[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5555-5557]
[FR Doc No: 2020-01060]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2020 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 172 and 177

[Docket No. FDA-2015-F-4317]

Food Additive Regulations; Synthetic Flavoring Agents and
Adjuvants; Confirmation of Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is responding to
the submission styled as an objection submitted by Earthjustice on
behalf of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, Center for Environmental
Health, Center for Food Safety, Center for Science in the Public
Interest, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Working Group, and
the Natural Resources Defense Council, on the final rule that amended
the food additive regulations to no longer authorize the use of
benzophenone, ethyl acrylate, eugenyl methyl ether, myrcene, pulegone,
and pyridine as synthetic flavoring substances for use in food. The
final rule also amended the food additive regulations to no longer
provide for the use of benzophenone as a plasticizer in rubber articles
intended for repeated use in contact with food. After reviewing the
submission, we have concluded that the submission we received is not an
objection and consequently does not provide a basis for modifying the
regulations.

DATES: Effective date of final rule published in the Federal Register
of October 9, 2018 (83 FR 50490) confirmed: October 9, 2018.

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number found in brackets in the heading of this final rule into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts, and/or go to the Dockets
Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mical Honigfort, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration,
5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740-3835,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of January 4, 2016 (81 FR 42), we announced
the filing of a food additive petition (FAP 5A4810) (``petition'')
submitted jointly by the Center for Science in the Public Interest;
Natural Resources Defense Council; Center for Food Safety; Consumers
Union; Improving Kids' Environment; Center for Environmental Health;
Environmental Working Group; Environmental Defense Fund, and Mr. James
Huff (collectively, ``petitioners'') c/o Thomas Neltner, 1875
Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20009. Subsequently, the
Breast Cancer Fund (now known as the Breast Cancer Prevention Partners)
and WE ACT for Environmental Justice joined as co-petitioners.
    The petition proposed that we take two separate regulatory actions:
(1) Amend the food additive regulations in Sec.  172.515 Synthetic
flavoring substances and adjuvants (21 CFR 172.515) to no longer
authorize the use of seven listed synthetic flavoring food additives
and (2) to establish zero tolerances in Sec.  172.515 for these
additives. As FDA explained in the filing notice (81 FR 42 at 42
through 43) and the final rule (83 FR 50490 at 50491) for this
petition, the food additive regulation is not the appropriate section
for a ``zero tolerance,'' and this request is not the proper subject of
a food additive petition. A food additive petition must either propose
the issuance of a regulation prescribing the conditions under which a
food additive may be safely used (see section 409(b)(1) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(1)), or
propose the amendment or repeal of an existing food additive regulation
(see section 409(i) of the FD&C Act). As we explained in the final
rule, we interpreted the petitioners' request to establish zero
tolerances for these additives as a request to issue a regulation
prohibiting a substance from human food under part 189 (21 CFR part
189), a request that is not the proper subject of a food additive
petition (83 FR 50490 at 50491). Therefore, because the petitioners'
request to establish zero tolerances fell outside the scope of a food
additive petition, we focused solely on the request in the petition to
amend the food additive regulations pertaining to these seven synthetic
flavoring food additives.
    The seven food additives that were the subject of the petition are:

    1. Benzophenone (also known as diphenylketone) (CAS No. 119-61-
9);
    2. Ethyl acrylate (CAS No. 140-88-5);
    3. Eugenyl methyl ether (also known as 4-allylveratrole or
methyl eugenol) (CAS No. 93-15-2);
    4. Myrcene (also known as 7-methyl-3-methylene-1,6-octadiene)
(CAS No. 123-35-3);
    5. Pulegone (also known as p-menth-4(8)-en-3-one) (CAS No. 89-
82-7);
    6. Pyridine (CAS No. 110-86-1); and
    7. Styrene (CAS No. 100-42-5)

    Related to FAP 5A4810, in the Federal Register of June 15, 2016 (81
FR 38984), we announced that we filed a food additive petition (FAP
6A4817) proposing that we amend Sec.  172.515 to no longer provide for
the use of styrene as a synthetic flavoring substance and adjuvant in
food because the use has been abandoned. We later issued a final rule
in the Federal Register of October 9, 2018 (83 FR 50487) granting the
petition and amending Sec.  [thinsp]172.515 to no longer authorize the
use of styrene as a synthetic flavoring substance and adjuvant in food
because its use under Sec.  [thinsp]172.515 had been permanently and
completely abandoned.
    Additionally, in the Federal Register of October 9, 2018 (83 FR
50490), we published a final rule partially granting FAP 5A4810 to
amend the food additive regulations in Sec.  [thinsp]172.515 to no
longer authorize the use of benzophenone, ethyl acrylate, eugenyl
methyl ether, myrcene, pulegone, and pyridine as synthetic flavoring
substances for use in food. We also amended the food additive
regulation in 21 CFR[thinsp]177.2600 to no longer provide for the use
of benzophenone as a plasticizer in rubber articles intended for
repeated use in contact with food. We denied as moot the portions of
the petition proposing that the food additive regulations be amended to
no longer authorize the use

of styrene as a synthetic flavoring substance because this use has been
permanently and completely abandoned (83 FR 50490 at 50492 through
50493). As discussed in detail in section III, we explained in the
final rule that we declined to act on the petitioners' request to
establish a zero tolerance for the use of these synthetic flavoring
substances in food because that issue is not the proper subject of a
food additive petition. The final rule advised that objections and
requests for a hearing on the final rule were due by November 8, 2018.

