between A1/A+ and A3/A-. The Barclays credit-quality
classification is based on the three rating agencies, Moody's, S&P, and
Fitch. If two of the three agencies rate the bond equivalently, then
that rating is used. If all three rate the bond differently, the middle
rating is used. If only two of the three agencies rate the security,
the lower rating is used to determine index eligibility. If only one of
the three agencies rates a security, the rating must be A1/A+, A2/A, or
A3/A-. The bonds must have an outstanding par value of at least $7
million and be issued as part of a transaction of at least $75 million.
Remarketed issues will not be allowed in the benchmark. All bonds must
have a fixed rate, a dated-date (i.e., the date when interest begins to
accrue) after December 31, 1990, and a nominal maturity of 1 to 12
years. Taxable municipal bonds, bonds with floating rates, and
derivatives will be excluded from the Revised Index.
    The composition of the Revised Index will be rebalanced monthly.
Interest and principal payments earned by the component securities will
be held in the Revised Index without a reinvestment return until month
end, when they are removed from the Revised Index.
    Total returns will be calculated based on the sum of price changes,
gain/loss on repayments of principal, and coupons received or accrued,
expressed as a percentage of beginning market value. The Revised Index
will be calculated and made available once a day.
    As of June 30, 2015, 69.73% of the weight of the Revised Index
components was composed of individual maturities that were part of an
entire municipal bond offering with a minimum original principal amount
outstanding of $100 million or more for all maturities of the offering.
In addition, the total dollar amount outstanding of issues in the
Revised Index was approximately $224.6 billion, and the average dollar
amount outstanding of issues in the Index was approximately $23.7
million. Further, the most heavily weighted component represents 2.44%
of the weight of the Revised Index, and the five most heavily weighted
components represent 9.47% of the weight of the Revised Index.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Commentary .02(a)(4) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)
provides that no component fixed-income security (excluding Treasury
Securities and GSE Securities, as defined therein) shall represent
more than 30% of the weight of the index or portfolio, and the five
most heavily weighted component fixed-income securities in the index
or portfolio shall not in the aggregate account for more than 65% of
the weight of the index or portfolio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the Revised Index is sufficiently broad-
based to deter potential manipulation, notwithstanding that the Revised
Index does not satisfy the criterion in NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(3), Commentary .02 (a)(2), because it is composed of
approximately 9,481 issues and 900 unique issuers. The Exchange also
believes that the Revised Index securities are sufficiently liquid to
deter potential manipulation in that a substantial portion (69.73%) of
the

Revised Index weight is composed of maturities that are part of a
minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or more,
and in view of the substantial total dollar amount outstanding and the
average dollar amount outstanding of Revised Index issues, as
referenced above. In addition, the Exchange notes that the average
daily notional trading volume for Revised Index components for the
period from June 30, 2014 to June 30, 2015 was approximately $323.6
million, and the sum of the notional trading volumes for the same
period was $82.2 billion.
    The Revised Index value, calculated and disseminated at least once
daily, as well as the components of the Revised Index and their
percentage weighting, will be available from major market data vendors.
In addition, the portfolio of securities held by the Fund will be
disclosed daily on the Fund's Web site at www.marketvectorsetfs.com.
    The Exchange represents that: (1) Except for Commentary .02(a)(2)
to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3), the Shares currently satisfy all
of the generic listing standards under NYSE Arca Equities Rule
5.2(j)(3); (2) the continued listing standards under NYSE Arca Equities
Rules 5.2(j)(3) and 5.5(g)(2) applicable to Units shall apply to the
Shares; and (3) the Trust is required to comply with Rule 10A-3 under
the Act \11\ for the initial and continued listing of the Shares. In
addition, the Exchange represents that the Shares will comply with all
other requirements applicable to Units including, but not limited to,
requirements relating to the dissemination of key information such as
the value of the Revised Index and the applicable Intraday Indicative
Value (``IIV''); \12\ rules governing the trading of equity securities,
trading hours, trading halts, surveillance, and the Information
Bulletin to Equity Trading Permit Holders (``ETP Holders''), as set
forth in Exchange rules applicable to Units; and prior Commission
orders approving the generic listing rules applicable to the listing
and trading of Units.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.10A-3.
    \12\ The IIV will be widely disseminated by one or more major
market data vendors at least every 15 seconds during the Exchange's
Core Trading Session of 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Eastern time.
Currently, it is the Exchange's understanding that several major
market data vendors display or make widely available IIVs taken from
the Consolidated Tape Association or other data feeds.
    \13\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55783 (May
17, 2007), 72 FR 29194 (May 24, 2007) (SR-NYSEArca-2007-36) (order
approving NYSE Arca generic listing standards for Units based on a
fixed income index); 44551 (July 12, 2001), 66 FR 37716 (July 19,
2001) (SR-PCX-2001-14) (order approving generic listing standards
for Units and Portfolio Depositary Receipts); 41983 (October 6,
1999), 64 FR 56008 (October 15, 1999) (SR-PCX-98-29) (order
approving rules for listing and trading of Units).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The value of the Revised Index will be widely disseminated by one
or more major market data vendors at least once per day, as required by
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3), Commentary .02(b)(ii). The IIV for
the Shares will be disseminated by one or more major market data
vendors, updated at least every 15 seconds during the Exchange's Core
Trading Session, as required by NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3),
Commentary .02(c).

