[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 182 (Thursday, September 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49287-49288]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20269]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 6398-023, 3428-182]

Hackett Mills Hydro Associates and Brown Bear II Hydro, Inc.;
Notice of Applications Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments,
Protests and Motions To Intervene

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric applications have been
filed with the Commission and are available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Proceeding: Extension of License Terms.
    b. Project Nos.: P-6398-023 and P-3428-182.
    c. Date Filed: July 9, 2019.
    d. Licensees: Hackett Mills Hydro Associates and Brown Bear II
Hydro, Inc.
    e. Name and Location of Project: Hackett Mills Hydroelectric
Project No. 6398, located on the Little Androscoggin River and Worumbo
Hydroelectric Project No. 3428, located on the Androscoggin River, in
Androscoggin County, Maine.
    f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    g. Licensee Contact Information: Mr. Michael Scarzello, Eagle Creek
Renewable Energy, LLC, 116 North State Street, P.O. Box 167, Neshkoro,
WI 54960; Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    h. FERC Contact: Ashish Desai,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene and protests,
is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions
to intervene, protests, comments, and recommendations, using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-6398-023 and 3428-182.
    j. Description of Proceeding: Hackett Mills Hydro Associates and
Brown Bear II Hydro, Inc., licensees for the Hackett Mills (Project No.
6398) and Worumbo (Project No. 3428) hydroelectric projects,
respectively, requests that the Commission extend the license terms for
both projects. The 40-year license term for the Hackett Mills Project
expires on August 31, 2024 and the 40-year license term for the Worumbo
Project expires on November 30, 2025. The licensees request that the
license terms for both projects be extended to February 28, 2029 to
align the expiration dates with that of the Brunswick Project No. 2284
located downstream of both projects on the Androscoggin River.
    Prior to filing its request, the licensees consulted with various
federal and state resources agencies regarding the proposed license
extensions. The licensees' request includes letters and email
correspondence from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection,
which supports extending the license terms, and from the National
Marine Fisheries Service, Maine Department of Marine Resources, and
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which do not support extending the
license terms.
    k. This notice is available for review and reproduction at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room, Room 2A, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be viewed on the Commission's
website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.

Enter the Docket number (P-6398-023) excluding the last three digits in
the docket number field to access the notice. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676
or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, PROTEST, or MOTION TO
INTERVENE as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions
to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). All comments,
motions to intervene, or protests should relate to the request to
extend the license terms. Agencies may obtain copies of the application
directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to
intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant
specified in the particular application. If an intervener files
comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an
issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource
agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource
agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application
must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the
service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in
accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

    Dated: September 12, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-20269 Filed 9-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 31583]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14094]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-2252-000]

Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing
Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Stanton Energy
Reliability Center, LLC

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Stanton Energy Reliability Center, LLC's application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is July 16, 2019.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 26, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-14094 Filed 7-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 18813]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7444]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0332; FRL-9343-2]

Rescission of Previously Issued Cancellation Order for Methyl
Parathion Product Registration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice rescinds a previously issued Cancellation Order,
printed in the Federal Register on December 28, 2011, to the extent it
is applicable to one methyl parathion product. The product in question,
EPA Registration Number<PHONE_NUMBER>3, was previously cancelled under a
separate Cancellation Order published in the Federal Register on July
27, 2010. The July 27, 2010 order correctly identifies the effective
date of cancellation for the affected product registration as well as
the correct dates associated with the disposition of existing stocks.
This rescission only applies to the methyl parathion registration. All
other product registrations for all other chemicals that were included
in the December 28, 2011 cancellation order remain in effect and are
not otherwise affected by this action.

