			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

       Issued by the Department of Transportation on June 24, 2002

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2002-12159

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  European Aviation Air Charter Limited					Date Filed:  April
22, 2002

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. 41301 to conduct charter
foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between the
United Kingdom and the United States, and other charters pursuant to 14
CFR 212 of the Department’s regulations.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representative:  Wayne Vance<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved									Action date:  June 24, 2002

Effective dates of authority granted:  June 24, 2002  -  June 24, 2003

Basis for approval:  The authority is provided for in the Air Services
Agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland, and the applicant has been properly
designated and licensed by the United Kingdom to operate the requested
services.  We found the carrier operationally and financially qualified
to conduct the proposed services, and substantially owned and
effectively controlled by citizens of the United Kingdom.  We made these
findings based on the May 25, 1989, U.S.-U.K. Exchange of Notes under
which the aviation authorities of each country will normally accept, on
a reciprocal basis, the other’s fitness and citizenship determinations
in regard to carriers seeking authority to conduct certain bilateral
services, including the requested authority.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

 X Standard exemption conditions (attached)        __ Foreign air
carrier permit conditions (Order   -  -  )

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

												        Appendix A

FOREIGN AIR CARRIER CONDITIONS OF AUTHORITY

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the holder shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are:

   (a)  based on its operations in international air transportation
that, according to the contract of carriage, include a point in the
United States as a point of origin, point of destination, or agreed
stopping place, or for which the contract of carriage was purchased in
the United States; or

   (b)  based on a claim under any international agreement or treaty
cognizable in any court or other tribunal of the United States.

In this condition, the term "international air transportation" means
"international transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention,
except that all States shall be considered to be High Contracting
Parties for the purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code (formerly the
Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended).

U.S. Department of Transportation

Office of the Secretary of Transportation									        (41301/40109)
6/2002


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 58 (Monday, March 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18131-18132]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06184]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 4108-019]

City of St. Cloud; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With
the Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Licensing and
Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 4108-019.
    c. Date Filed: December 15, 2022.
    d. Applicant: City of St. Cloud.
    e. Name of Project: St. Cloud Hydroelectric Project (St. Cloud
Project or project).
    f. Location: The project is located on the Mississippi River
approximately 75 miles northwest of St. Paul, Minnesota in the City of
St. Cloud, Stearns and Sherburne Counties, Minnesota. The project does
not occupy any federal or Tribal lands.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Ms. Tracy Hodel, City of St. Cloud--Public
Services Director, 1201 7th Street South, St. Cloud, MN 56301;
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Nicholas Ettema at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
[email protected].
    j. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    k. Project Description: The project consists of: (1) an
approximately 3.5-mile-long, 294-surface-acre reservoir with a storage
capacity of 2,254 acre-feet at a normal pool elevation of 981.0 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; (2) a 420-foot-long earthen
embankment that abuts the east side of the dam; (3) a 550-foot-long,
19.5-foot-high concrete gravity dam and main spillway topped with
inflatable crest gates; (4) a 50-foot-wide spillway containing two 20-
foot-wide Tainter gates; (5) a 70-foot-wide, 122-foot-long reinforced
concrete powerhouse containing two turbine-generator units with a total
installed generating capacity of 8.64 megawatts and with an average
annual generation of 51,500 megawatt-hours; (6) a 200-foot-long earthen
embankment that abuts the west side of the dam; (7) an underground 180-
foot-long, 5-kilovolt (kV) transmission line connecting the powerhouse
to a step-up transformer; (8) a 5/34.5-kV step-up transformer; (9) an
underground 900-foot-long, 34.5-kV transmission line connecting the
step-up transformer to a non-project substation; and (10) appurtenant
facilities. Average annual generation at the St. Cloud Project was
51,500 MW-hours from 2014 through 2021. City of St. Cloud is not
proposing any new project facilities or changes to the operation of the
project.
    l. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's
website at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the
docket number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field, to access the document (P-4108). For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected], or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or (202)
502-8659 (TTY).
    m. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following preliminary schedule. Revisions to the schedule will
be made as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Deficiency Letter (if necessary)..  April 2023.
Request Additional Information (if        May 2023.
 necessary).
Notice of Acceptance/Notice of Ready for  October 2023.
 Environmental Analysis.
Filing of recommendations, preliminary    December 2023.
 terms and conditions, and preliminary
 fishway prescriptions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    o. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: March 15, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-06184 Filed 3-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 59 (Thursday, March 27, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17088-17091]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06789]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0775; FRL-9906-72-OAR]
RIN 2060-AR92

Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile
Organic Compounds--Exclusion of 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
revise the regulatory definition of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). This proposed revision would add 2-
amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (also known as AMP; CAS number 124-68-5) to
the list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOCs
on the basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to
tropospheric ozone formation. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section
of this Federal Register, we are making this same amendment as a direct
final rule without a prior proposed rule. If we receive no adverse
comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 27, 2014.
    Public Hearing: If anyone contacts the EPA requesting a public
hearing concerning the proposed regulation by April 11, 2014, we will
hold a public hearing on April 28, 2014. If a public hearing is held,
it will be held at 10 a.m. at Building C on the EPA campus in Research
Triangle Park, NC, or at an alternate site nearby. Please refer to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on the comment
period and the public hearing.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0775, by one of the following methods:
     Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments:
www.regulations.gov.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0775.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2013-0775.
     Mail: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0775, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., William Jefferson
Clinton West Building, Room: 3334, Mail Code: 28221T, Washington, DC
20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0775. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2013-0775. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov,
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should
avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption and be free
of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's
public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2013-0775, EPA/DC, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, Mail Code C539-07, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: (919)
541-5315; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
    D. How can I find information about a possible public hearing?
II. Proposed Rule
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations

I. General Information

A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    We are publishing a direct final rule in the ``Rules and
Regulations'' section of this Federal Register because we view this
action as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comment.

B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this proposal will also be available on the World Wide Web. Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of this action will be
posted on the EPA's Web site www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/new/html.

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

    Submitting CBI: Do not submit this information to the EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

D. How can I find information about a possible public hearing?

    Public Hearing: If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to present
oral testimony at a public hearing concerning the proposed regulation
by April 11, 2014, we will hold a public hearing on April 28, 2014. If
a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10 a.m. at Building C on
the EPA campus in Research Triangle Park, NC, or at an alternate site
nearby. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony must contact
Sherry Russell, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Health
and Environmental Impacts Division, Mail Code C504-02, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: (919)
541-2464; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>no later than April
11, 2014. Persons interested in attending the public hearing if one is
held must also call Ms. Russell to verify the time, date and location
of the hearing. If no one contacts Ms. Russell by April 11, 2014 with a
request to present oral testimony at the hearing, we will cancel the
hearing. To find out if a hearing has been requested, please check the
EPA's Web site www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/new/html for further information,
or contact Ms. Sherry Russell at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
II. Proposed Rule

    This proposed action would revise the EPA's regulatory definition
of VOCs for purposes of preparing SIPs to attain the NAAQS for ozone
under title I of the CAA, by adding AMP to the list of compounds
excluded from the regulatory definition of VOCs on the basis that this
compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone
formation.\1\ We have explained our reasons for this action in the
preamble to the direct final rule. The regulatory text for the proposal
is identical to that for the direct final rule published in the ``Rules
and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register. For further
supplementary information, the detailed rationale for the proposal and
the regulatory revisions, see the direct final rule published under
``Rules and Regulations'' of this Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP) is also known as
Isobutanolamine and CAS No. 124-68-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action
on this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw
the direct final rule, and take further action on this proposed rule.
We would address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based
on this proposed rule.
    We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
For further

information, please see the information in the ADDRESSES section of
this document.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). It does not contain any
recordkeeping or reporting requirement.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this notice on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that is a
small industrial entity as defined in the U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) size standards. (See 13 CFR 121.); (2) A
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district or special district with a population of less than
50,000; and (3) A small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on all of the small entities subject to the rule. This proposed rule
would remove AMP from the regulatory definition of VOCs and thereby
relieve users of the compound from requirements to control emissions of
the compound. We have therefore concluded that today's proposed rule
would relieve regulatory burden for all affected small entities. We
continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule
on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such
impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.
The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal
governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This proposed rule
would remove AMP from the regulatory definition of VOCs and thereby
relieve users of the compound from requirements to control emissions of
the compound.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This proposed rule would remove AMP
from the regulatory definition of VOCs and thereby relieve users of the
compound from requirements to control emissions of the compound. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. In the spirit of
Executive Order 13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to promote
communications between the EPA and state and local governments, the EPA
specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule from state and
local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). It would not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
This proposed rule would remove AMP from the regulatory definition of
VOCs and thereby relieve users of the compound from requirements to
control emissions of the compound. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) because it is not economically significant as defined in EO
12866. While this proposed rule is not subject to the Executive Order,
the EPA has reason to believe that at higher concentrations ozone has a
disproportionate effect on active children who play outdoors (62 FR
38856; 38859, July 18, 1997). The EPA has not identified any specific
studies on whether or to what extent AMP may affect children's health.
The public is invited to submit comments or identify peer-reviewed
studies and data, of which the EPA may not be aware, that assess
results of early life exposure to the chemical compound herein.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution
or use of energy. This proposed rule would remove AMP from the
regulatory definition of VOCs and thereby relieve users of the compound
from requirements to control its emissions.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d), (15 U.S.C.
272 note) directs the EPA to use voluntary

consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This rulemaking does not
involve technical standards. Therefore, the EPA has not considered the
use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it would not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 21, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-06789 Filed 3-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16732-16733]
[DOCID:fr28mr08-141]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549-0213.
Extension:
    Rule 15c2-11; OMB Control No. 3235-0202; SEC File No. 270-196.

    `Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
     Rule 15c2-11 (17 CFR 240.15c2-11)--Initiation or
resumption of quotations without specific information
    On September 13, 1971, effective December 13, 1971 (see 36 FR
18641, September 18, 1971), the Commission adopted Rule 15c2-11 (``Rule
15c2-11'' or ``Rule'') under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78a et seq.) to regulate the initiation or resumption of
quotations in a quotation medium by a broker-dealer for over-the-
counter (``OTC'') securities. The Rule was designed primarily to
prevent certain manipulative and fraudulent trading schemes that had
arisen in connection with the distribution and trading of unregistered
securities issued by shell companies or other companies having
outstanding but infrequently traded securities. Subject to certain
exceptions, the Rule prohibits brokers-dealers from publishing a
quotation for a security, or submitting a quotation for publication, in
a quotation medium unless they have reviewed specified information
concerning the security and the issuer.
    Based on information provided by Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA''), in the 2006 calendar year, FINRA received
approximately 970 applications from broker-dealers to initiate or
resume publication of covered OTC securities in the OTC Bulletin Board
and/or the Pink Sheets or other quotation mediums. We estimate that (i)
80% of the covered OTC securities were issued by reporting issuers,
while the other 20% were issued by non-reporting issuers, and (ii) it
will take a broker-dealer about 4 hours to review, record and retain
the information pertaining to a reporting issuer, and about 8 hours to
review, record and retain the information pertaining to a non-reporting
issuer.
    We therefore estimate that broker-dealers who initiate or resume
publication of quotations for covered OTC securities of reporting
issuers will require 3,104 hours (970 x 80% x 4) to review, record and
retain the information required by the Rule. We estimate that broker-
dealers who initiate or resume publication of quotations for covered
OTC securities of non-reporting issuers will require 1,552 hours (970 x
20% x 8) to review, record and retain the information required by the
Rule. Thus, we estimate the total annual burden hours for broker-
dealers to initiate or resume publication of quotations of covered OTC
securities to be 4,656 hours (3,104 + 1,552). The Commission believes
that these 4,656

hours would be borne by staff working at a rate of $40 per hour.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Appendix C, SIFMA Office Salaries Data--Sept. 2007 for
General Clerk national hourly rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subject to certain exceptions, the Rule prohibits brokers-dealers
from publishing a quotation for a security, or submitting a quotation
for publication, in a quotation medium unless they have reviewed
specified information concerning the security and the issuer. The
broker-dealer must also make the information reasonably available upon
request to any person expressing an interest in a proposed transaction
in the security with such broker or dealer. The collection of
information that is submitted to FINRA for review and approval is
currently not available to the public from FINRA.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Comments should be directed to: R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted within
60 days of this notice.

    Dated: March 24, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-6423 Filed 3-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54205-54210]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22010]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-87209; File No. SR-PEARL-2019-26]

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

October 3, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 20, 2019, MIAX PEARL, LLC (``MIAX PEARL'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') a
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX PEARL Fee
Schedule (the ``Fee Schedule'') to establish Application Programming
Interface (``API'') Testing and Certification fees.
    The Exchange previously filed to establish API Testing and
Certification fees on June 28, 2019 (SR-PEARL-2019-22).\3\ That filing
was withdrawn on August 27, 2019. It is replaced with the current
filing (SR-PEARL-2019-26).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 86363 (July 12,
2019), 84 FR 34445 (July 18, 2019) (SR-PEARL-2019-22) (the ``Second
Proposed Rule Change'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings/pearl at MIAX
PEARL's principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference
Room.

