[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61435-61438]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25509]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-65428; File No. SR-BX-2011-068]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Revise the Methodology for
Determining When to Halt Trading Due to Extraordinary Market Volatility

September 28, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on September 27, 2011, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``BX'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange, pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4 thereunder,\4\ proposes to amend Exchange Rule 4121 to revise the
methodology for determining when to halt trading in all stocks due to
extraordinary market volatility. The proposal is made in conjunction
with all national securities exchanges and the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the 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 Exchange Rule 4121 to revise the
current methodology for determining when to halt trading in all stocks
due to extraordinary market volatility. The Exchange is proposing this
rule change in consultation with other equity, options, and futures
markets, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''),
and staffs of the Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
    Since May 6, 2010, when the markets experienced excessive
volatility in an abbreviated time period, i.e., the ``flash crash,''
the exchanges and FINRA have implemented market-wide measures designed
to restore investor confidence by reducing the potential for excessive
market volatility. Among the measures adopted include pilot plans for
stock-by-stock trading pauses \5\ and related changes to the clearly
erroneous execution rules \6\ and more stringent market maker quoting
requirements.\7\ In addition, on April 5, 2011, the equities exchanges
and FINRA filed a plan pursuant to Rule 608 of Regulation NMS to
address extraordinary market volatility (the ``Limit Up-Limit Down
Plan'').\8\ As proposed, the Limit Up-Limit Down Plan is designed to
prevent trades in individual NMS stocks from occurring outside
specified price bands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ BX Rule 4120(a)(11).
    \6\ BX Rule 11890.
    \7\ BX Rule 4613.
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64547 (May 25,
2011), 76 FR 31647 (June 1, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Joint CFTC-SEC Advisory Committee on Emerging Regulatory Issues
(``Committee'') has recommended that, in addition to the initiatives
already adopted or proposed, the markets should consider reforming the
existing market-wide circuit breakers. Among other things, the
Committee noted that the interrelatedness of today's highly electronic
markets warrants the need to review the present operation of the
system-wide circuit breakers now in place. Specifically, the Committee
recommended that the markets consider replacing the Dow Jones
Industrial Average (``DJIA'') with the S&P 500[reg] Index (``S&P
500''), revising the 10%, 20%, and 30% decline percentages, reducing
the length

of trading halts, and allowing halts to be triggered up to 3:30 p.m.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Summary Report of the Committee, ``Recommendations
Regarding Regulatory Responses to the Market Events of May 6, 2010''
(Feb, 18, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The exchanges and FINRA have taken into consideration the
Committee's recommendations, and with some modifications, have proposed
changes to market-wide circuit breakers that the Exchange believes will
provide for a more meaningful measure in today's faster, more
electronic markets, of when to halt stocks on a market-wide basis as a
result of rapid market declines.
Background
    The Exchange adopted Rule 4121 in 2008. Rule 4121 provides that
upon SEC request the Exchange will halt all domestic trading in both
securities listed on Nasdaq and securities traded [sic] the Exchange
pursuant to unlisted trading privileges if other major securities
markets initiate marketwide trading halts in response to extraordinary
market conditions. In effect, the Exchange agreed via Rule 4121 to
abide by marketwide halts called for by the SEC in conjunction with
other listing markets. The standards governing such halts were adopted
in 1988 as part of an effort by the securities and futures markets to
implement a coordinated means to address potentially destabilizing
market volatility.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 26198 (Oct. 19,
1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of a marketwide halt, as embodied in Rule 4121, is to
enable market participants to establish an equilibrium between buying
and selling interest and to ensure that market participants have an
opportunity to become aware of and respond to significant price
movements. Importantly, the market-wide circuit breakers were not
intended to prevent markets from adjusting to new price levels; rather,
they provide for a speed bump for extremely rapid market declines.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current standard, set forth in the rules of other
exchanges,\12\ provides for Level 1, 2, and 3 declines and specified
trading halts following such declines. The values of Levels 1, 2 and 3
are calculated at the beginning of each calendar quarter, using 10%,
20% and 30%, respectively, of the average closing value of the DJIA for
the month prior to the beginning of the quarter. Each percentage
calculation is rounded to the nearest fifty points to create the
Levels' trigger points. The values then remain in effect until the next
quarterly calculation, notwithstanding whether the DJIA has moved and a
Level 1, 2, or 3 decline is no longer equal to an actual 10%, 20%, or
30% decline in the most recent closing value of the DJIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The rule was last amended in 1998, when declines based on
specified point drops in the DJIA were replaced with the current
methodology of using a percentage decline that is recalculated
quarterly. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 39846 (April 9,
1998), 63 FR 18477 (April 15, 1998) (SR-NYSE-98-06, SR-Amex-98-09,
SR-BSE-98-06, SR-CHX-98-08, SR-NASD-98-27, and SR-Phlx-98-15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Once a marketwide circuit breaker is in effect, trading in all
stocks halt for the time periods specified below:
Level 1 Halt
    Anytime before 2 p.m.--one hour; at or after 2 p.m. but before 2:30
p.m.--30 minutes; at or after 2:30 p.m.--trading shall continue, unless
there is a Level 2 Halt.
Level 2 Halt
    Anytime before 1 p.m.--two hours; at or after 1 p.m. but before 2
p.m.--one hour; at or after 2 p.m.--trading shall halt and not resume
for the rest of the day.
Level 3 Halt
    At any time--trading shall halt and not resume for the rest of the
day.
    Unless stocks are halted for the remainder of the trading day,
price indications are disseminated during a Rule 80B trading halt for
stocks that comprise the DJIA.
Proposed Amendments
    As noted above, the Exchange, other equities, options, and futures
markets, and FINRA propose to amend the market-wide circuit breakers to
take into consideration the recommendations of the Committee, and to
provide for more meaningful measures in today's markets of when to halt
trading in all stocks. Accordingly, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule
4121 to create the following standards: (i) Replace the DJIA with the
S&P 500; (ii) replace the quarterly calendar recalculation of Rule 80B
triggers with daily recalculations: (iii) replace the 10%, 20%, and 30%
market decline percentages with 7%, 13%, and 20% market decline
percentages; (iv) modify the length of the trading halts associated
with each market decline level; and (v) modify the times when a trading
halt may be triggered. The Exchange believes that these proposed
amendments update the rule to reflect today's high-speed, highly
electronic trading market while still ensuring that market participants
have an opportunity to become aware of and respond to significant price
movements.
    First, the Exchange proposes to replace the DJIA with the S&P 500.
The Exchange believes that because the S&P 500 is based on the trading
prices of 500 stocks, as compared to the 30 stocks that comprise the
DJIA, the S&P 500 represents a broader base of securities against which
to measure whether extraordinary market-wide volatility is occurring.
In addition, as noted by the Committee, using an index that correlates
closely with derivative products, such as the E-Mini and SPY, will
allow for a better cross-market measure of market volatility.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to change the recalculation of the
trigger values from once every calendar quarter to daily. The Exchange
believes that updating the trigger values daily will better reflect
current market conditions. In particular, a daily recalculation will
ensure that the percentage drop triggers relate to current market
conditions, and are not compared to what may be stale market
conditions. As noted in the proposed rule, the daily calculations of
the trigger values will be published before the trading day begins.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Exchange and other markets will advise via Trader
Update the specific methodology for publishing the daily
calculations, as well as the manner by which the markets will halt
trading in all stocks should a Rule 4121 trading halt be triggered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, the Exchange proposes to decrease the current Level 1, 2,
and 3 declines of 10%, 20%, and 30% to a Level 1 Market Decline of 7%,
a Level 2 Market Decline of 13%, and Level 3 Market Decline of 20%. In
particular, as demonstrated by the May 6, 2010 flash crash, the current
Level 1 10% decline may be too high a threshold before determining
whether to halt trading across all securities. In fact, since adoption,
the markets have halted only once, on October 27, 1997.\14\
Accordingly, to reflect the potential that a lower, yet still
significant decline may warrant a market-wide trading halt, the
Exchange proposes to lower the market decline percentage thresholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ At that time, the triggers were based on absolute declines
in the DJIA (350 point decrease for a Level 1 halt and 550 point
decrease for a Level 2 halt).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As further proposed, the Exchange would halt trading based on a
Level 1 or Level 2 Market Decline only once per day. For example, if a
Level 1 Market Decline were to occur and trading were halted, following
the reopening of trading, the Exchange would not halt the market again
unless a Level 2 Market Decline were to occur. Likewise, following the
reopening of trading after a Level 2 Market Decline, the Exchange would
not halt trading again unless a