DATES: The cancellation of the methyl parathion product at issue is
effective December 31, 2012 as provided by the July 27, 2010
Cancellation Order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Ballard, Pesticide Re-evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0332. Publicly available
docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at
http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, by
appointment at One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr.,
Arlington, VA, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. To schedule an appointment, call (703) 305-
5805.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is rescinding a recently issued Cancellation Order, a December
28, 2011 Federal Register Notice (76 FR 81496) to the extent it is
applicable to one methyl parathion product. On December 28, 2011 EPA
issued a batch order cancelling products for failure to pay maintenance
fees. The list of products in Table 2 inadvertently contained the
methyl parathion product, EPA Registration Number<PHONE_NUMBER>3,
Penncap-M Microencapsulated Insecticide. However, this methyl parathion
product was previously cancelled under a separate Cancellation Order
printed in the Federal Register of July 27, 2010 (75 FR 43981), in
relation to a Memorandum of Agreement where all methyl parathion
products were voluntarily cancelled by the registrants. The July 27,
2010 order correctly identifies the effective date of cancellation for
the affected product registration as well as the correct dates
associated with the disposition of existing stocks. The cancellation
order for the methyl parathion product, issued in the Federal Register
on December 28, 2011 is rescinded. The rescission only applies to the
methyl parathion registration, EPA Registration Number<PHONE_NUMBER>3.
The December 28, 2011 cancellation order remains in full force and
effect with respect to all other product registrations and chemicals
contained in those cancellation orders.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: March 21, 2012.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-7444 Filed 3-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Erik C. Helm, Ph.D.
Senior Economist
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
OW, OGWDW, SRMD,
Targeting and Analysis Branch
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

Eric:

Thank you for opening dialogue with the American Foundry Society and providing the opportunity to discuss the pending rulemaking relating to the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act. Representing the copper alloy metalcasting industry, AFS appreciates the chance to answer some of your questions regarding the manufacturing of cast copper based components for water applications.

Below is a copy of your questions with our responses. I have also included under separate cover a brief overview of the metalcasting process, as well as a copy of our previous position paper that was submitted to EPA in 2013.

   1. EPA:  What are examples of current lead free labeling on products and product packaging?  What percentage of RLDWA lead free products are already labeled on the product and on the packaging?  Are there any current industry norms for this type of labeling?
         * AFS:  Almost all RLDWA lead free cast metal products produced in the US are labeled in some way. Cast metal parts are labeled depending on the size of the part. If the part size can accommodate lettering, it is cast directly on the component as part of the manufacturing process. Typically, most foundries use the "NL" designation. Other foundries cast in the NSF 372 designation to indicate the specification and testing protocol. These have become accepted as industry standard labeling.
[See:  NSF 61, NSF 372 and Lead Content - NSF International -
http://www.nsf.org/newsroom_pdf/nsf61-372_lead_insert_LWD-1350-0513.pdf]

   Example of cast in lettering:

         * Most of the time, smaller RLDWA lead free parts are shipped with packaging that denotes the component complies with the new specification.
         * For example, one foundry cast NL into the most product, but for some lower volume products, there may be a metal attached with the `NL' stamped on it. Alternatively for valves, this foundry uses an adhesive sticker sanctioned by an NSF approval body indicating NSF 372 compliance.

   2. EPA:  For typical product categories (e.g. valves, pipe, faucets...) what percentage of the production is labeled when cast, or through etching, on product printing, attaching a Tyvek tag, attaching an adhesive sticker, bagged with printing on the bag, , or packed in preprinted box?
         * AFS:  Our best estimate is that over 90 percent of all cast RLDWA lead free components manufactured for potable water applications and made in the U.S are designated using one of the above noted labels. This is most often done in the manufacturing (casting) process.

   3. EPA:  At what point or points in the production process are products labeled?
         * AFS:  On cast parts, the pattern or tooling is labeled and this label is then reproduced onto the cast part. For example, on a sand cast meter, a wood, plastic or metal pattern is used. The `NL' is added to the pattern (called tooling) as raised lettering.  When the tooling is pressed into the sand, the lettering in reproduced and becomes an integral part of the cast component.