II. Objections and Requests for Hearing

    Section 409(f)(1) of the FD&C Act provides that, within 30 days
after publication of an order relating to a food additive regulation,
any person adversely affected by such order may file objections,
specifying with particularity the provisions of the order deemed
objectionable, stating reasonable grounds therefor, and requesting a
public hearing upon such objections.
    Under 21 CFR 171.110, objections and requests for a hearing are
governed by 21 CFR part 12 of FDA's regulations. Under 21 CFR 12.22(a),
each objection must meet the following conditions: (1) Must be
submitted on or before the 30th day after the date of publication of
the final rule; (2) must be separately numbered; (3) must specify with
particularity the provision of the regulation or proposed order
objected to; (4) must specifically state each objection on which a
hearing is requested; failure to request a hearing on an objection
constitutes a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection; and
(5) must include a detailed description and analysis of the factual
information to be presented in support of the objection if a hearing is
requested; failure to include a description and analysis for an
objection constitutes a waiver of the right to a hearing on that
objection.
    Within the 30-day objection period following publication of the
final rule, we received approximately 50 comments concerning the final
rule. With the exception of one submission, the comments did not
purport to raise objections and did not provide or identify any
relevant new evidence. We will not address these comments further.
    However, we received one submission that stated it was noting
several concerns and raising one ``objection.'' Earthjustice, on behalf
of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, Center for Environmental Health,
Center for Food Safety, Center for Science in the Public Interest,
Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Working Group, and the
Natural Resources Defense Council, wrote to ``share our objection and
concerns'' about the final rule (see Letter from Peter Lehner, Senior
Attorney, and Carrie Apfel, Staff Attorney, Earthjustice, to Dockets
Management Staff, Food and Drug Administration, dated November 8,
2018). (For the purposes of this document, we will refer to these
entities as ``parties.'') The submission stated that the parties
``applaud[ed] FDA for acknowledging that it `cannot consider these
synthetic substances to be safe as a matter of law,''' but indicated
that it objected to our ``failure to indicate expressly that these
substances no longer qualify in any way as `safe' for use in food,
which amounts to an arbitrary and unlawful failure to protect the
safety of food'' (id. at page 1). The submission also noted two
concerns about our analyses of the substances (id.). The parties also
stated in their submission that they waived their right to a hearing
(id.).
    As discussed in detail in section III, the provision for objections
and a hearing under section 409(f) of the FD&C Act does not apply to
this ``objection.'' For the purposes of this document, our use of the
term ``objection'' does not mean that the provision for objections
under section 409(f) of the FD&C Act applies.

III. Analysis of Objection

    The submission's ``objection'' is not subject to the objections and
hearing procedure in section 409(f) of the FD&C Act. Therefore, we will
not address the arguments detailed in the submission.
    The submission asserts that FDA's failure to indicate expressly in
the final rule that substances found to induce cancer cannot qualify in
any way as ``safe'' for use in food is arbitrary and unlawful
(Earthjustice submission at pages 2 through 3). The submission further
states that, ``To correct this deficiency, FDA must explain that
substances found to induce cancer cannot qualify as ``safe'' for use in
food, regardless of whether those substances purport to be food
additives, GRAS substances, or both'' (id. at page 3). A substance is
generally recognized as safe (GRAS) if there is general recognition,
among qualified experts, to be safe under the conditions of its
intended use. A substance that is GRAS under the conditions of its
intended use is excluded from the statutory definition of food additive
under section 201(s) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(s)). Thus, given a
substance is, by definition, not a food additive if it is GRAS, whether
the status of a substance is GRAS is outside the scope of the food
additive petition process and the related provision for objections and
public hearing.
    Section 409(f)(1) of the FD&C Act states that within 30 days after
publication of an order made pursuant to section 409(c) or (d) of the
FD&C Act, any person adversely affected by such an order may file
objections, specifying with particularity the provisions of the order
deemed objectionable, stating reasonable grounds therefor. In the final
rule, we stated that we partially granted the petition and partially
denied the petition, completely responding to the food additive
petition submitted by the petitioners (83 FR 50490 at 50492). FDA
partially granted the petition by amending the food additive
regulations to no longer authorize the use of benzophenone, ethyl
acrylate, eugenyl methyl ether, myrcene, pulegone, and pyridine as
synthetic flavoring substances for use in food based on data provided
by the petitioners that demonstrated these additives induce cancer in
laboratory animals, and, as a result of this finding in animals, FDA
cannot as a matter of law maintain the listing of these synthetic
flavoring substances in the food additive regulations (21 U.S.C.
348(c)(3)(A)). We further amended the food additive regulations to no
longer provide for the use of benzophenone as a plasticizer in rubber
articles intended for repeated use in contact with food because of
evidence that benzophenone causes cancer in animals. FDA denied as moot
the portions of the petition proposing that the food additive
regulations be amended to no longer authorize the use of styrene as a
synthetic flavoring substance because this use has been permanently and
completely abandoned. Further, and most relevant here, FDA denied the
petitioners' request to establish zero tolerances for these additives
because such a request fell outside the scope of the food additive
petition process (83 FR 50490 at 50491).
    As a result of responding to these two food additive petitions, FDA
revoked the uses of all seven synthetic flavoring substances either:
(1) As a matter of law because data demonstrated that six of the seven
synthetic flavoring substances have been shown to cause cancer in
animals or (2) based on a determination that the use had been
completely and permanently abandoned; we further made clear that the
petitioners' ``zero tolerance'' request was not the proper subject of a
food additive petition (83 FR 50487; 83 FR 50490).