Level 3 Market Decline were to occur, at which point, trading in all
stocks would be halted until the primary market opens the next trading
day.
    Fourth, to correspond with the lower percentages associated with
triggering a trading halt, the Exchange also proposes to shorten the
length of the market-wide trading halts associated with each Level. As
proposed, a Level 1 or 2 Market Decline occurring after 9:30 a.m.
Eastern and up to and including 3:25 p.m. Eastern, would result in a
trading halt in all stocks for 15 minutes.
    The Exchange believes that by reducing the percentage threshold,
coupled with the reduced length of a trading halt, the proposed rule
would allow for trading halts for serious market declines, while at the
same time, would minimize disruption to the market by allowing for
trading to continue after the proposed more-abbreviated trading halt.
The Exchange believes that in today's markets, where trading
information travels in micro-second speed, a 15-minute trading halt
strikes the appropriate balance between the need to halt trading for
market participants to assess the market, while at the same time
reducing the time that the market is halted.
    Finally, because the proposed Level 1 and Level 2 trading halts
will now be 15 minutes, the Exchange proposes amending the rule to
allow for a Level 1 or 2 Market Decline to trigger a trading halt up to
3:25 p.m. (or, in the case of scheduled early closure, at 12:25 p.m.).
Under the current rule, a trading halt cannot be triggered after 2:30
p.m., and this time corresponds to the need for the markets both to
reopen following a 30-minute halt and to engage in a fair and orderly
closing process. However, as the markets experienced on May 6, 2010,
even if the Level 1 decline had occurred that day, because the market
decline occurred after 2:30 p.m., it would not have triggered a halt
under the current rule. The Committee recommended that trading halts be
triggered up to 3:30 p.m. The Exchange agrees that the proposed
amendments must strike the appropriate balance between permitting
trading halts as late in the day as feasible without interrupting the
closing process.
    Accordingly, to accommodate existing rules at other Exchange [sic]
concerning closing procedures, including the publication of imbalance
information beginning at 3:50 p.m. and the restrictions on entry and
cancellation of market on close (``MOC'') and limit on close (``LOC'')
orders after 3:45 p.m., the Exchange proposes that the last Level 1 or
Level 2 Market Decline trading halt should begin no later than 3:25
p.m. (or, in the case of scheduled early closure, at 12:25 p.m.). The
Exchange proposes 3:25 p.m. as the cut-off time so that there is time
following the 15-minute trading halt for the markets to reopen before
the 3:45 cut-off for entry and cancellation of MOC and LOC orders under
Exchange rules.
    Under the proposed rule, a Level 3 Market Decline would halt
trading for the remainder of the trading day, including any trading
that may take place after 4 p.m., Eastern, and would not resume until
the next trading day.
    In addition to these proposed changes, the Exchange proposes to add
to Rule 4121 how the markets will reopen following a 15-minute trading
halt. In particular, the Exchange proposes that if the primary market
halts trading in all stocks, all markets will halt trading in those
stocks until the primary market has resumed trading or notice has been
provided by the primary market that trading may resume. As further
proposed, if the primary market does not re-open a security within 15
minutes following the end of the trading halt, other markets may resume
trading in that security.
2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\15\ which
requires the rules of an exchange 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 proposed rule change
also is designed to support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \16\ of
the Act in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and
dealers and among exchange markets. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule meets these requirements in that it promotes transparency
and uniformity across markets concerning decisions to pause trading in
a security when there are significant price movements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed
changes to the market-wide circuit breaker regime are consistent with
the Act. The Commission specifically requests comment on the following:
     As discussed above, the proposed rule change would narrow
the percentage market declines that would trigger a market-wide halt in
trading. How would the proposed changes interact with the existing
single-stock circuit breaker pilot program \17\ or, if approved, the
proposed NMS Plan to establish a limit-up/limit-down mechanism for
individual securities? \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64735 (June 23,
2011), 76 FR 38243 (June 29, 2011) (SR-BATS-2011-016; SR-BYX-2011-
011; SR-BX-2011-025; SR-CBOE-2011-049; SR-CHX-2011-09; SR-EDGA-2011-
15; SR-EDGX-2011-14; SR-FINRA-2011-023; SR-ISE-2011-028; SR-NASDAQ-
2011-067; SR-NYSE-2011-21; SR-NYSEAmex-2011-32; SR-NYSEArca-2011-26;
SR-NSX-2011-06; SR-Phlx-2011-64) (approving the ``Phase III Pilot
Program''). The Phase III Pilot Program has been extended through
January 2012. See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release 65094
(August 10, 2011), 76 FR 50779 (August 16, 2011) (SR-NASDAQ-2011-
011).
    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64547 (May 25,
2011), 76 FR 31647 (June 1, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     To what extent could the concurrent triggering of single
stock circuit breakers in many S&P 500 Index stocks lead to
difficulties in calculating the index? Would the triggering of many
single stock circuit breakers in a general market downturn cause the
index calculation to become stale and thereby delay the triggering of
the market-wide circuit breaker?

     Should the market-wide circuit breaker be triggered if a
sufficient number of single-stock circuit breakers or price limits are
triggered, and materially affect calculations of the S&P 500 Index?
     Should market centers implement rules that mandate
cancellation of pending orders in the event a market-wide circuit
breaker is triggered? If so, should such a rule require cancellation of
all orders or only certain order types (e.g., limit orders)? Should all
trading halts trigger such cancellation policies or should the
cancellation policies apply only to a Level 3 Market Decline?
     Should some provision be made to end the regular trading
session if a market decline suddenly occurs after 3:25 p.m. but does
not reach the 20% level?
     In the event of a Level 3 Market Decline, should some
provision be made for the markets to hold a closing auction?
     Should the primary market have a longer period (e.g., 30
minutes) to reopen trading following a Level 2 Market Decline before
trading resumes in other venues?
     In the event of a Level 3 Market Decline, should the
markets wait for the primary market to reopen trading in a particular
security on the next trading day before trading in that security
resumes?
    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-BX-2011-068 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-BX-2011-068. 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-BX-2011-068 and should be
submitted on or before October 25, 2011.