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the Exchange's
proposal to permit the Fund to track the Revised Index is consistent
with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\14\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act,\15\ which requires, among other
things, that the Exchange's rules be 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Commission believes that the Revised Index is unlikely to be
more susceptible to manipulation than the existing Index. The weight of
the Revised Index components with a minimum original principal amount
outstanding of $100 million or more was 30.10% as of June 30, 2015,\16\
which is heavier than the weight of such components in the Index as of
November 27, 2012.\17\ Additionally, the number of components and the
number of unique issuers is greater for the Revised Index than for the
Index.\18\ Further, the average daily notional trading volume was much
greater for Revised Index components than for Index components.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Notice, supra note 3, 80 FR at 55703.
    \17\ See Order, supra note 4, 79 FR at 1663-4 (``only 15.66% of
the weight of the Index components, as of November 27, 2012, had a
minimum original principal amount outstanding of $100 million or
more'').
    \18\ As of June 30, 2015, the Revised Index was composed of
9,481 issues and 900 unique issuers. See Notice, supra note 3, 80 FR
at 55704. As of November 27, 2012, the Index was composed of 1,935
issues and 530 unique issuers. See Order, supra note 4, 79 FR at
1664.
    \19\ Between June 30, 2014, and June 30, 2015, the average daily
notional trading volume for Revised Index components was
approximately $323.6 million. See Notice, supra note 3, 80 FR at
55704. The average daily notional trading volume for Index
components between October 31, 2011, and October 31, 2012 was
$2,839,895. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71232, supra
note 4, 78 FR at 69505.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the Exchange represents that: (1) The
Shares and the Revised Index satisfy all of the requirements for
generic listing standards under NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3)
except for Commentary .02(a)(2) to NYSE Arca Equities Rule 5.2(j)(3);
and (2) except as noted, all other representations made in support of
the Release remain unchanged.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act \20\
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Exchange Act,\21\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2015-74),
be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-31932 Filed 12-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24552-24553]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08841]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 15241-000]

PacifiCorp; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for
Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing
Applications