    Thus, when the parties state in their ``objection'' that FDA's
``failure to indicate expressly that these substances no longer qualify
in any way as `safe' for use in food.. . . amounts to an arbitrary and
unlawful failure to protect the safety of food,'' it does not appear
the parties have stated with particularity a specific provision of the
synthetic flavoring substances order that they deem objectionable. The
parties do not object to our determination to revoke the uses of the
synthetic flavoring substances, and in fact in their submission, the
parties stated they ``applaud FDA for acknowledging that it `cannot
consider these synthetic flavoring substances to be safe as a matter of
law' '' (Earthjustice submission, page 1). Rather, by asserting in
their submission that FDA is being arbitrary and unlawful by failing to
indicate expressly in the final rule that substances found to induce
cancer cannot qualify in any way as ``safe'' for use in food, we
interpret the parties' ``objection'' to be related to the petitioners'
request to establish zero tolerances for these synthetic flavoring
additives, a request we declined to act on in the final rule because
such a request was not the proper subject of a food additive petition.
    As explained in the final rule (83 FR 50490 at 50491), a food
additive petition must either propose the issuance of a regulation
prescribing the conditions under which a food additive may be safely
used or propose the amendment or repeal of an existing food additive
regulation (sections 409(b)(1) and (i) of the FD&C Act). We explained
in the final rule that we interpreted the request to establish zero
tolerances for these flavoring additives as a request to issue a
regulation prohibiting a substance from human food under part 189 and
that this request fell outside the scope of a food additive petition
because it does not propose the issuance of a new food additive
regulation or the amendment or repeal of an existing food additive
regulation (id.). Consequently, we did not address the zero tolerance
request further in the final rule and thus this issue was not
considered part of the order by regulation that revoked the uses for
these synthetic flavoring additives, pursuant to section 409(c) of the
FD&C Act. Therefore, because the parties failed to identify a provision
of the order deemed objectionable and have also failed to raise an
objection regarding the order made pursuant to section 409(c) or (d) of
the FD&C Act, the provision for objections and public hearing under
section 409(f) of the FD&C Act does not apply.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We note that the parties' submission did not present any
argument or evidence that FDA's determination that the petitioners'
zero tolerance request was not the proper subject of a food additive
petition, and was thus outside the scope of section 409 of the FD&C
Act, was erroneous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, even though we do not think the parties' submission
legally rises to an objection under 409(f) of the FD&C Act, even if the
submission was a properly raised objection, we would deny such an
objection because the parties' request amounts to the same outcome as
the petitioners' zero tolerance request and such a request falls
outside the scope of the food additive petition process.

IV. Conclusion

    After evaluating the submission from Earthjustice et al., we have
concluded that the ``objection'' is not within the scope of the
objections and hearing provision under section 409(f) of the FD&C Act.
Therefore, we do not address the arguments related to this
``objection.'' We are confirming October 9, 2018, as the effective date
of this regulation. FDA still intends to not enforce applicable
requirements of the final rule with regard to food products
manufactured (domestically and internationally) prior to October 9,
2020, that contain one or more of these six synthetic flavoring
substances, to provide an opportunity for companies to reformulate
products prior to enforcing the requirements of this final rule.

    Dated: January 16, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-01060 Filed 1-30-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3415-3417]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00730]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0937; FRL-9374-8]

3-Decen-2-One; Receipt of Application for Emergency Exemption,
Solicitation of Public Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has received a specific exemption request from the
Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection to
use the pesticide 3-decen-2-one (CAS No. 10519-33-2) to treat up to
500,000 tons of potatoes with 3-decen-2-one to burn-off potato sprouts
in storage facilities. The applicant proposes the use of a new chemical
which has not been registered by the EPA. EPA is soliciting public
comment before making the decision whether or not to grant the
exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 31, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0937 by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.

     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amaris Johnson, Registration Division
(7505P), 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?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
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:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have a typical or disproportionately high and adverse
human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the
pesticide(s) discussed in this document, compared to the general
population.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    Under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136p), at the discretion of the
Administrator, a Federal or State agency may be exempted from any
provision of FIFRA if the Administrator determines that emergency
conditions exist which require the exemption. The Wisconsin Department
of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has requested the EPA
Administrator to issue a specific exemption for the use of 3-decen-2-
one on potatoes in storage facilities to burn off already emerged
sprouts. Information in accordance with 40 CFR part 166 was submitted
as part of this request.
    As part of this request, the applicant asserts that the 2012
growing season started 2-3 weeks early and was unseasonably warmer by
3-5 degrees Fahrenheit. This resulted in potatoes sprouting early in
storage facilities, and thus the need to control the sprouting to
prevent potential economic loss. Buyers can reject or mark down full
loads of potatoes even if minor sprouting is observed. Currently, there
are many stored potatoes with sprouts greater than 1 millimeter (mm) in
Wisconsin. 3-decen-2-one is the best option for stored potatoes because
it burns off existing sprouts, even those greater than 1 mm. The
majority of alternatives do not burn off existing sprouts nor can they
be used on sprouts greater than 1 mm. If the use of 3-decen-2-one is
not permitted, the economic loss to the state of Wisconsin is estimated
at 40% of the state's potato crop or up to 500,000 tons.
    The applicant proposes to make no more than two applications of the
chemical with at least 7 days between applications (retreatment
interval), the maximum number of stored potatoes to be treated is
10,000,000 hundredweight (cwt) or 500,000 tons. The total amount of
product is 16,406 gallons or 16,078 gallons of active ingredient,
during the growing season from now through July 2013. The use of 3-
decen-2-one is permissible in the following Wisconsin counties: Adams,
Barron, Chippewa, Columbia, Green Lake, Iowa, Jefferson, Juneau,
Marquette, Portage, Richland, Sauk, Shawano, Waushara, Waupaca, Wood,
Langlade, and Oneida.
    This notice does not constitute a decision by EPA on the
application itself. The regulations governing section 18 of FIFRA
require publication of a notice of receipt of an application for a
specific exemption proposing use of a new chemical (i.e., an active
ingredient) which has not been registered by EPA. The notice provides
an opportunity for public comment on the application.
    The Agency, will review and consider all comments received during
the comment period in determining whether to issue the specific
exemption requested by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade
and Consumer Protection.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: January 3, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-00730 Filed 1-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 82 (Tuesday, April 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 23513]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08973]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-39-000]