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

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

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-25509 Filed 10-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 210 (Tuesday, October 30, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54624-54630]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23625]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-84481; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2018-037]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Permit the Listing and Trading
of P.M.-Settled Series on Certain Broad-Based Index Options on a Pilot
Basis

October 24, 2018.
    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 October 11, 2018, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'' or ``SEC'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX Options'')
proposes to permit the listing and trading of P.M.-settled series on
certain broad-based index options on a pilot basis. [The text of the
proposed rule change is provided below.] [sic]
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's

website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx),
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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The proposed rule change permits the listing and trading of P.M.-
settled series on certain broad-based index options on a pilot
basis.\3\ First, the proposed rule change would permit the listing and
trading of XSP options with third-Friday-of-the-month expiration dates,
whose exercise settlement value will be based on the closing index
value on the expiration day (``P.M.-settled'') for an initial period of
twelve months (the ``XSPPM Pilot Program'') from the date of approval
of this proposed rule change. Second, the proposed rule change would
permit the listing and trading of P.M.-settled options on broad-based
indexes with weekly expirations (``Weeklys'') and end-of-month
expirations (``EOMs'') for an initial period of 12 months (the
``Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program'') from the date of approval of
this proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange is authorized to list for trading options that
overlie the Mini-SPX Index (``XSP'') and the Russell 2000 Index
(``RUT''). See Rule 29.11(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XSPPM Pilot Program
    Proposed Rule 29.11(a)(6) permits the listing and trading, in
addition to A.M.-settled XSP options, of P.M.-settled XSP options with
third-Friday-of-the-month expiration dates on a pilot basis for an
initial period of 12 months from the date of approval of this proposed
rule change. XSP options are A.M.-settled pursuant to the generic
listing criteria in Rule 29.11(a)(5). The Exchange believes permitting
the trading of XSP options on a P.M.-settled basis will encourage
greater trading in XSP options.
    Other than settlement and closing time on the last trading day (as
discussed below), contract terms for P.M.-settled XSP options will be
the same as the A.M.-settled XSP options. The proposed contract would
use a $100 multiplier. The minimum trading increments, strike price
intervals, and expirations would be the same as the A.M.-settled XSP
option series. P.M.-settled XSP options would have European-style
exercise. The Exchange will also have flexibility to open for trading
additional series in response to customer demand.
    The proposed rule change amends Rule 29.10(a) to state that, on
their last trading day, transactions in P.M.-settled XSP options may be
effected on the Exchange between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
Eastern time (as opposed to the normal trading hours for non-expiring
P.M.-settled XSP options, which are from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Eastern
time). XSP options are typically priced in the market based on
corresponding futures values. The primary listing markets for the
component securities that comprise the S&P 500 Index close trading in
those securities at 4:00 p.m. The primary listing exchanges for the
component securities disseminate closing prices of the component
securities, which are used to calculate the exercise settlement value
of the S&P 500 Index. The Exchange believes that, under normal trading
circumstances, the primary listing markets have sufficient bandwidth to
prevent any data queuing that would cause any trades that are executed
prior to the closing time from being reported after 4:00 p.m. Despite
the fact that the exercise settlement value will be fixed at or soon
after 4:00 p.m., if the Exchange did not close trading in expiring
P.M.-settled XSP options at 4:00 p.m. on their last trading day,
trading in expiring P.M.-settled XSP options would continue for an
additional fifteen minutes until 4:15 p.m. and would not be able to be
priced on corresponding futures values, but rather the known cash
value. At the same time, the prices of non-expiring P.M.-settled XSP
option series would continue to move and be priced in response to
changes in corresponding futures prices.
    A potential pricing divergence could occur between 4:00 p.m. and
4:15 p.m. on the final trading day in expiring P.M.-settled XSP options
(e.g. switch from pricing off of futures to cash). Further, the switch
from pricing off of futures to cash can be a difficult and risky
switchover for liquidity providers. As a result, without closing
expiring contracts at 4:00 p.m., it is foreseeable that Market-Makers
could react by widening spreads in order to compensate for the
additional risk. Therefore, the Exchange believes that, in order to
mitigate potential investor confusion and the potential for increased
costs to investors, it is appropriate to cease trading in the expiring
P.M.-settled XSP contracts at 4:00 p.m. The Exchange does not believe
the proposed change will impact volatility on the underlying cash
market at the close on third Fridays. Further, other options exchanges
close trading in certain options on the last trading day for certain
classes.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.6, Interpretations and Policies .01
(options with Quarterly Index Expirations), .03 (Cboe S&P 500 A.M./
P.M. Basis options), .04 (P.M.-settled SPX options with third
Friday-of-the-month expiration and P.M.-settled XSP options), and
.05 (MSCI EAFE Index options).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Exchange were to propose an extension of the XSPPM Pilot
Program or should the Exchange propose to make the XSPPM Pilot Program
permanent, the Exchange would submit a filing proposing such amendments
to the XSPPM Pilot Program. Further, any positions established under
the XSPPM Pilot Program would not be impacted by the expiration of the
XSPPM Pilot Program. For example, if the Exchange lists a P.M.-settled
XSP option that expires after the XSPPM Pilot Program expires (and is
not extended), then those positions would continue to exist. If the
pilot were not extended, then the positions could continue to exist.
However, any further trading in those series would be restricted to
transactions where at least one side of the trade is a closing
transaction.
    As part of the XSPPM Pilot Program, the Exchange will submit a
pilot report to the Commission at least two months prior to the
expiration date of the pilot. This annual report will contain an
analysis of volume, open interest, and trading patterns. The analysis
would examine trading in the proposed option product as well as trading
in the securities that comprise the S&P 500 Index. In addition, for
series that exceed certain minimum open interest parameters, the annual
report will provide analysis of index price volatility and, if needed,
share trading activity.
    The annual report will contain the following volume and open
interest data:
    (1) Monthly volume aggregated for all trades;
    (2) monthly volume aggregated by expiration date;