    On October 13, 2021, PacifiCorp filed an application for a
preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of Long Ridge Pumped Storage
Project to be located about 3 miles West of Mona, Utah. The sole
purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A new
upper reservoir for alternative 1 with a surface area of 277 acres, a
total storage capacity of 3,672 acre-feet at a normal maximum operating
elevation of 6,500 feet average mean sea level (msl); (2) a new upper
reservoir for alternative 2 and 3 with a total storage capacity of
2,798 acre-feet at a normal maximum operating elevation of 6,830 feet
msl; (3) a new lower reservoir for alternative 1 with a surface area of
90 acres at a normal maximum operating elevation of 5,220 feet msl; (4)
a new lower reservoir for alternative 2 with a surface area of 98 acres
at a normal maximum elevation of 5,320 feet msl; (5) a new lower
reservoir for alternative 3 with a surface area of 98 acres at a normal
maximum elevation of 5,115 feet msl; (6) a 14,784-foot-long tunnel
penstock, with a hydraulic head of 1,280 feet, connecting the upper and
lower reservoirs to the powerhouse for alternative 1; (7) a 16,368-
foot-long tunnel penstock, with a hydraulic head of 1,665 feet,
connecting the upper and lower reservoirs to the powerhouse for
alternative 2; (8) a 17,424-foot-long tunnel penstock, with a hydraulic
head of 1,665 feet, connecting the upper and lower reservoirs to the
powerhouse for alternative 3; (9) a new underground powerhouse that
would be sited along the western shore of the lower reservoir for
alternative 1, 2, and 3 containing three turbine-generator units with a
total rated capacity of 500 megawatts; (10) a new 0.8-mile-long, 230-
kilovolt (kV) transmission line connecting the powerhouse to
PacifiCorp's existing Mona substation for alternative 1; (11) a new
1.2-mile-long, 345-kV transmission line connecting the powerhouse to
PacifiCorp's existing Clover substation for alternatives 2 and 3; and
(12) appurtenant facilities. The estimated annual power generation at
the Long Ridge Pumped Storage would be 1,460 gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Tim Hemstreet, Managing Director, Renewable
Energy Development PacifiCorp. 825 NE Multnomah, Suite 1800, Portland,
OR 97232 [email protected].
    FERC Contact: Ousmane Sidibe; Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior

registration, using the eComment system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/QuickComment.aspx. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a
paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-15241-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's website at https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/elibrary/overview. Enter the docket number (P-15241) in the docket number field
to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: April 20, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-08841 Filed 4-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2597-2600]
[FR Doc No: 2012-769]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66129; File No. SR-EDGX-2011-39]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Amendments to the EDGX Exchange, Inc. Fee Schedule

January 11, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on December 30, 2011, the EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
the ``EDGX'') 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 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'' or the ``Exchange''), proposes to
amend its fees and rebates applicable to Members \3\ of the Exchange
pursuant to EDGX Rule 15.1(a) and (c). Text of the proposed rule change
is attached as Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Member is any registered broker or dealer, or any person
associated with a registered broker or dealer, that has been
admitted to membership in the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
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

Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to add footnote b
to it to

specify that trading activity on days when the market closes early \4\
does not count toward any volume tiers, which are currently found in
footnotes 1, 6, and 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In 2012, these days include July 3, 2012, November 23, 2012,
and December 24, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend the Super Tier to lower the rebate
from $0.0030 per share to $0.0028 per share.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the following tier to lower the
rebate to $0.0028 per share as well: Members that post 0.065% of the
TCV in average daily volume more than their February 2011 average daily
volume added to EDGX will qualify for a $0.0029 per share rebate
(unless they otherwise qualify for a higher rebate) (the ``0.065% TCV
Tier'').
    The Exchange proposes to add another method to qualify for the Mega
Tier rebate of $0.0032 per share if Members add or route at least
4,000,000 shares of average daily volume prior to 9:30 a.m. or after 4
p.m. (includes all flags except 6) and adds a minimum of .20% of the
Total Consolidated Volume (TCV) on a daily basis measured monthly,
including during both market hours and/or pre and post-trading hours.
    The Exchange proposes to implement these amendments to its fee
schedule on January 1, 2012.
Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Exchange Act,\5\ in general,
and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\6\ in particular, as it
is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its schedule to add footnote b to
specify that trading activity on days when the market closes early does
not count toward volume tiers (footnotes 1, 6, and 11). Since the
Exchange is only open until 1PM Eastern Time (``ET'') on these days
(e.g., the day after Thanksgiving),\7\ the Exchange believes that
counting volume on these days towards the tiers would not be
illustrative of typical market activity or liquidity provision, since
the trading day is shortened. Therefore, the Exchange proposes to
exclude such shortened trading days from any volume tier calculations,
as presently found in footnotes numbers 1, 6, and 11. The Exchange
believes that the proposed amendment is non-discriminatory in that it
applies uniformly to all Members and would more accurately represent
their trading volume. In addition, the proposed amendment is in
accordance with the practices employed by other Exchanges.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In 2012, these days include July 3, 2012, November 23, 2012,
and December 24, 2012.
    \8\ See fee schedules of Nasdaq and NYSE Arca found at: http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2; and https://usequities.nyx.com/sites/usequities.nyx.com/files/nyse_arca_marketplace_fees_12_1_2011.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reduction in rebate of the Super Tier from $0.0030 per share to
$0.0028 per share is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees,
and other charges as the additional revenue that results from the lower
rebate enables the Exchange to cover increased infrastructure and
administrative expenses. In addition, when the Exchange lowered its
removal rate from $0.0030 per share to $0.0029 per share (October
2012), a more significant percentage of EDGX members achieved inverted
rates, where the rebate paid to Members for adding liquidity was more
than the removal rate of $0.0029 per share. Given this result, and
since the Super Tier has less stringent criteria than either the Mega
Tier or Ultra Tier, the Exchange is proposing to moderate the rate and
decrease the rebate so that the maker/taker spread is no longer
inverted for such a large percentage of Members.
    The Exchange believes that the reduced rebate for the Super Tier
and the alternative criteria to qualify for the Mega Tier rebate of
$0.0032 per share also represents an equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges since higher rebates are directly
correlated with more stringent criteria.
    The Mega Tier rebates of $0.0034/$0.0032 per share have the most
stringent criteria associated with them, and are $0.0003/$0.0001
greater than the Ultra Tier rebate ($0.0031 per share) and $0.0006/
$0.0004 greater than the proposed Super Tier rebate ($0.0028 per
share).
    For example, in order for a Member to qualify for the Mega Tier
rebate of $0.0034, the Member would have to add or route at least
4,000,000 shares of average daily volume during pre and post-trading
hours and add a minimum of 20,000,000 shares of average daily volume on
EDGX in total, including during both market hours and pre and post-
trading hours. The criteria for this tier is the most stringent as
fewer Members generally trade during pre and post-trading hours because
of the limited time parameters associated with these trading sessions.
The Exchange believes that this higher rebate awarded to Members would
incent liquidity during these trading sessions. Such increased volume
increases potential revenue to the Exchange, and would allow the
Exchange to spread its administrative and infrastructure costs over a
greater number of shares, leading to lower per share costs. These lower
per share costs would allow the Exchange to pass on the savings to
Members in the form of a higher rebate.
    Another way a Member can qualify for the Mega Tier (with a rebate
of $0.0032 per share) would be to post 0.75% of TCV. Based on average
TCV for November 2011 (8.0 billion), this would be 60 million shares on
EDGX. A second method to qualify for the rebate of $0.0032 per share
would be to post 0.12% of the TCV (9.6 million shares) more than the
Member's February 2011 average daily volume added to EDGX. Assuming the
Member's February 2011 ADV is 1 million shares, the Exchange believes
that requiring Members to post 10.6 million more shares than a February
2011 baseline average daily volume encourages Members to add increasing
amounts of liquidity to EDGX each month. Such increased volume
increases potential revenue to the Exchange, and would allow the
Exchange to spread its administrative and infrastructure costs over a
greater number of shares, leading to lower per share costs. These lower
per share costs would allow the Exchange to pass on the savings to
Members in the form of a higher rebate. The increased liquidity also
benefits all investors by deepening EDGX's liquidity pool, offering
additional flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost savings,
supporting the quality of price discovery, promoting market
transparency and improving investor protection. Volume-based rebates
such as the one proposed herein have been widely adopted in the cash
equities markets, and are equitable because they are open to all
members on an equal basis and provide discounts that are reasonably
related to the value to an exchange's market quality associated with
higher levels of market activity, such as higher levels of liquidity
provision and introduction of higher volumes of orders into the price
and volume discovery processes.
    In order to qualify for the proposed Mega Tier rebate of $0.0032
per share, a Member would have to add or route at least 4,000,000
shares of average daily volume prior to 9:30 a.m. or after 4 p.m.
(includes all flags except 6) and add a minimum of .20% of the Total
Consolidated Volume (``TCV'') on a daily basis measured monthly,
including during both market hours and/or pre and post-trading hours.