Questar Southern Trails Pipeline Company; Notice of Extension of
Time Request

    Take notice that on April 17, 2020, Questar Southern Trails
Pipeline Company (Questar) requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission) grant an extension of time, until May 9, 2022,
to complete its Southern Trail Pipeline Abandonment Project (Project)
authorized in the May 9, 2018 Order Approving Abandonment (May 2018
Order).\1\ The May 2018 Order required Questar to abandon, within two
years of the order date, all of its certificated facilities dedicated
to providing jurisdictional transportation services (Questar Southern
Trails Facilities) located in California, Arizona, Utah, and New
Mexico, in part by sale to the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority (NTUA)
and in part by abandonment-in-place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Questar Southern Trails Pipeline Company, 163 FERC 62,086
(2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Questar states that Phase 1 of the two-phased implementation plan,
filed on May 23, 2019, was completed on June 29, 2019. Questar asserts
that in Phase 2 of the Project, Questar will conclude the Asset
Purchase Agreement with the NTUA. Upon closing the transaction, Questar
will simultaneously abandon by sale the remaining facilities detailed
in the application and abandon its NGA Section 7(c) certificate, the
Questar FERC Gas Tariff, and all transportation services. Questar
affirms that it and the NTUA continue to diligently seek the consents
necessary to finalize the transaction; however, all the necessary
consents have not yet been obtained, and as a result, Questar is unable
to complete abandonment within the 2-year time frame designated in the
Order.
    This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment
period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on the extension motion
may do so. No reply comments or answers will be considered. If you wish
to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this
request, you should, on or before the comment date stated below, file a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10).
However, only motions to intervene from entities that were party to the
underlying proceeding will be accepted.
    As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on
requests for extensions of time to complete construction for NGA
facilities when such requests are contested before order issuance. For
those extension requests that are contested,\2\ the Commission acting
as a whole will aim to issue an order acting on the request within 45
days.\3\ The Commission will address all arguments relating to whether
the applicant has demonstrated there is good cause to grant the
extension. The Commission will not consider arguments that re-litigate
the issuance of the certificate order, including whether the Commission
properly found the project to be in the public convenience and
necessity and whether the Commission's environmental analysis for the
certificate complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.\4\ At
the time a pipeline requests an extension of time, orders on
certificates of public convenience and necessity are final and the
Commission will not re-litigate their issuance. The OEP Director, or
his or her designee, will act on all of those extension requests that
are uncontested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Contested proceedings are those where an intervenor disputes
any material issue of the filing. 18 CFR 385.2201(c)(1) (2019).
    \3\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
    \4\ Similarly, the Commission will not re-litigate the issuance
of an NGA section 3 authorization, including whether a proposed
project is not inconsistent with the public interest and whether the
Commission's environmental analysis for the permit order complied
with NEPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, The Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and three copies of the protest or intervention to
the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on May 7, 2020.

    Dated: April 22, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-08973 Filed 4-27-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 34)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9186-9188]
[DOCID:fr20fe08-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0061; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-92]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Vinalhaven, ME

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule, request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E Airspace at Vinalhaven, ME to
support a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS)
Special Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP) that has been developed for
medical flight operations into the Mary Talbot Memorial Airfield. This
action enhances the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rule
(IFR) operations by providing that required controlled airspace to
protect for this approach around Vinalhaven, ME.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 5, 2008. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. Comments for
inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before April 7,
2008.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building, Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2008-0061; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-92, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

    You may review the public docket containing the rule, any comments
received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office
(see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
    An informal docket may also be examined during normal business
hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, Room 210, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, System Support Group,
Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box
20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Direct Final Rule Procedure

    The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comments, and, therefore, issues it as a direct final rule.
The FAA has determined that this rule only involves an established body
of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are
necessary

to keep them operationally current. Unless a written or negative
comment or a written notice of intent to submit an adverse or negative
comment is received within the comment period, the regulation will
become effective on the date specified above. After the close of the
comment period, the FAA will publish a comment in the Federal Register
indicating that no adverse or negative comments were received and
confirming the effective date. If the FAA receives, within the comment
period, an adverse or negative comment, or written notice of intent to
submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the direct final rule
will be published in the Federal Register and a notice of proposed
rulemaking may be published with a new comment period.

Comments Invited

    Although this action is in the form of a direct final rule, and was
not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, interested persons are
invited to comment on this rule by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments as they may desire. An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded from and comments may be submitted and reviewed at
http://www.regulations gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov.

or the Federal Register's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
 Communications should identify both docket numbers and be

submitted in triplicate to the address specified under the caption
ADDRESSES above or through the website. All communications received on
or before the closing date for comments will be considered, and this
rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of the comments received.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. Factual information that supports
the commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in
evaluating the effectiveness of this action and determining whether
additional rulemaking action would be needed. All comments submitted
will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments,
in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. Those
wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in
response to this rule must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on
which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-
2008-0061; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-92.'' The postcard will be date
stamped and returned to the commenter.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace at Vinalhaven, ME providing the
controlled airspace required to support the new Copter Area Navigation
(RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) 233 Point in Space (PinS)
approach developed for the Mary Talbot Memorial Airfield. In today's
environment where speed of treatment for medical injuries is
imperative, landing sites have been developed for helicopter medical
Lifeguard flights or Lifeflights; this is one of those sites.
Controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet Above Ground Level
(AGL) is required for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations and to
encompass all Instrument Approach Procedures (IAPs) to the extent
practical, therefore, the FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish a 6-mile radius Class E5
airspace at Vinalhaven, ME. Designations for Class E airspace areas
extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the Earth
are published in FAA Order 7400.9R, signed August 15, 2007 effective
September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part
71.1. The Class E designations listed in this document will be
published subsequently in the Order.