         * Each component has a distinct tooling and it is common for an individual foundry to have thousands of patterns. Since this marking protocol has already been used for many years, the cost to change the NL designation would be quite significant since every individual piece of tooling would need to be changed, for example the lettering would have to be removed and replaced on each part and each pattern (there are often many individual parts of a single pattern).

            An example of a pattern that will be used to cast a single component. Many pattern have multiple parts on the plate. As indicated above, raised lettering can be added to the pattern that will be reproduced onto the cast component.
NOTE: In foundry terminology, the `cope' refers to the top half of the pattern (and the forms the top half of the sand mold) and the `drag' is the bottom.
An example of a pattern that will be used to cast a single component. Many pattern have multiple parts on the plate. As indicated above, raised lettering can be added to the pattern that will be reproduced onto the cast component.
NOTE: In foundry terminology, the `cope' refers to the top half of the pattern (and the forms the top half of the sand mold) and the `drag' is the bottom.

            An example of a plumbing ball valve pattern. This pattern plate will produce 6 cast components. In this case, each of the 6 master patterns would have to be modified for many changes in alloy designation. Smaller parts may have 30 or more master patterns on the tooling plate.
An example of a plumbing ball valve pattern. This pattern plate will produce 6 cast components. In this case, each of the 6 master patterns would have to be modified for many changes in alloy designation. Smaller parts may have 30 or more master patterns on the tooling plate.

   4. EPA:  How long does your production line printing and labeling equipment last before it must be replaced?  How often are printer heads replaced?  When this equipment is replaced, is the purchase financed and through what financing mechanism?
         * AFS:  Not applicable to cast product.

   5. EPA:  What is the typical time period between product packaging redesign?  Does this vary by type of product?
         * This will vary with the type of product and customer requests.

   6. EPA:  What are the different types of casting techniques used in the industry and what types of products are being produced by these different types of casting techniques?  For each of the casting methods what process is most commonly used for lettering and marking the casting molds (e.g. electric diode machining)?
         * AFS:  Most water-related parts that run from the water main to the meter in the house (meters, valves, etc.) are manufactured by sand casting. Faucets can also be produced by permanent molding, where molten metal is poured into a metal mold. The larger parts include cast-in lettering, and smaller part would be designated by packaging or etching onto the part.

   7. EPA:  What type of production line downtime is typically built into production runs to account for necessary equipment maintenance?  Typically, how long do molds last for the different casting techniques before they must be refurbished or replaced?  Are extra molds held in reserve to minimize production line downtime when changing or repairing molds?
         * AFS:  For cast parts, the tooling is designed to handle the wear and tear of the foundry manufacturing process, and has a long life.  The individual patterns are not generally replaced unless there is a substantial design change that requires modifying the pattern, excessive wear creating the need for refurbishing, or the component has been discontinued.

There are several key issues related to the RLDWA that are of concern to metalcasting facilities:

         * Timing: The copper foundry industry has been in conversation with EPA about this certification for several years and has submitted documents with our concerns and suggestions. A change in labeling at this point would be most difficult and costly.
         * Cost: For cast-in labeling, a change in marking protocol would involve modifying thousands of individual of patterns.
         * Productivity: There would be also be lost time and productivity related to retrofitting all existing patterns with a common labeling.
         * Inventory: Furthermore, we have produced thousands of RLDWA castings that have been provided to our customers and suppliers that are already in inventory with the current marking protocol. Oftentimes, our castings sit on the shelves for years before they are utilized.
         * Training: The current labeling has been accepted as industry standards and previous discussions with governing bodies have indicated that the currently accepted standards would be adequate. AFS members companies have invested considerable time educating their customers over that past few years on the lead free markings and labeling requirements under the RLDWA. A change in labeling protocol at this time would be confusing and require additional training and education.
         * Import Material: All components designed to water applications that fall under the RLDWA regulations should all be held to the same standard, including imported components manufactured outside the U.S.