Based on an average TCV for November 2011 (8.0 billion shares), a
Member would qualify by adding 16 million shares during both market
hours and/or pre and post-trading hours and adding or routing at least
4,000,000 shares of average daily volume during pre and post-trading
hours. The Exchange notes that fewer Members generally trade during pre
and post-trading hours because of the limited time parameters
associated with these trading sessions. Therefore, the amount of shares
that the Exchange requires to be added or routed to satisfy this tier
is less than for the Ultra Tier,\9\ for example, which is based on
posting liquidity to EDGX during regular trading hours. The Exchange
believes that this higher rebate awarded to Members would incent
liquidity during these trading sessions. Such increased volume
increases potential revenue to the Exchange, and would allow the
Exchange to spread its administrative and infrastructure costs over a
greater number of shares, leading to lower per share costs. These lower
per share costs would allow the Exchange to pass on the savings to
Members in the form of a higher rebate. The Exchange believes that the
proposed amendment is non-discriminatory in that it applies uniformly
to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See discussion in next paragraph regarding Ultra Tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to qualify for the Ultra Tier, which has less stringent
criteria than the Mega Tier, the Member would have to post 0.50% of
TCV. Based on average TCV for November 2011 (8.0 billion shares), this
would be 40 million shares on EDGX.
    Finally, the Super Tier has the least stringent criteria of the
tiers mentioned above. In order for a Member to qualify for this
rebate, the Member would have to post at least 10 million shares on
EDGX and would qualify for the amended rebate of $0.0028 per share. As
stated above, these rebates also result, in part, from lower
administrative and other costs associated with higher volume. The
reduction in rebate would allow the Exchange to recoup additional
revenue to recover increased infrastructure and administrative
expenses. This rebate also results, in part, from lower administrative
and other costs associated with higher volume. The Exchange believes
that the proposed amendment is non-discriminatory in that it applies
uniformly to all Members.
    The reduction in rebate of the 0.065% TCV Tier from $0.0030 per
share to $0.0028 per share is an equitable allocation of reasonable
dues, fees, and other charges as the additional revenue that results
from the lower rebate enables the Exchange to cover increased
infrastructure and administrative expenses. This tier allows Members
even greater flexibility with respect to achieving an additional rebate
and rewards growth patterns in volume by Members as this rebate's
conditions encourage Members to add increasing amounts of liquidity to
EDGX each month. Based on an average daily volume in February 2011
(baseline) of 1,000,000 shares, the Member would have to add 6.2
million shares total to qualify for such rebate. This rebate also
results, in part, from lower administrative and other costs associated
with higher volume. The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment
is non-discriminatory in that it applies uniformly to all Members.
    The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly competitive
market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. The proposed rule change reflects a competitive pricing
structure designed to incent market participants to direct their order
flow to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that the proposed rates are
equitable and non-discriminatory in that they apply uniformly to all
Members. The Exchange believes the fees and credits remain competitive
with those charged by other venues and therefore continue to be
reasonable and equitably allocated to Members.

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

    The proposed rule change does not 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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \11\ thereunder. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-EDGX-2011-39 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-EDGX-2011-39. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
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. 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-
EDGX-2011-39 and should be submitted on or before February 8, 2012.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-769 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P