Agency Findings

    The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of government. Therefore, it is
determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
described the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes is more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace near the Mary Talbot Memorial
Airfield in Vinalhaven, ME.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed August 15, 2007, effective September 15, 2007, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700
feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANE ME E5 Vinalhaven, ME [New]

Mary Talbot Memorial Airfield
    (Lat. 44[deg]04'25'' N., long. 68[deg]49'08'' W.)
Point in Space Coordinates
    (Lat. 44[deg]04'54'' N., long. 68[deg]48'39'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
of the Earth within a 6-mile radius of the Point in Space
Coordinates (Lat. 44[deg]04'54'' N., long. 68[deg]48'39'' W.)
serving the Mary Talbot Memorial Airfield.
* * * * *

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on January 31, 2008.
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, System Support Group, Eastern Service Center.
[FR Doc. 08-719 Filed 2-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 28, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19257-19261]
[FR Doc No: E9-9556]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59799; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by NYSE Amex LLC Amending NYSE
Amex Equities Rules 13, 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 To Eliminate Certain
Order Types From the Off-Hours Trading Facility

April 20, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on April 9, 2009, NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. NYSE Amex filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)

thereunder,\5\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Amex Equities Rules 13
(Definitions of Orders), 902 (Off-Hours Trading Orders), 903 (Off-Hours
Transactions), 904 (Priority of Off-Hours Trading Orders), 905 (Off-
Hours Trading Reports and Recordkeeping) and 906 (Impact of Trading
Halts on Off-Hours Trading) to eliminate certain order types from the
off-hours trading facility. The text of the proposed rule change is
available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and
http://www.nyse.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Through this filing, the Exchange seeks to amend NYSE Amex Equities
Rules 902, 903, 904, 905 and 906 to remove certain off-hours trading
functions from the Exchange's Crossing Session I. The Exchange is
making this change in connection with certain technology upgrades it is
in the process of rolling out.
    As explained more fully below, customers who previously relied on
the trading functions in Crossing Session I that are being eliminated
will be able to execute their off-hours trades through the NYSE
MatchPoint[reg] system. The Exchange will continue to accommodate
certain types of off-hours trading (error offset trades and trades
between a member and the DMM for the purpose of offsetting a market-on-
close imbalance) in Crossing Session I.
    These amendments are proposed to conform to amendments filed by the
New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59570 (March 12,
2009), 74 FR 11800 (March 19, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-28).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background
    As described more fully in a related rule filing,\7\ NYSE Euronext
acquired The Amex Membership Corporation (``AMC'') pursuant to an
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated January 17, 2008 (the ``Merger'').
In connection with the Merger, the Exchange's predecessor, the American
Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex''), a subsidiary of AMC, became a subsidiary
of NYSE Euronext called NYSE Alternext US LLC,\8\ and continues to
operate as a national securities exchange registered under Section 6 of
the Act.\9\ The effective date of the Merger was October 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58673 (September 29,
2008), 73 FR 57707 (October 3, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-60 and SR-Amex-
2008-62) (approving the Merger).
    \8\ NYSE Alternext US LLC was subsequently renamed NYSE Amex
LLC. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59575 (March 13, 2009),
74 FR 11803 (March 19, 2009) (SR-NYSEALTR-2009-24).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the Merger, on December 1, 2008, the Exchange
relocated all equities trading conducted on the Exchange legacy trading
systems and facilities located at 86 Trinity Place, New York, New York,
to trading systems and facilities located at 11 Wall Street, New York,
New York (the ``Equities Relocation''). The Exchange's equity trading
systems and facilities at 11 Wall Street (the ``NYSE Amex Trading
Systems'') are operated by the NYSE on behalf of the Exchange.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex-2008-63) (approving
the Equities Relocation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the Equities Relocation, NYSE Alternext adopted NYSE
Rules 1-1004, subject to such changes as necessary to apply the Rules
to the Exchange, as the NYSE Alternext Equities Rules to govern trading
on the NYSE Alternext Trading Systems.\11\ The NYSE Alternext Equities
Rules, which became operative on December 1, 2008, are substantially
identical to the current NYSE Rules 1-1004 and the Exchange continues
to update the NYSE Alternext Equities Rules, now renamed the NYSE Amex
Equities Rules, as necessary to conform with rule changes to
corresponding NYSE Rules filed by the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58705 (October 1,
2008), 73 FR 58995 (October 8, 2008) (SR-Amex-2008-63) (approving
the Equities Relocation); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58833
(October 22, 2008), 73 FR 64642 (October 30, 2008) (SR-NYSE-2008-
106) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58839 (October 23,
2008), 73 FR 64645 (October 30, 2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-03)
(together, approving the Bonds Relocation); Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 59022 (November 26, 2008), 73 FR 73683 (December 3,
2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-10) (adopting amendments to NYSE Alternext
Equities Rules to track changes to corresponding NYSE Rules);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59027 (November 28, 2008), 73 FR
73681 (December 3, 2008) (SR-NYSEALTR-2008-11) (adopting amendments
to Rule 62--NYSE Alternext Equities to track changes to
corresponding NYSE Rule 62).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NYSE initiated its Off-Hours Trading Facility in June 1991.\12\
In connection with its implementation, the NYSE adopted the ``900''
series of rules to govern trading, order eligibility, order entry and
record keeping requirements. Upon the Equities Relocation and the
adoption of the NYSE Amex Equities Rules, the Exchange implemented the
NYSE Off-Hours Trading Facility as part of the NYSE Amex Trading
Systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 29237 (May 31,
1991), 56 FR 24853 (June 3, 1991) approving File Nos. SR-NYSE-90-52
and 90-53 which established the NYSE Off-Hours Trading Facility on a
pilot basis. See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33992 (May
2, 1994), 59 FR 23907 (May 9, 1994) approving the NYSE Off-Hours
Trading Facility on a permanent basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In one application of the Off-Hours Trading Facility, members and
member organizations may enter orders to be executed at the Exchange
closing price, that is, the price established by the last regular way
sale in a security at the official closing of the 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
trading session (``Crossing Session I''). Orders may be entered for any
Exchange-listed issue, other than a security that is subject to a
trading halt at the close of the regular trading session \13\ or is
halted after 4 p.m. Crossing Session I normally runs from 4:15 p.m. to
5 p.m. on each trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This includes any market-wide trading halt instituted under
NYSE Amex Equities Rule 80B (Trading Halts Due to Extraordinary
Market Volatility).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under NYSE Amex Equities Rule 902(a)(i) and (ii)(A) respectively,
members may enter single-sided orders (i.e., either an order to buy or
an order to sell) and coupled orders (i.e., both a buy and a sell
order) into Crossing Session I. In addition, pursuant to NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 902(b), the Exchange will migrate into Crossing Session I
for possible execution any good-til-cancelled (``GTC'') orders that
have been designated as eligible for execution in the Off-Hours Trading
Facility.\14\ These types of orders entered into Crossing Session I are
usually executed at the end of the Session, i.e., at 5 p.m.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See NYSE Amex Equities Rule 13 (Definitions of Orders). GTC
orders that have been designated as ``Off-Hours Eligible'' under
this rule are referred to as ``GTX orders''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE Amex Equities Rules 903 and 904 describe, in pertinent part,
how