    (3) monthly volume for each individual series;
    (4) month-end open interest aggregated for all series;
    (5) month-end open interest aggregated by expiration date; and
    (6) month-end open interest for each individual series.
    The annual report will also contain the information noted above for
expiration Friday A.M.-settled XSP option series, if applicable, for
the period covered in the annual report. In addition to the annual
report, the Exchange will provide the Commission with interim reports
of the information listed in (1) through (6) above.
    In the annual report, the annual report would contain the following
analysis of trading patterns in expiration Friday, P.M.-settled XSP
option series in the XSPPM Pilot Program:
    (1) A time series analysis of open interest; and
    (2) an analysis of the distribution of trade sizes.
    Also, for series that exceed certain minimum parameters, the annual
report will also contain the following analysis related to index price
changes and, if needed, underlying share trading volume at the close on
expiration Fridays:
    (1) A comparison of index price changes at the close of trading on
a given expiration Friday with comparable price changes from a control
sample. The data will include a calculation of percentage price changes
for various time intervals and compare that information to the
respective control sample. Raw percentage price change data as well as
percentage price change data normalized for prevailing market
volatility, as measured by an appropriate index as agreed by the
Commission and the Exchange, would be provided; and
    (2) a calculation of share volume for a sample set of the component
securities representing an upper limit on share trading that could be
attributable to expiring in-the-money series. The data, if needed, will
include a comparison of the calculated share volume for securities in
the sample set to the average daily trading volumes of those securities
over a sample period.
    The minimum open interest parameters, control sample, time
intervals, method for randomly selecting the component securities, and
sample periods would be determined by the Exchange and the Commission.
    Additionally, the Exchange will provide the Commission with any
additional data or analyses the Commission requests because it deems
such data or analyses necessary to determine whether the XSPPM Pilot
Program is consistent with the Exchange Act. The Exchange will make
public all data and analyses it submits to the Commission under the
XSPPM Pilot Program.
    Other exchanges currently have pilots that permit P.M.-settled
index options.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.9, Interpretation and Policy .14
and Phlx Rule 1101A, Commentary .05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program
    The proposed rule change permits the listing and trading, on a
pilot basis, of P.M.-settled options on broad-based indexes with
nonstandard expiration dates for an initial period of 12 months from
the date of approval of this proposed rule change. The Nonstandard
Expirations Pilot Program will permit both Weeklys and EOMs as
discussed below. Contract terms for the Weekly and EOM expirations will
be similar to those of the A.M.-settled broad-based index options,
except that the Weekly and EOM expirations will be P.M.-settled.
    Proposed Rule 29.11(j)(1) permits the Exchange to open for trading
Weeklys on any broad-based index eligible for standard options trading
to expire on any Monday, Wednesday, or Friday (other than the third
Friday-of-the-month or days that coincide with an EOM). Weeklys will be
subject to all provisions of Rule 29.11 and will be treated the same as
options on the same underlying index that expire on the third Friday of
the expiration month. However, Weeklys will be P.M.-settled, and new
Weekly series may be added up to and including on the expiration date
for an expiring Weekly.
    The maximum number of expirations that may be listed for each
Weekly (i.e., a Monday expiration, a Wednesday expiration, or Friday
expiration, as applicable) in a given class will be the same as the
maximum number of expirations permitted in Rule 29.11(a)(3) for
standard options on the same broad-based index.\6\ Weeklys would not
need to be for consecutive Monday, Wednesday, or Friday expirations, as
applicable. However, the expiration date of a non-consecutive
expiration would not be permitted beyond what would be considered the
last expiration date if the maximum number of expirations were listed
consecutively. Weeklys that are first listed in a given class could
expire up to four weeks from the actual listing date. If the last
trading day of a month is a Monday, Wednesday, or Friday and the
Exchange lists EOMs and Weeklys, as applicable, in a given class, the
Exchange will list an EOM instead of a Weekly in the given class. Other
expirations in the same class are not counted as part of the maximum
number of Weeklys for a broad-based index class. If the Exchange is not
open for business on a respective Monday, the normally Monday expiring
Weeklys would expire on the following business day. If the Exchange is
not open for business on a respective Wednesday or Friday, the normally
Wednesday or Friday expiring Weekly will expire on the previous
business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Pursuant to Rule 29.11(a)(3), the Exchange may list up to
six expiration months at any one time. Therefore, pursuant to the
proposed rule change, the Exchange may list a maximum of six Weekly
expirations under the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 29.11(a)(2) [sic] permits the Exchange to open for
trading EOMs on any broad-based index eligible for standard options
trading to expire on the last trading day of the month. EOMs will be
subject to all provisions of Rule 29.11 and treated the same as options
on the same underlying index that expire on the third Friday of the
expiration month. However, EOMs will be P.M.-settled, and new series of
EOMs may be added up to and including on the expiration date for an
expiring EOM.
    The maximum number of expirations that may be listed for EOMs in a
given class is the same as the maximum number of expirations permitted
in Rule 29.11(a)(3) for standard options on the same broad-based
index.\7\ EOMs need not be for consecutive end-of-month expirations.
However, the expiration date of a non-consecutive expiration may not be
beyond what would be considered the last expiration date if the maximum
number of expirations were listed consecutively. EOMs that are first
listed in a given class may expire up to four weeks from the actual
listing date. Other expirations in the same class are not counted as
part of the maximum number of EOMs for a broad-based index class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change amends Rule 29.11(c)(5)(C) to provide that
the lowest strike interval for series of XSP options listed under the
Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program will be $0.50. With respect to
XSP, this is consistent with the minimum strike interval for XSP
options listed under the Short Term Series Program.\8\ Additionally,
this is consistent with the minimum strike interval for options on the
Standard & Poor's Depository Receipts Trust (SPY), which is an ETF that
like XSP tracks the performance of 1/10th