Contact Information
      Steve Robison
      Sr. Technical Director
American Foundry Society
1695 N. Penny Lane
Schaumburg, IL 60173
<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12521-12523]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04566]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94329; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2022-007]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To
Modify How Drill-Through Price Protection Applies to Users' Orders When
Multiple Stop Orders and Stop-Limit Orders Are Triggered by the Same
Price

February 28, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on February 17, 2022, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange''
or ````EDGX'''') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``EDGX'' or the ``Exchange'') is filing
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') a
proposal to modify how Drill-Through Price protection applies to Users'
\5\ orders when multiple Stop Orders and Stop-Limit Orders are
triggered by the same price. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided in Exhibit 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``User'' shall mean any Member or Sponsored
Participant who is authorized to obtain access to the System
pursuant to Rule 11.3. See Rule 1.5(ee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this rule filing is to amend current Rule 21.17,
Additional Price Protection Mechanisms and Risk Controls, to add new
Rule 21.17(a)(4)(C), which modifies what the Drill-Through Price will
be for Stop Orders \6\ and Stop-Limit Orders \7\ when multiple Stop
Orders Stop-Limit Orders are triggered by the same stop price specified
by Users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A Stop Order is order is an order that becomes a Market
Order when the stop price is elected. A Stop Order to buy is elected
when the consolidated last sale in the option occurs at or above, or
the NBB is equal to or higher than, the specified stop price. A Stop
Order to sell is elected when the consolidated last sale in the
option occurs at or below, or the NBO is equal to or lower than, the
specified stop price. Users may not designate bulk messages as Stop
Orders. See 21.1(d)(11).
    \7\ A ``Stop-Limit'' Order is an order that becomes a limit
order when the stop price is elected. A Stop Limit Order to buy is
elected and becomes a buy limit order when the consolidated last
sale in the option occurs at or above, or the NBB is equal to or
higher than, the specified stop price. A Stop Limit Order to sell is
elected and becomes a sell limit order when the consolidated last
sale in the option occurs at or below, or the NBO is equal to or
lower than, the specified stop price. Users may not designate a Stop
Limit Order as All Sessions. Users may not designate bulk messages
as Stop Limit Orders. See 21.1(d)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Drill-through price protection is currently described in Exchange
Rule 21.17(a)(4). Rule 21.17(a)(4) provides that if a buy (sell) order
enters the EDGX Options Book at the conclusion of the opening auction
process or would execute or post to the EDGX Options Book at the time
of order entry. The System executed the order up to a buffer amount
(the Exchange determines the buffer amount on a class and premium
basis) above (below) the offer (bid) limit of the Opening Collar or NBO
(NBB) that existed at the time of order entry, respectively (the,
``Drill-Through Price'').\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Rule 21.17(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, when multiple Stop Orders and Stop-Limit Orders are
triggered by the same price, the System \9\ considers them separate
orders received in sequence and enters them sequentially into the EDGX
Options Book.\10\ As such, when determining the Drill-Through Price for
each order, the System uses the contra side NBBO that existed at the
time each of the orders was entered into the EDGX Options Book.\11\ By
applying drill-through price protection in this manner, the Exchange
has observed, particularly in thinly traded markets, that the first
order triggered will trade with the best priced contra-side order,
while the second triggered order can trade at prices that may be
multiple price levels away, as it is using the NBBO that existed after
the first triggered order executed. Accordingly, the Exchange seeks to
enhance the drill-through price functionality as it relates to Stop
Orders and Stop-Limit Orders, through the addition of proposed Rule
21.17(a)(4)(C). Under proposed Rule 21.17(a)(4)(C), rather than using
separate Drill-Through Prices for each individual Stop Order and Stop-
Limit Order, the System will instead use the contra-side NBBO that
existed at the time the first order in sequence was entered into the
EDGX Options Book as the Drill-Through Price, for all orders. This is
the Drill-Through Price that would apply to each Stop Order or Stop-
Limit Order if it was the only one triggered at that price. By way of
illustration, consider the following examples:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``System'' means the electronic communications and trading
facility designated by the Board through which securities orders of
Users are consolidated for ranking, execution and, when applicable,
routing away. See Rule 1.5(cc).
    \10\ ``EDGX Options Book'' means the System's electronic file of
orders. See Rule 1.5.(e).
    \11\ See Rule 21.17(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 1--Current Functionality
    Assume that the Drill-Through Price buffer \12\ for a certain
option series is $0.25, and that the following quotes are in the EDGX
Options Book: Quote 1 (NBBO): 5.00 x 7.00; Quote 2: 4.00 x 8.00. Each
quote has a size of 1. Additionally, the following Stop Orders/Stop
Limit Orders are being held in the System when the Quote 1 offer is
updated to $6.50 (they were received by the System in sequence):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Exchange determines the buffer amount on a premium and
class basis.