orders that are entered into the off-hours trading facility establish
priority, and the execution protocols for such orders. Specifically,
NYSE Amex Equities Rule 903 provides that single-sided and migrated GTX
orders are to be executed against opposite side single-sided and GTX
orders in the Off-Hours trading Facility, while coupled orders are to
be executed against the other side of the coupled order. NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 904 provides that GTX orders retain the priority among
themselves that existed when they were entered into Display Book[reg],
while the priority of coupled orders will be determined based upon
their sequence of entry into the Off-Hours Trading facility.
    NYSE Amex Equities Rule 905 requires that certain records be
maintained by members and member organizations with respect to off-
hours trading.
    NYSE Amex Equities Rule 906 outlines procedures under which Off-
Hours Trading Facility orders in an NYSE-listed security may go
unexecuted if such security was subject to a trading halt.
II. Proposed Changes to Off-Hours Order Processing and Rule Amendments
    The Exchange is preparing to institute a number of technology
changes to its systems that will foster more efficient and cost
effective processing of orders it receives. As part of these changes,
the Exchange is phasing out the SuperDOT[supreg] system and will
replace it with a system referred to as Super Display Book (``SDBK'').
    Because the Off-Hours Trading Facility relies on the SuperDOT
system for certain trade processing functions, the Exchange plans to
eliminate the ability to enter single-sided, coupled orders and GTX
into the off-hours trading facility known as Crossing Session I, and to
instead direct customers to use the NYSE's MatchPoint[supreg] system to
effect those types of trades. Accordingly, the Exchange is proposing to
amend NYSE Amex Equities Rules 902, 903, 905 and 906 and to rescind
NYSE Amex Equities Rule 904 in its entirety to remove the provisions
that relate to closing price single-sided, coupled and GTX orders. The
Exchange also proposes to amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule 13 to remove
provisions relating to GTX orders as these will no longer be supported
by Exchange systems.
1. Proposed Amendments
a. NYSE Amex Equities Rule 13 (Definitions of Orders)
    When the NYSE created the Off-Hours Trading Facility, it decided to
provide a means for good-til-cancelled (GTC) orders to become
automatically eligible for execution in this facility if the person or
entity who had entered the GTC order so desired. This would then
provide a possible source of liquidity to the Off-Hours Trading
Facility, and could increase a GTC order's chance of being executed
since it could access additional liquidity that was entered into the
Off-Hours Trading Facility that was not available during the regular
trading session. At the same time, GTC orders designated to migrate to
the Off-Hours Trading Facility would return to the Display Book, and
retain their original priority on Display Book, if not executed in the
Off-Hours Trading Facility. This would provide a further incentive to
migrate GTC orders since they would not lose their standing on the
Display Book as a result of the migration.
    The language indicating that a good-til-cancelled order may be
designated as ``Off-Hours eligible'' and executed through the ``Off-
Hours Trading Facility'' is proposed for deletion as this order type is
being eliminated. The Exchange also proposes to add language to the
definition of the good-til-cancelled order type to indicate that these
orders are not eligible for execution in any Off-Hours Trading Facility
of the Exchange.
b. NYSE Amex Equities Rule 902 (Off-Hours Trading Orders)
    The Exchange proposes to delete paragraph (a)(i) (Closing-Price
Orders) and paragraph (a)(ii)(A) (Closing-Price Coupled Orders) in
their entirety to eliminate these as order types eligible for entry and
execution in the Off-Hours Trading Facility.\15\ Paragraph (b)
(Migration of Orders) is also proposed to be deleted to reflect the
elimination of GTX, as that paragraph explains the migration of GTC
orders from the regular hours trading session to the Off-Hours Trading
Session. Paragraph (d) is proposed to be deleted since it explains that
a migrated order (i.e., a GTX order) or a closing price order may be
cancelled before execution. Paragraph (e) (Disposition of Unexecuted
Orders) is proposed for deletion as it relates to migration of
unexecuted GTX orders back to the Display Book if they are not executed
in the Off-Hours Trading Facility, and to the fact that unexecuted
closing-price orders expire if unexecuted in the Off-Hours Trading
Facility. References to closing-price orders and paragraphs (a)(ii) and
(b) are proposed for deletion in paragraph (g) (Odd-Lots and Partial
Round Lots).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Exchange is retaining the Aggregate-Price Coupled Order
type, as defined in NYSE Amex Equities Rule 900 (Off-Hours Trading:
Applicability and Definitions), paragraph (e)(i). This order type is
specified for coupled buy and sell orders representing 15 or more
securities having a total market value of $1 million or more. These
orders are entered and executed in Crossing Session II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. NYSE Amex Equities Rule 903 (Off-Hours Transactions)
    Paragraph (a) (Priority of Single-Sided Orders) is proposed for
deletion as it relates solely to this order type, which is being
eliminated. In paragraphs (b) (Priority of Coupled Orders) and (c)
(Binding Nature), references to closing-price, paragraph (a)(ii) of
NYSE Amex Equities Rule 902 and paragraph (a) of NYSE Amex Equities
Rule 903 are proposed for deletion as they will no longer be valid
references. References to single-sided and coupled closing-price orders
in (d) (Executions of Orders) are also proposed for deletion.
d. NYSE Amex Equities Rule 904 (Priority of Off-Hours Trading Orders)
    The Exchange proposes to delete this rule entirely. NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 904 (Priority of Off-Hours Trading Orders) relates to the
priority of GTX among themselves as existed when these orders were on
the Display Book, and the priority of closing-price orders entered into
the Off-Hours Trading Facility.
e. NYSE Amex Equities Rule 905 (Off-Hours Trading Reports and
Recordkeeping)
    A reference to closing price and migrated orders is proposed for
deletion in paragraph (b) (Off-Hours Trading Records) of this rule.
f. NYSE Amex Equities Rule 906 (Impact of Trading Halts on Off-Hours
Trading)
    Paragraph (a) (Security Halts Prior to Off-Hours Trading) is
proposed to be deleted in its entirety as it relates to closing-price
and migrated orders, which are both being eliminated. Paragraph (b)
(Corporate Developments during Off-Hours Trading Session) of the rule
establishes the Exchange's ability to halt trading in a security during
the time it is open for Off-Hours Trading as a result of a corporate
development. The Exchange proposes to delete subparagraphs (i), (ii)
and (iii) which relate to closing-price and migrated GTC orders since
they are being eliminated. The provision in the rule relating the
permissibility of entry or the exemption from cancellation for closing
price orders entered by Designated Market Makers (``DMMs'') in stocks
that would otherwise be cancelled or prohibited from entry as a