the value of the S&P 500 Index, with weekly expirations.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Rule 29.11(c)(5)(C).
    \9\ See Rule 19.6, Interpretation and Policy .05(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Weeklys and EOMs will be subject to the same rules that currently
govern the trading of standard monthly broad-based index options,
including sales practice rules, margin requirements, and floor trading
procedures. Contract terms for Weeklys and EOMs will be the same as
those for standard monthly broad-based index options. Since Weeklys and
EOMs will be new types of series, and not a new class, the Exchange
proposes that Weeklys and EOMs will be aggregated for any applicable
reporting and other requirements.\10\ Pursuant to new proposed Rule
29.11(j)(4), expiring transactions in Weeklys and EOMs may be effected
on the Exchange between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (Eastern
time).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Rule 29.5(a) requires Options Members to comply with the
applicable rules of Cboe Options with respect to position limits for
broad-based index options for options traded on Cboe Options. Cboe
Options Rule 24.4, Interpretation and Policy .03 sets forth the
reporting requirements for certain market indexes that do not have
position limits, including XSP and RUT, and would apply to XSP and
RUT options traded on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 29.5(a); see
also Cboe Options Rule 24.4(b), which provides that Weeklys and EOMs
will be aggregated with option contracts on the same broad-based
index and will be subject to the overall position limit, and would
apply to Weeklys/EOMs traded on the Exchange pursuant to Rule
29.5(a). The Exchange notes that the proposed aggregation is
consistent with the aggregation requirements or other types of
option series (e.g. quarterly expiring options) that may be listed
on the Exchange and that do not expire on the customary ``third
Friday'' (see Cboe Options Rule 24.4(e)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, this proposed rule change establishes a
Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program for broad-based index options on
a pilot basis, for an initial period of 12 months from the date of
approval of this proposed rule change. If the Exchange were to propose
an extension of the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program or should the
Exchange propose to make it permanent, the Exchange would submit a
filing proposing such amendments. Further, any positions established
under the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program would not be impacted
by the expiration of the pilot. For example, if the Exchange lists a
Weekly or EOM that expires after the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot
Program expires (and is not extended), then those positions would
continue to exist. However, any further trading in those series would
be restricted to transactions where at least one side of the trade is a
closing transaction.
    As part of the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program, the Exchange
will submit a pilot report to the Commission at least two months prior
to the expiration date of the pilot (the ``annual report''). The annual
report will contain an analysis of volume, open interest, and trading
patterns. In addition, for series that exceed certain minimum open
interest parameters, the annual report will provide analysis of the
index price volatility, and, if needed, share trading activity.
    For all Weekly and EOM series, the annual report will contain the
following volume and open interest data for each broad-based index
overlying Weekly and EOM options:
    (1) Monthly volume aggregated for all Weekly and EOM series;
    (2) Volume in Weekly and EOM series aggregated by expiration date;
    (3) Month-end open interest aggregated for all Weekly and EOM
series;
    (4) Month-end open interest for EOM series aggregated by expiration
date and open interest for Weekly series aggregated by expiration date;
    (5) Ratio of monthly aggregate volume in Weekly and EOM series to
total monthly class volume; and
    (6) Ratio of month-end open interest in EOM series to total month-
end class open interest and ratio of open interest in each Weekly
series to total class open interest.
    In addition, the annual report will contain the information noted
above for standard expiration Friday, A.M.-settled series, if
applicable, for the period covered in the annual report as well as for
the six-month period prior to the initiation of the pilot.
    Upon request by the SEC, the Exchange will provide a data file
containing: (1) Weekly and EOM option volume data aggregated by series,
and
    (2) Weekly open interest for each expiring series and EOM month-end
open interest for expiring series.
    In the annual report, the Exchange also proposes to identify Weekly
and EOM trading patterns by undertaking a time series analysis of open
interest in Weekly and EOM series aggregated by expiration date
compared to open interest in near-term standard expiration Friday A.M.-
settled series in order to determine whether users are shifting
positions from standard series to Weekly and EOM series. In addition,
to the extent that data on other weekly or monthly P.M.-settled
products from other exchanges is publicly available, the report will
also compare open interest with these options in order to determine
whether users are shifting positions from other weekly or monthly P.M.-
settled products to the Weekly and EOM series. Declining open interest
in standard series or the weekly or monthly P.M.-settled products of
other exchanges accompanied by rising open interest in Weekly and EOM
series would suggest that users are shifting positions.
    For each Weekly and EOM expiration that has open interest that
exceeds certain minimum thresholds, the annual report will contain the
following analysis related to index price changes and, if needed,
underlying share trading volume at the close on expiration dates:
    (1) A comparison of index price changes at the close of trading on
a given expiration date with comparable price changes from a control
sample. The data will include a calculation of percentage price changes
for various time intervals and compare that information to the
respective control sample. Raw percentage price change data as well as
percentage price change data normalized for prevailing market
volatility, as measured by an appropriate index agreed to by the
Commission and the Exchange, will be provided; and
    (2) If needed, a calculation of share volume for a sample set of
the component securities representing an upper limit on share trading
that could be attributable to expiring in-the-money Weekly and EOM
series. The data, if needed, will include a comparison of the
calculated share volume for securities in the sample set to the average
daily trading volumes of those securities over a sample period.
    The minimum open interest parameters, control sample, time
intervals, method for selecting the component securities, and sample
periods will be determined by the Exchange and the Commission.
    Additionally, the Exchange will provide the Commission with any
additional data or analyses the Commission requests because it deems
such data or analyses necessary to determine whether the Nonstandard
Expirations Pilot Program is consistent with the Exchange Act. The
Exchange will make public all data and analyses it submits to the
Commission under the Nonstandard Expirations Pilot Program. Other
exchanges currently have pilots that have weekly and end-of-month
expirations.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.9(e); and Phlx Rule 1101A(b)(vii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Information
    Precedent exists for P.M.-settled broad-based index options, as
other options exchanges list P.M.-settled broad-based index
options.\12\ The

Exchange does not believe that any market disruptions will be
encountered with the introduction of listing P.M.-settled options on
the Exchange. The Exchange will monitor for any such disruptions or the
development of any factors that would cause such disruptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, e.g., Cboe Options Rule 24.9(a)(4) (OEX not listed as
A.M.-settled) and Interpretation and Policy .14 (permits listing of
P.M.-settled SPX and XSP options); and PHLX Rule 1101A, Commentary
.05 (permits listing of P.M.-settled NDX options).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that P.M.-settled options predominate in the
over-the-counter (``OTC'') market, and the Exchange is not aware of any
adverse effects in the stock market attributable to the P.M.-settlement
feature. The Exchange is merely proposing to offer a P.M.-settled
product in an exchange environment that offers the benefit of added
transparency, price discovery, and stability. In response to any
potential concerns that disruptive trading conduct could occur as a
result of the concurrent listing and trading of two index option
products based on the same index but for which different settlement
methodologies exist (i.e., one is A.M.-settled and one is P.M.-
settled), the Exchange notes that Cboe Options lists and trades both
A.M.-settled and P.M.-settled SPX options, and Phlx lists and trades
both A.M.-settled and P.M.-settled NDX options. The Exchange is not
aware of any market disruptions occurring as a result of these
exchanges offering both products.
    The adoption of P.M.-settled options on an exchange that lists
A.M.-settled options in the same class would provide greater spread
opportunities. This manner of trading in different products allows a
market participant to take advantage of the different expiration times,
providing expanded trading opportunities. In the options market
currently, market participants regularly trade similar or related
products in conjunction with each other, which contributes to overall
market liquidity.
    The Exchange represents it has an adequate surveillance program in
place for index options. The Exchange is a member of the Intermarket
Surveillance Group (``ISG''), which is comprised of an international
group of exchanges, market centers, and market regulators. The purpose
of ISG is to provide a framework for the sharing of information and the
coordination of regulatory efforts among exchanges trading securities
and related products to address potential intermarket manipulations and
trading abuses. ISG plays a crucial role in information sharing among
markets that trade securities, options on securities, security futures
products, and futures and options on broad-based security indexes. A
list of identifying current ISG members is available at https://www.isgportal.org/isgPortal/public/members.htm.
    The Exchange has analyzed its capacity and represents that it
believes the Exchange and OPRA have the necessary systems capacity to
handle the additional traffic associated with the listing of P.M.-
settled XSP and Weekly/EOM option series up to the proposed number of
possible expirations and strike prices. The Exchange believes any
additional traffic that would be generated from the introduction of
P.M.-settled XSP and Weekly/EOM options series will be manageable. The
Exchange believes its Members will not have a capacity issue as a
result of this proposed rule change. The Exchange also represents that
it does not believe this expansion will cause fragmentation of
liquidity. The Exchange will monitor the trading volume associated with
the additional options series listed as a result of this proposed rule
change and the effect (if any) of these additional series on market
fragmentation and on the capacity of the Exchange's automated systems.
    P.M.-settled options would be subject to all provisions of Rule
29.11. P.M.-settled options would be subject to the same rules that
govern the trading of A.M.-settled options overlying the same indexes,
including sales practice rules, margin requirements, and floor trading
procedures. P.M.-settled options will be subject to the margin
requirements set forth in Chapter 28 and the position limits set forth
in Rule 29.5. Chapter 28 imposes the margin requirements of either Cboe
Options or the New York Stock Exchange on Exchange Options Members.
Similarly, Rule 29.5 imposes position (and exercise) limits for broad-
based index options of Cboe Options on Exchange Options Members. Since
P.M.-settled options will be a new type of series, and not a new class,
the Exchange proposes that the P.M.-settled options will be aggregated
for any applicable reporting and other requirements.\13\ Currently,
there are no position limits on RUT and XSP options.\14\ Therefore,
there will be no position limits on P.M.-settled RUT and XSP options.
P.M.-settled XSP options and Weekly/EOM broad-based index options are
currently authorized for listing on Cboe Options,\15\ and thus the same
margin requirements and position and exercise limits that apply to
these products as listed and traded on Cboe Options will apply to these
products when listed and traded on the Exchange. The proposed rule
change will also result in similar regulatory treatment for similar
option products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Rule 29.5(a), which requires Options Members to comply
with the applicable rules of Cboe Options with respect to position
limits for broad-based index options for options traded on Cboe
Options. Cboe Options Rule 24.4(b), which applies to index options
traded on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 29.5(a), provides that
Nonstandard Expirations will be aggregated with option contracts on
the same broad-based index and subject to the overall position
limit. Additionally, Cboe Options Rule 24.4(d), which applies to
index options traded on the Exchange pursuant to Rule 29.5(a),
positions in reduced-value index options will be aggregated with
positions in full-value indices. The Exchange notes that the
proposed aggregation is consistent with the aggregation requirements
for other types of option series (e.g. quarterly expiring options)
that are listed on the Exchange and that do not expire on the
customary ``third Friday.'' See Cboe Options Rule 24.4 (which
applies to the Exchange pursuant to Rule 29.5(a)).
    \14\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.4(a) (which applies to the
Exchange pursuant to Rule 29.5(a)).
    \15\ Similarly, pursuant to Cboe Options Chapter 12, Cboe
Options Trading Permit Holders may request to have New York Stock
Exchange margin requirements apply to their trading.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\16\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \17\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
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 regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will attract order
flow to the Exchange, increase the variety of listed options to
investors, and provide a valuable hedge tool to investors. The Exchange
believes the proposed rule change will also remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market, and in general protect
investors by expanding the ability of investors to hedge risks against
market movements stemming from economic releases or market events that
occur during the month and at the end of the month. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that P.M.-settled options will create greater trading
and hedging opportunities and flexibility, and