Order 1: Sell 1 @Market, Stop Price = $6.50
Order 2: Sell 1 @Market, Stop Price = $6.55
Order 3: Sell 1 @Market, Stop Price = $6.50

    Per current Rule 21.17(d), the following will occur:
    1. Orders 1, 2 and 3 are held in the System, and handled as
separate orders received in sequence. Each have stop prices less than
the NBO, and are therefore triggered by the 6.50 quote, and enter the
EDGX Options Book for execution or posting. Under today's
functionality, the System assigns each order a separate Drill-Through
Price, equal to the contra-side NBBO in existence at the time each
order separately entered the EDGX Options Book for execution.
    2. Order 1 will execute against Quote 1 @$5.00. Using the NBB of
$5.00 as the Drill-Through Price, the System would prevent execution
beyond $4.75.
    3. When Order 1 executes against Quote 1 @5.00, that NBB will no
longer be in the EDGX Options Book. Instead Order 2 will execute
against Quote 2 @4.00 and use the NBB of 4.00 as the Drill-Through
Price and prevent execution beyond $3.75.
    4. Order 3 will cancel due to no liquidity left at the drill-
through price of $3.75.
Example 2--Proposed Functionality
    Again, assume that the Drill-Through Price buffer for a certain
option series is $0.25, and that the following quotes are in the EDGX
Options Book: Quote 1 (NBBO): 5.00 x 7.00; Quote 2: 4.00 x 8.00. Each
quote has a size of 1. Additionally, the following Stop Orders/Stop
Limit Orders are being held in the System when the Quote 1 offer is
updated to $6.50 (they were received by the System in sequence):

Order 1: Sell 1 @Market, Stop Price = $6.50
Order 2: Sell 1 @Market, Stop Price = $6.55
Order 3: Sell 1 @Market, Stop Price = $6.50