result of corporate developments to offset all or part of a market-on-
close imbalance that existed in a stock prior to the close of the
Exchange's regular trading session \16\ is being retained. In these
instances, the DMM and the member organization taking the other side
have already agreed to trade in the stock at the closing price and this
agreement is not affected by the ensuing corporate development. The
Exchange is therefore proposing to add the phrase ``as a result of
corporate developments during the Off-Hours Trading Session'' to
paragraph (b) to complete the last sentence of the paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ These types of orders are entered pursuant to NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 902(a)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Availability of MatchPoint[supreg] for Off-Hours Trading
    In the Exchange's view these changes will not significantly affect
the experience of customers who would have previously submitted orders
to Crossing Session I for execution since similar functionality exists
in the MatchPoint[supreg] system. MatchPoint[supreg] is an NYSE
electronic equity-trading facility that matches aggregated orders at
predetermined fixed times with prices that are derived from primary
markets. There are seven matching sessions at fixed times throughout
the trading day, and, of particular relevance to this filing, an after-
hours matching session at 4:45 p.m.
    Orders in MatchPoint are executed at a single trading price (known
as the ``reference price'') that, for the 4:45 match is equal to the
NYSE official closing price for NYSE-listed securities and the official
closing price of the primary market for all non-NYSE-listed
securities.\17\ Customers who previously executed single-sided and
coupled trades through Crossing Session I at the NYSE's official
closing price can submit single-sided and coupled orders for execution
through MatchPoint[supreg].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See, generally, NYSE Rule 1500 (NYSE MatchPoint[supreg])
and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57058 (December 28, 2007),
73 FR 903 (January 4, 2008) approving adoption of NYSE Rule 1500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should be noted that certain other order types allowed under
NYSE Amex Equities Rule 902 will not be affected by the proposed
changes, although after the phase-out, the Exchange will process these
trades on a different system instead of through SuperDOT. In
particular, NYSE Amex Equities Rule 902(a)(ii)(C) permits a coupled
order to be submitted in Crossing Session I to address situations where
a member or member organization wishes to close out an error at the
closing price on the Exchange, and the Designated Market Maker has
agreed to take the other side of the error trade. NYSE Amex Equities
Rule 902(a)(ii)(B) permits entry of coupled orders when one side of
such coupled order is for the account of a specialist member
organization entered in those instances in which the coupled order
reflects contra side interest to offset an imbalance of market-on-close
orders \18\ that existed at the regular 4:00 p.m. close. The Exchange
is not deleting these provisions from its rules, and member
organizations will continue to be able to execute these trades in the
same manner that they do today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ A ``market-on-close'' order is a market order which is to
be executed in its entirety at the closing price, on the Exchange,
of the stock named in the order, and if not so executed, is to be
treated as cancelled. See NYSE Amex Equities Rule 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange intends to progressively implement this elimination on
a security by security basis as it gains experience with the
implementation until it is operative in all securities traded on the
Floor. During the implementation, the Exchange will identify on its
website which securities will no longer be eligible for processing in
Crossing Session I as described in this filing.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\19\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ in particular, in that it is designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The
Exchange believes the proposed rule change will facilitate the timely
and efficient execution of securities on the Exchange by eliminating
the use of an under-utilized order types and thus ultimately serve to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \21\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\22\
Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) by its terms does not
become operative for 30 days of this filing, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \23\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) does not
normally become opertative prior to 30 days after the date of
filing.\25\ However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See id. In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires a self-
regulatory organization to provide the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of 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 Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because the proposed rule change seeks to eliminate one type of off-
hours trading, while continuing to provide another type of off-hours
trading throught the use of the NYSE Matchpoint[supreg] facility, in
accordance with technology changes designed to foster a more efficient
and cost effective processing of orders. The Commission notes that the
proposed rule change is similar to NYSE's rules regarding off-hours
trading. Therefore, the Commission designates the proposed rule change
operative upon filing.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule'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 may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the Act.