provide customers with the ability to more closely tailor their
investment objectives.
    The Commission has previously stated that when cash-settled index
options were first introduced in the 1980s, they generally utilized
closing-price settlement procedures (i.e., P.M. settlement). The
Commission stated it became concerned about the impact of P.M.
settlement on cash-settled index options on the markets for the
underlying stocks at the close on expiration Fridays, especially during
the quarterly expirations of the third Friday of March, June,
September, and December when options, index futures, and options on
index futures all expire simultaneously. The Commission expressed
concerns that P.M. settlement was believed to have contributed to
above-average volume and added market volatility on those days, which
sometimes led to sharp price movements during the last hour of trading,
as a consequence of which the close of trading on the quarterly
expiration Friday became known as the ``triple witching hour.'' The
Commission observed that besides contributing to investor anxiety,
heightened volatility during the expiration periods created the
opportunity for manipulation and other abusive trading practices in
anticipation of the liquidity constraints.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 65256 (September 2,
2011), 76 FR 55569 (September 9, 2011) (SR-C2-2011-008) (order
approving listing of SPXPM options on C2); see also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 81293 (August 2, 2017), 82 FR 151 (August
8, 2017) (SR-Phlx-2017-04) (or approving listing of NDXPM options on
Phlx).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, the Exchange believes that the above concerns that have
led to the transition to A.M. settlement for index derivatives have
been largely mitigated. It believes that expiration pressure in the
underlying cash markets at the close has been greatly reduced with the
advent of multiple primary listing and unlisted trading privilege
markets, and that trading is now widely dispersed among many market
centers. Additionally, the Exchange notes that opening procedures in
the 1990s were deemed acceptable to mitigate one-sided order flow
driven by index option expiration and that the New York Stock Exchange
and Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC each use an automated closing cross
procedures and has a closing order type that facilitates orderly
closings. These closing procedures on the exchanges on which the
components of the S&P 500 Index trade are well-equipped to mitigate
imbalance pressure at the close. In addition, after-hours trading now
provides market participants with an alternative to help offset market-
on-close imbalances.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other exchanges currently have pilots that permit P.M.-settled
index options \20\ and Weekly/EOM options.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.9, Interpretation and Policy .14;
and Phlx Rule 1101A, Commentary .05.
    \21\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.9(e); and Phlx Rule 1101A(b)(vii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change to permit transactions on the Exchange in
P.M.-settled XSP and Weekly/EOM options on their last trading day
between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern time (as opposed
to the normal trading hours for non-expiring P.M.-settled XSP and
Weekly/EOM options, which are from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Eastern time)
will prevent potential pricing divergence that could occur between 4:00
p.m. and 4:15 p.m. on the final trading day in expiring P.M.-settled
XSP options. Without closing expiring contracts at 4:00 p.m., it is
foreseeable that Market-Makers would react by widening spreads in order
to compensate for the additional risk. Therefore, the Exchange believes
that, in order to mitigate potential investor confusion and the
potential for increased costs to investors, it is appropriate to cease
trading in the expiring P.M.-settled XSP and Weekly/EOM contracts at
4:00 p.m. The Exchange does not believe the proposed change will impact
volatility on the underlying cash market at the close on third Fridays.
Further, the other options exchanges close trading in certain options
on the last trading day for certain classes.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.6, Interpretations and Policies
.01 (options with Quarterly Index Expirations), .03 (Cboe S&P 500
a.m./PM Basis options), .04 (P.M.-settled SPX options with third
Friday-of-the-month expiration and P.M.-settled XSP options), and
.05 (MSCI EAFE Index options).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has analyzed its capacity and represents that it
believes the Exchange and OPRA have the necessary systems capacity to
handle the additional traffic associated with the listing of P.M.-
settled options. The Exchange believes any additional traffic that may
be generated from the introduction of P.M.-settled options will be
manageable. The Exchange represents that it has in place adequate
surveillance procedures to monitor trading in these options thereby
helping to ensure the maintenance of a fair and orderly market.