    Per proposed Rule 21.17(d), the following will occur:
    1. Orders 1, 2 and 3 each have stop prices less than the NBO, and
will therefore be triggered by the 6.50 quote, and enter the EDGX
Options Book for execution or posting. A Drill-Through Price for all
three orders is set at the contra-side NBB of 5.00.
    2. Order 1 will execute against Quote 1 @$5.00.
    3. Orders 2 and 3 will cancel due to no liquidity left at the
drill-through price of $4.75.
    The Exchange notes that aside from the difference in Drill-Through
Price, the drill-through mechanism will apply in the same manner to
these orders. The Exchange is not proposing wholly new drill-through
protection behavior, but rather only seeks to modify the reference
price utilized by the drill-through price protection for Stop Orders
and Stop-Limit Orders if multiple such orders are triggered and entered
into the EDGX Options Book for execution due to the same price event.
By using the same Drill-Through Price for all triggered orders eligible
for execution, the proposed modification will help the drill-through
protection prevent executions too far away from the NBBO when multiple
Stop Orders and Stop Limit Orders become eligible for execution. In
doing so, Stop Orders and Stop Limit Orders will receive executions at
prices more closely aligned to the stop prices specified by Exchange
Users.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule amendment is consistent
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act,\13\ in general, and
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\14\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a
free and open market and a national market system and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that proposed Rule
21.17(a)(4)(C) does not unfairly discriminate amongst Users. Under
proposed Rule 21.17(a)(4)(C), all Users with Stop Orders and Stop-Limit
Orders triggered by the same price event will have the same drill-
through reference price. The primary purpose of the drill-through price
protection is to prevent orders from executing at prices ``too far
away'' from the market when they enter the EDGX Options Book for
potential execution. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with this purpose, and thus will promote just and equitable
principles of trade and protect investors, because Users who submit
Stop Orders and Stop-Limit Orders will receive the same level of drill-
through price protection against execution at potentially erroneous
prices, regardless of the sequence in which they enter the EDGX Options
Book. As a result of the proposed rule change, all Users' Stop Orders
and Stop-Limit Orders will receive protection based on the NBBO at the
time those orders were triggered to enter the EDGX Options Book for
potential execution, which is consistent with the drill-through
protection as well as Stop Order functionality.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change imposes
any burden on intramarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Under the
current drill-through price protection functionality, the System's use
of separate Drill-Through Prices can result in Stop Orders executed
later in sequence being filled at prices several levels away from the
NBBO in existence at the time they are triggered and entered into the
EDGX Options Book for execution merely because those orders were
submitted after another Stop Order. As discussed above, the proposed
rule change will apply the same Drill-Through Price (and thus the same
level of drill-through price protection) to Stop Orders and Stop-Limit
Orders that become eligible for potential execution at the same time
due to the same price triggering event.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because it
relates solely to how an Exchange price protection applies to Stop
Orders and Stop Limit Orders. The proposed enhancement to the drill-
through protection is consistent with the current protection and
provides orders subject to drill-through price protection with improved
protection against execution at potentially erroneous prices.

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 proposal. No written comments were solicited or
received on the proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \16\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay such that Exchange Users will be able to more quickly benefit
from the proposed Drill through protections that are designed to: (1)
Prevent potentially erroneous executions and (2) more closely align the
execution prices of Stop Orders and Stop Limit Orders that become
eligible for potential execution at the same time due to the same price
triggering event.\17\ The Commission finds that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest. Specifically, waiver of the operative delay should
allow Exchange Users to utilize Stop Orders and Stop Limit Orders with
an increased likelihood that the execution price of such orders will be
more closely related to the market at the time the order is triggered
for entry onto the EDGX Book. Accordingly, the Commission designates
the proposal operative upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2022-007 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2022-007. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; 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-CboeEDGX-2022-007 and should
be submitted on or before March 25, 2022.

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

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

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-04566 Filed 3-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 244 (Thursday, December 21, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60576-60577]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27303]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 170

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0543; FRL-9972-10]
RINs 2070-AK40 and 2070-AK43

Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard;
Reconsideration of Several Requirements and Notice About Compliance
Dates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is providing notice to the public that it has initiated a
rulemaking process to revise certain requirements in the Agricultural
Worker Protection Standard. EPA expects to publish a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in FY 2018 to solicit public input on proposed revisions to
the WPS requirements for minimum age, designated representative, and
application exclusion zone.

DATES: EPA is also announcing that the compliance dates in the revised
WPS published on November 2, 2015 (80 FR 67496) (FRL-9931-81) remain in
effect and that the Agency does not intend to extend them.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Keaney, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you work in or
employ persons working in crop production agriculture where pesticides
are applied. The following list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive,
but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this
document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
     Agricultural Establishments (NAICS code 111000).
     Nursery and Tree Production (NAICS code 111421).
     Timber Tract Operations (NAICS code 113110).
     Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products (NAICS
code 113210).
     Farm Workers (NAICS codes 11511, 115112, and 115114).
     Pesticide Handling on Farms (NAICS code 115112).
     Farm Labor Contractors and Crew Leaders (NAICS code
115115).
     Pesticide Handling in Forestry (NAICS code 115310).
     Pesticide Manufacturers (NAICS code 325320).
     Farm Worker Support Organizations (NAICS codes 813311,
813312, and 813319).
     Farm Worker Labor Organizations (NAICS code 813930).
     Crop Advisors (NAICS codes 115112, 541690, 541712).