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-NYSEAmex-2009-07 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-NYSEAmex-2009-07. 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 inspection
and copying 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-NYSEAmex-2009-07 and should
be submitted on or before May 19, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-9556 Filed 4-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: April 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 83)]
[Notices]
[Page 22881-22882]
[DOCID:fr30ap10-149]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61961; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-61]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Fees and Rebates for Adding and Removing Liquidity

April 22, 2010.
    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 April 22, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. Phlx has designated this
proposal as one establishing or changing a member due, fee, or other
charge imposed under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend the fees and rebates for adding and
removing liquidity for options overlying various select symbols.
    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative for transactions settling on or after May 3, 2010.
    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, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its current fees and rebates for
adding and removing liquidity by eliminating the fees for adding
liquidity. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the current
$0.45 Firm and $0.45 Broker-Dealer per-contract fees for adding
liquidity.
    The Exchange currently assesses a per-contract transaction charge
in various select symbols \5\ on six different categories of market
participants that submit orders and/or quotes that remove, or ``take,''
liquidity from the Exchange: (i) Specialists, Registered Options
Traders (``ROTs''), Streaming Quote Traders (``SQTs'') \6\ and Remote
Streaming Quote Traders (``RSQTs''); \7\ (ii) customers; \8\ (iii)
specialists, SQTs and RSQTs that receive Directed Orders (``Directed
Participants'' \9\ or ``Directed Specialists, RSQTs, or SQTs'' \10\);
(iv) Firms; (v) broker-dealers; and (vi) Professionals.\11\ The current
per-contract transaction charge depends on the category of market
participant submitting an order or quote to the Exchange that removes
liquidity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The fees and rebates for adding and removing liquidity are
applicable to executions in options overlying AA, AAPL, AIG, ALL,
AMD, AMR, AMZN, BAC, C, CAT, CSCO, DELL, DIA, DRYS, EK, F, FAS, FAZ,
GDX, GE, GLD, GS, INTC, IWM, JPM, LVS, MGM, MSFT, MU, NEM, PALM,
PFE, POT, QCOM, QQQQ, RIMM, SBUX, SKF, SLV, SMH, SNDK, SPY, T, UAUA,
UNG, USO, UYG, VZ, WYNN, X and XLF (``Symbols'').
    \6\ An SQT is an Exchange Registered Options Trader (``ROT'')
who has received permission from the Exchange to generate and submit
option quotations electronically through an electronic interface
with AUTOM via an Exchange approved proprietary electronic quoting
device in eligible options to which such SQT is assigned. See
Exchange Rule 1014(b)(ii)(A).
    \7\ An RSQT is 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 through AUTOM in eligible options to which such RSQT
has been assigned. An RSQT may only submit such quotations
electronically from off the floor of the Exchange. See Exchange Rule
1014(b)(ii)(B).
    \8\ This applies to all customer orders, directed and non-
directed.
    \9\ For purposes of the fees and rebates related to adding and
removing liquidity, A Directed Participant is a Specialist, SQT, or
RSQT that executes a customer order that is directed to them by an
Order Flow Provider and is executed electronically on PHLX XL II.
    \10\ See Exchange Rule 1080(l), `` * * * The term `Directed
Specialist, RSQT, or SQT' means a specialist, RSQT, or SQT that
receives a Directed Order.'' A Directed Participant has a higher
quoting requirement as compared with a specialist, SQT or RSQT who
is not acting as a Directed Participant. See Exchange Rule 1014.
    \11\ 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'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The per-contract transaction charges that are currently assessed on
participants who submit proprietary quotes and/or orders that remove
liquidity in the applicable Symbols are, by category:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Charge (per
                       Category                             contract)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer..............................................             $0.25
Directed Participants.................................              0.30
Specialist, ROT, SQT, RSQT............................              0.32
Firms.................................................              0.45
Broker-Dealers........................................              0.45
Professional..........................................              0.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also currently assesses a per-contract rebate relating
to transaction charges for orders or quotations that add liquidity in
the select Symbols. The amount of the rebate depends on the category of
participant whose order or quote was executed as part of the Phlx Best
Bid and Offer. Specifically, the per-contract rebates are, by category:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Rebate (per
                       Category                             contract)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer..............................................             $0.20
Directed Participants.................................              0.25

Specialist, ROT, SQT, RSQT............................              0.23
Firms.................................................              0.00
Broker-Dealers........................................              0.00
Professional..........................................              0.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also currently assesses a transaction charge of $0.45
per contract to Firms and $0.45 per contract to broker-dealers that add
liquidity, which this proposal seeks to eliminate.
    The Exchange also proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to remove all
references to the fees for adding liquidity.
    While changes to the Fee Schedule pursuant to this proposal are
effective upon filing, the Exchange has designated these changes to be
operative for transactions settling on or after May 3, 2010.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \12\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \13\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members. The Exchange believes that
the elimination of the fees for adding liquidity is reasonable because
the proposal is consistent with the current Fee Schedule and industry
fee assessments of member firms that allow for different rates to be
charged for different order types originated by dissimilarly classified
market participants.\14\ Additionally, the impact of the proposal upon
the net fees paid by a particular market participant will depend on a
number of variables, including its monthly volumes, the order types it
uses, and the prices of its quotes and orders (i.e., its propensity to
add or remove liquidity).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \14\ See International Securities Exchange, LLC Schedule of
Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange 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
Exchange believes that the fees it charges for options overlying the
various Symbols remain competitive with fees charged by other venues
and therefore continue to be reasonable and equitably allocated to
those members that opt to direct orders to the Exchange rather than
competing venues.

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 \15\ and paragraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4\16\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b 4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2010-61 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-61. 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 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-61 and should be
submitted on or before May 21, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-10029 Filed 4-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P