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. P.M.-settled options would
be available for trading on the Exchange to all market participants.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change will increase the
variety of listed options to investors, and provide valuable hedge
tools to investors. The listing of P.M.-settled options will enhance
competition by providing investors with an additional investment
vehicle, through which investors can gain and hedge exposure to the
stocks that compose the applicable broad-based indexes. Additionally,
markets participants are welcome to become Members and trade at the
Exchange if they determine this proposed rule change has made the
Exchange more attractive or favorable. Further, this product could
offer a competitive alternative to other existing investment products
that seek to allow Members to gain broad market exposure. Finally, all
options exchanges are free to compete by listing and trading index
options that are P.M.-settled. Other exchanges currently have pilots
that permit P.M.-settled index options \23\ or Weeklys/EOMs.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.9, Interpretation and Policy .14
and Phlx Rule 1101A, Interpretation and Policy .05.
    \24\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.9(e); and Phlx Rule 1101A(b)(vii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change to permit transactions on the Exchange in
P.M.-settled XSP and Weekly/EOM options on their last trading day
between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern time (as opposed
to the normal trading hours for non-expiring P.M.-settled XSP and
Weekly/EOM options, which are from 9:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Eastern time)
will prevent potential pricing divergence that could occur between 4:00
p.m. and 4:15 p.m. on the final trading day in expiring P.M.-settled
XSP and Weekly/EOM options. Without closing expiring contracts at 4:00
p.m., it is foreseeable that Market-Makers would react by widening
spreads in order to compensate for the additional risk. Therefore, the
Exchange believes that, in order to mitigate potential investor
confusion and the potential for increased costs to investors, it is
appropriate to cease trading in the expiring P.M.-settled XSP and
Weekly/EOM contracts at 4:00 p.m. The Exchange does not believe the
proposed change will impact volatility on the underlying cash market at
the close on third Fridays. Further, the other options exchanges close
trading in certain options on the last trading day for certain
classes.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Cboe Options Rule 24.6, Interpretations and Policies
.01 (options with Quarterly Index Expirations), .03 (Cboe S&P 500
a.m./PM Basis options), .04 (P.M.-settled SPX options with third
Friday-of-the-month expiration and P.M.-settled XSP options), and
.05 (MSCI EAFE Index options).

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will relieve
any burden on, or otherwise promote, competition, as the rules are
substantially the same as those of other options exchanges, as noted
above.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    A. by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be 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-2018-037 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-2018-037. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2018-037, and should be
submitted on or before November 20, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-23625 Filed 10-29-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 10, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21242-21244]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08085]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30894; Amdt. No. 3529]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective April 10, 2013. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of April 10, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to:http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability_All SIAPs are available online free of charge. Visit
nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Programs
Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and
Sec.  97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This
amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure
and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and
timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only
specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to
SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions
existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule
have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency
action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all
these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30
days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs
and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure
before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the
public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for
making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore-- (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR part 97:

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 29, 2013.
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC
on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

Sec. Sec.  97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35  [Amended]

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC Date            State               City               Airport          FDC No.      FDC Date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-May-13.............  TX.............  Waco...............  McGregor Executive.       3/2024     03/15/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  TX.............  Waco...............  McGregor Executive.       3/2029     03/15/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  MA.............  Marshfield.........  Marshfield Muni--         3/2685     03/12/13  NDB RWY 24, Amdt 2
                                                              George Harlow
                                                              Field.

2-May-13.............  MA.............  Marshfield.........  Marshfield Muni--         3/2686     03/12/13  NDB RWY 6, Amdt 4B
                                                              George Harlow
                                                              Field.
2-May-13.............  PA.............  Altoona............  Altoona-Blair             3/2687     03/12/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 21, Amdt 7
                                                              County.
2-May-13.............  PA.............  Altoona............  Altoona-Blair             3/2688     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 1
                                                              County.
2-May-13.............  ME.............  Belfast............  Belfast Muni.......       3/2773     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Orig
2-May-13.............  ME.............  Belfast............  Belfast Muni.......       3/2774     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Orig
2-May-13.............  ME.............  Belfast............  Belfast Muni.......       3/2775     03/12/13  NDB RWY 15, Amdt 3A
2-May-13.............  FL.............  Stuart.............  Witham Field.......       3/2776     03/12/13  Takeoff Minimums and (Obstacle) DP, Amdt 2A
2-May-13.............  FL.............  Avon Park..........  Avon Park Executive       3/2780     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig
2-May-13.............  FL.............  Avon Park..........  Avon Park Executive       3/2781     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Orig
2-May-13.............  AZ.............  Safford............  Safford Rgnl.......       3/2866     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Orig
2-May-13.............  AZ.............  Safford............  Safford Rgnl.......       3/2867     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Orig-A
2-May-13.............  WA.............  Seattle............  Seattle-Tacoma Intl       3/3081     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 34L, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  WA.............  Seattle............  Seattle-Tacoma Intl       3/3109     03/12/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 34R, Amdt 2
2-May-13.............  MS.............  Greenwood..........  Greenwood-Leflore..       3/3110     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2
2-May-13.............  CA.............  Watsonville........  Watsonville Muni...       3/3115     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  IL.............  Lacon..............  Marshall County....       3/3173     03/12/13  VOR RWY 13, Amdt 2A
2-May-13.............  PA.............  Altoona............  Altoona-Blair             3/3234     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 3, Orig
                                                              County.
2-May-13.............  FL.............  St Petersburg......  Albert Whitted.....       3/3246     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 3
2-May-13.............  MA.............  Boston.............  General Edward            3/3850     03/12/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 33L, ILS RWY 33L (SA CAT I),
                                                              Lawrence Logan                                 ILS RWY 33L (CAT II), ILS RWY 33L (CAT
                                                              Intl.                                          III), Amdt 5
2-May-13.............  IL.............  Moline.............  Quad City Intl.....       3/3905     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  IL.............  Moline.............  Quad City Intl.....       3/3907     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  IL.............  Moline.............  Quad City Intl.....       3/3908     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  IL.............  Moline.............  Quad City Intl.....       3/3909     03/12/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  MA.............  Taunton............  Taunton Muni--King        3/4303     03/25/13  NDB RWY 30, Amdt 5
                                                              Field.
2-May-13.............  MA.............  Taunton............  Taunton Muni--King        3/4304     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 30, Orig
                                                              Field.
2-May-13.............  GA.............  Cartersville.......  Cartersville.......       3/4613     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  GA.............  Cartersville.......  Cartersville.......       3/4619     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 1
2-May-13.............  NC.............  Rockingham.........  Richmond County....       3/4648     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig
2-May-13.............  WA.............  Seattle............  Seattle-Tacoma Intl       3/4659     03/25/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 16L, ILS RWY 16L (SA CAT I),
                                                                                ILS RWY 16L (CAT II), ILS RWY 16L (CAT
                                                                                III), Amdt 5
2-May-13.............  WA.............  Seattle............  Seattle-Tacoma Intl       3/4660     03/25/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 16R, ILS RWY 16R (SA CAT I),
                                                                                ILS RWY 16R (CAT II), ILS RWY 16R (CAT
                                                                                III), Amdt 2
2-May-13.............  WA.............  Seattle............  Seattle-Tacoma Intl       3/4665     03/25/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 34C, ILS RWY 34C (SA CAT I),
                                                                                ILS RWY 34C (SA CAT II) Amdt 3
2-May-13.............  VA.............  Richmond...........  Richmond Intl......       3/4790     03/25/13  VOR RWY 34, Amdt 23A
2-May-13.............  IL.............  Decatur............  Decatur............       3/5005     03/25/13  ILS OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 13E
2-May-13.............  MN.............  Minneapolis........  Anoka County-Blaine       3/5150     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-B
                                                              Arpt(Janes Field).
2-May-13.............  MN.............  Minneapolis........  Anoka County-Blaine       3/5151     03/25/13  VOR RWY 9, Amdt 12
                                                              Arpt(Janes Field).
2-May-13.............  MN.............  Minneapolis........  Anoka County-Blaine       3/5152     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-B
                                                              Arpt(Janes Field).
2-May-13.............  KY.............  Marion.............  Marion-Crittenden         3/5436     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1
                                                              County.
2-May-13.............  KY.............  Marion.............  Marion-Crittenden         3/5437     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 1
                                                              County.
2-May-13.............  MS.............  Lexington..........  C. A. Moore........       3/5479     03/25/13  VOR/DME OR GPS A, Orig-A
2-May-13.............  CQ.............  Saipan Island......  Francisco C. Ada/         3/5542     03/15/13  NDB/DME RWY 25, Amdt 2C
                                                              Saipan Intl.
2-May-13.............  SC.............  Kingstree..........  Williamsburg Rgnl..       3/5631     03/25/13  NDB RWY 14, Amdt 4
2-May-13.............  AK.............  Barter Island LRRS.  Barter Island LRRS.       3/5854     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Orig-A
2-May-13.............  AK.............  Barter Island LRRS.  Barter Island LRRS.       3/5855     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Orig-A
2-May-13.............  CO.............  Lamar..............  Lamar Muni.........       3/5924     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1A
2-May-13.............  AZ.............  Flagstaff..........  Flagstaff Pulliam..       3/5930     03/25/13  RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Orig
2-May-13.............  CO.............  Lamar..............  Lamar Muni.........       3/7407     03/26/13  VOR RWY 18, Amdt 10B
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-08085 Filed 4-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