II. What action is the Agency taking?

A. Potential Changes to Several WPS Requirements

    In accordance with Executive Order 13777, titled Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda, EPA solicited public comments on regulations
that may be appropriate for repeal, replacement or modification as part
of the President's Regulatory Reform Agenda efforts. The comments
received can be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov under docket EPA-
HQ-OA-2017-0190. EPA received comments on the Agricultural Worker
Protection Standard (WPS) requirements for minimum age, designated
representative, and application exclusion zone (AEZ). These three
topics were discussed at the November 2, 2017, meeting of the Office of
Pesticide Program's Federal Advisory Committee, the Pesticide Program
Dialogue Committee (PPDC). A transcript of the meeting will be posted
when available on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-advisory-committees-and-regulatory-partners/pesticide-program-dialogue-committee-meeting-5. After considering these comments, revisiting the
record, and reviewing the applicable statutory authority, EPA has
determined that further consideration of the WPS requirements for
minimum age, designated representative, and AEZ is warranted through
the rulemaking process. A brief summary of the existing WPS
requirements for minimum age, designated representative, and the AEZ is
provided below.
    1. Minimum Age. The 2015 WPS established a minimum age of 18 years
for pesticide handlers and for early-entry workers, with an exemption
for owners of agricultural establishments and their immediate family
members.

    2. Designated Representative. The 2015 WPS required agricultural
employers to provide pesticide application information and safety data
sheets to a designated representative of a worker or handler under
certain circumstances. This requirement is in addition to the
requirement for agricultural employers to provide that information to
medical personnel, workers or handlers requesting it.
    3. Application Exclusion Zones (AEZs). For outdoor production on
farms, nurseries and forests, the 2015 WPS rule established AEZ
requirements to reduce the number of incidents where workers or other
persons are exposed to pesticides during agricultural pesticide
applications. The 2015 WPS requires agricultural employers to keep
workers and other persons out of certain areas around the pesticide
application equipment (i.e., AEZs) during ongoing pesticide
applications, in addition to continuing the 1992 WPS requirement to
keep workers and other persons out of the treated area. The 2015 WPS
also requires pesticide applicators (handlers) to suspend a pesticide
application if workers or other persons are in the AEZ.
    EPA is providing notice to the public that the Agency has initiated
a rulemaking process to reconsider the requirements in the 2015 revised
WPS for minimum age at 40 CFR 170.309(c), 170.313(c) and 170.605(a);
designated representative at 170.305 and 170.311(b)(9); and application
exclusion zone at 170.305, 170.405 and 170.505(b). EPA expects to
publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in FY 2018 to solicit public
input on the proposed revisions to the WPS.

B. WPS Compliance Dates

    EPA is also announcing that the compliance dates in the revised WPS
remain in effect and that the Agency does not intend to extend them.
Therefore, compliance with the revised WPS requirements will be
required as set forth in the November 2, 2015 (80 FR 67496) (FRL-9931-
81) revised WPS at 40 CFR 170.2, 170.311, 170.401, 170.501 and 170.505.
Compliance with most of the revised WPS requirements was required
beginning January 2, 2017. Compliance will be required with two
additional requirements starting January 2, 2018; specifically, the
pesticide safety information display (poster) which will have to
include the revised content, and pesticide handlers (applicators) will
have to temporarily suspend applications if workers or other persons
enter into the application exclusion zone during pesticide
applications. EPA will work with States and Tribes to implement the
revised WPS in 2018.
    The only requirements in the revised WPS that will not be in effect
as of January 2, 2018 are the requirements that the worker and handler
pesticide safety training material cover the expanded content at 40 CFR
170.401(c)(3) and 170.501(c)(3). The 2015 revised WPS provided that
compliance with the expanded pesticide safety content in these sections
was not required until 180 days after EPA publishes in the Federal
Register a notice of availability of certain training materials. While
there are training materials available that meet the expanded content
requirement, EPA has not yet published a Federal Register notice
announcing their availability and does not plan to issue such a notice
until the rulemaking process on the minimum age, designated
representative and application exclusion zone requirements is complete.
If any of those requirements change as a result of the rulemaking
process, all of the training materials covering the expanded pesticide
safety content (including videos, presentations and flip charts) would
have to be changed. EPA is delaying the publication of the training
materials availability notice to prevent extra work and costs to
developers of the training materials and EPA reviewers. Therefore,
pesticide safety training for workers and handlers may continue to be
conducted using EPA-approved ``old'' materials (covering the topics in
the August 21, 1992 WPS (57 FR 38102) (FRL-3774-6)) or EPA-approved
``new'' materials (covering the topics in the 2015 WPS) after January
2, 2018, and until the rulemaking process is complete. Training on the
expanded pesticide safety content will not be required until 180 days
after EPA publishes a Federal Register notice announcing the
availability of training materials that cover the expanded content in
40 CFR 170.401(c)(3) and 170.501(c)(3).

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136-136y.

    Dated: December 13, 2017.
Charlotte Bertrand,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2017-27303 Filed 12-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 18660]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07205]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77451; File No. SR-BATS-2016-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 2, to List and Trade Shares of the
SPDR DoubleLine Short Duration Total Return Tactical ETF

March 25, 2016.
    On February 4, 2016, BATS Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to list and trade
shares (``Shares'') of the SPDR DoubleLine Short Duration Total Return
Tactical ETF (``Fund''). The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on February 12, 2016.\3\ On March 8,
2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.
On March 24, 2016, the Exchange withdrew Amendment No. 1 and filed
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change.\4\ The Commission received
no comment letters on 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. 77078 (February 8,
2016), 81 FR 7599.
    \4\ Amendment No. 2 replaced the original filing in its
entirety. In Amendment No. 2, the Exchange: (1) Modified the name of
the Fund by replacing the word ``Term'' with ``Duration;'' (2)
clarified that, under normal circumstances, at least 80% of the
Fund's net assets (plus the amount of borrowings for investment
purposes) will be invested in its principal holdings; (3) stated
that the Fund may invest up to 20% of its portfolio in securities
issued or guaranteed by state or local governments or their agencies
or instrumentalities; (4) clarified which assets held by the Fund
would trade on markets that are members of the Intermarket
Surveillance Group or that have entered into a comprehensive
surveillance agreement with the Exchange; (5) clarified the
application of the investment restrictions to derivatives and
restricted securities; (6) described how fixed income instruments,
including municipal securities, would be valued for purposes of
calculating the net asset value of the Fund; (7) clarified that all
statements and representations made in the filing regarding the
description of the portfolio, limitations on portfolio holdings or
reference assets, or the applicability of Exchange rules and
surveillance procedures constitute continued listing requirements
for listing the Shares on the Exchange; (8) stated that the issuer
has represented to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of
any failure by the Fund to comply with the continued listing
requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under section
19(g)(1) of the Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with
the continued listing requirements, and if the Fund is not in
compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange
will commence delisting procedures under Exchange Rule 14.12; and
(9) made other technical amendments. Amendment No. 2 is available
at: http://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-bats-2016-04/bats201604.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is March 28, 2016. The Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is 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, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ designates May 12, 2016, as the date by which the Commission
should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-BATS-2016-04), as modified by Amendment No. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-07205 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P