July 14, 2008

Joe Hogue

US EPA/OPPTS (7506-P)

1200 Pennsylvania Ave N.W.

Washington, D.C.  20460

Dear Mr. Hogue;

As a member of the Small Entity Representative regarding the impact of
potential new requirements to the Agency regarding Ag Worker Protection
Standards, I will respond to both the PowerPoint presentation and the
written questions that were presented to us.  I have the following
thoughts:

From PowerPoint Slides:

I understand the need for additional training for fumigation,
chemigation and aerial application, but don’t quite understand the
need for compound 1080 and M-44.  Those baits do not pose a risk for
human risk for application, whereas the other compounds have a acute
toxicity level that should require additional training.

Regarding minimum age, I would have to disagree with many of the Small
Entity Representatives (SER’s) that were on the conference call that
did not believe that a minimum age should be established.  I could
forsee a large PR nightmare if a worker were to get sick and it be
determined that a 14 year old was responsible for the sickness.  Rather,
I believe a minimum age of between 16-18 should be established for
commercial applicators.  I would also agree with the prescribed method
for testing, as outlined.

However, regarding private applicators, I believe a minimum age of 16 is
appropriate.  Regarding, ensuring competency of non-certified
applicators applying Restricted Use Pesticides (RUP) under the
supervision of a certified applicator, I agree with all the proposed
standards, but would want to see some leniency regarding possession of
the label.  We are allowed to have the label within a reasonable
distance of the application site, but not to be carried on the
applicator’s person.

Regarding improving protections to workers from Restricted Entry
Intervals (REI), oral and written notification in my mind is not
feasible.  You cannot foretell who will be entering a given treated
field, nor can you guard the field.  Rather, posting for only Restricted
Use Pesticides, or other materials that may have a high dermal exposure
makes sense.  In our table grapes, we can spray up 3 times per month for
approximately a 4 month period, and during our gibrellic acid spray
period, we are literally spraying every 4 days for about three weeks.
Such oral and written notifications would take up to 1 hour per each
spray performed to notify every possible person that COULD enter that
field before the end of the REI.  As a small business employer, I do not
have the time to inform in such a manner  Rather, place the requirement
where it belongs, on Restricted Use Pesticides instead, and place a
reasonable posting requirement on that field….at the very least on
each possible entry point and on each corner…..no more than that.

Also requiring a shower and changing area seems unreasonable.  I do not
have a shower facility on my properties, but rather a metal shed, hoses
and electricity.  Placing a requirement for a shower would be an undue
requirement for me and could cost me in the tens of $1,000 for each
ranch site that I have, especially those that do not have water or
electricity nearby.  Rather, the use of PPE for handlers, mixer loaders
would make more sense.  We give our handlers a Tyvek suit when they mix
and load.

Cholinesterase testing restrictions were not very clear.  Therefore, it
was somewhat difficult to address.  Regarding eliminating closed
cabs…..this to me appears to be the best protection against drift.  If
the issue is the filtration system, encourage the manufacturers to
develop new, better filters that provide some protection, or require
some filter overwrap that provides the needed protection, but please do
not eliminate closed cabs.  It is the cheapest, quickest way to protect
those who apply materials.

From Written questions:

Applying RUP’s under supervision: yes, a supervisor should be somewhat
close, but I am more concerned with the ability to communicate when
there is a problem.  Requiring some form of communication, I believe, is
more cost effective for small business, as most if not all would have
two-ways or cell phones.  I do not think that would be an additional
burden or cost.

The current 5 day grace period and its elimination is not really a cost
issue, but more of timeliness issue.  For me, the grace period allows me
flexibility if I am busy on the first couple of days to provide me more
time to complete the training.  Again, a small business person is
handling multiple tasks.  Training every five years makes sense, but if
there is concern with this, then require a written document showing that
training has taken place rather than increasing the frequency.
Specific, documented training should be for Restricted Use Pesticides,
not on all product use.  I am more concerned with appropriate training
where the need dictates rather than just training for training sake.

I’ve already addressed posting, but to respond to the written
question, posting could be quite difficult and time consuming.  In a
given year, I could spray my table grape vineyard up to 15 times
(herbicide, foliar sprays, pesticides, fungicides, fertilizers).  As I
mentioned above, I could do 5-6 sprays within a three week period.
Posting would take up a very large chunk of my time.  I would rather
post for RUP’s.  The only time I expect early reentry is for
irrigation, which would be opening valves at the end of the row, for
about 1 hour per day over a 2 day irrigation period.  Minimal contact
with foliage occurs during this time.

A No-Entry zone around the field would have a disastrous impact upon us.
 We have shared avenues with other producers, who are growing different
crops, with different spray schedules…..this is impossible to accept.

Regarding MSDS’s, unless you subscribe to a service, it is very
difficult to obtain them.  I have asked for them from my pesticide
dealer, and they don’t always have them, and trying to get them from
the manufacturer is very difficult for a small business.  They just
don’t have the manpower to get us what we need and we don’t have the
clout (because of our low volume purchasing) to get their attention.

I hope my comments have been helpful.  Please let me know if I can
answer and questions.

Sincerely,

Richard Matoian