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

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

the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to establish API
Testing and Certification fees for Members \4\ and non-Members. MIAX
PEARL commenced operations as a national securities exchange registered
under Section 6 of the Act \5\ on February 6, 2017.\6\ The Exchange
adopted its transaction fees and certain of its non-transaction fees in
its filing SR-PEARL-2017-10.\7\ In that filing, the Exchange expressly
waived API Testing and Certification fees for Members and non-Members
to provide an incentive to prospective Members and non-Members to
engage in early API testing and certification to be able to utilize the
services of MIAX PEARL as soon as possible. At that time, the Exchange
waived API Testing and Certification fees for the Waiver Period \8\ and
stated that it would provide notice to market participants when the
Exchange intended to terminate the Waiver Period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Member'' means an individual or organization that is
registered with the Exchange pursuant to Chapter II of the Exchange
Rules for purposes of trading on the Exchange as an ``Electronic
Exchange Member'' or ``Market Maker.'' Members are deemed
``members'' under the Exchange Act. See Exchange Rule 100.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79543 (December 13,
2016), 81 FR 92901 (December 20, 2016) (File No. 10-227) (order
approving application of MIAX PEARL, LLC for registration as a
national securities exchange).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 80061 (February 17,
2017), 82 FR 11676 (February 24, 2017) (SR-PEARL-2017-10).
    \8\ ``Waiver Period'' means, for each applicable fee, the period
of time from the initial effective date of the MIAX PEARL Fee
Schedule until such time that the Exchange has an effective fee
filing establishing the applicable fee. The Exchange will issue a
Regulatory Circular announcing the establishment of an applicable
fee that was subject to a Waiver Period at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the termination of the Waiver Period and effective date of
any such applicable fee. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 14, 2019, the Exchange issued a Regulatory Circular which
announced that the Exchange would terminate the Waiver Period for API
Testing and Certification fees, among other non-transaction fees,
beginning on April 1, 2019.\9\ The Exchange initially filed the
proposal to adopt API Testing and Certification fees, certain other
non-transaction fees, and to terminate the three-month New Member Non-
Transaction Fee Waiver \10\ on March 27, 2019, designating the proposed
fees effective April 1, 2019.\11\ The First Proposed Rule Change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on April 12, 2019.\12\
The proposed fees remained in effect until the Exchange withdrew the
First Proposed Rule Change on May 20, 2019.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See MIAX PEARL Regulatory Circular 2019-09 available at
https://www.miaxoptions.com/sites/default/files/circular-files/MIAX_PEARL_RC_2019_09.pdf.
    \10\ ``New Member Non-Transaction Fee Waiver'' means the waiver
of certain non-transaction fees, as explicitly set forth in specific
sections of the Fee Schedule, for a new Member of the Exchange, for
the waiver period. For purposes of this definition, the waiver
period consists of the calendar month the new Member is credentialed
to use the System in the production environment following approval
as a new Member of the Exchange and the two (2) subsequent calendar
months thereafter. For purposes of this definition, a new Member
shall mean any Member who has not previously been approved as a
Member of the Exchange. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85541 (April 8,
2019), 84 FR 14983 (April 12, 2019) (SR-PEARL-2019-12) (the ``First
Proposed Rule Change'').
    \12\ See id.
    \13\ See Letter from Gregory P. Ziegler, AVP and Senior
Associate Counsel, MIAX PEARL, LLC, to Vanessa Countryman, Acting
Secretary, Commission, dated May 17, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange refiled the proposal on June 28, 2019, designating the
proposed fees effective July 1, 2019.\14\ The Second Proposed Rule
Change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July 18,
2019.\15\ The proposed fee changes remained in effect until the
Exchange withdrew the Second Proposed Rule Change on August 27,
2019.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra note 3.
    \15\ See id.
    \16\ See Letter from Joseph Ferraro, SVP and Deputy General
Counsel, MIAX PEARL, LLC, to Vanessa Countryman, Acting Secretary,
Commission, dated August 26, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is now re-filing the proposal to establish API Testing
and Certification fees for Members and non-Members. The Exchange will
file separate proposals to establish certain other non-transaction fees
and to terminate the New Member Non-Transaction Fee Waiver and remove
the definitions for the Waiver Period and New Member Non-Transaction
Fee Waiver from the Fee Schedule.
API Testing and Certification Fees for Members
    The Exchange proposes to adopt an API Testing and Certification fee
for Members. An API makes it possible for Member software to
communicate with MIAX PEARL software applications, and is subject to
Member testing with, and certification by, MIAX PEARL. API testing and
certification includes, for Electronic Exchange Members \17\
(``EEMs''), testing all available order types, new order entry, order
management, order throughput and mass order cancellation. For Market
Makers,\18\ API testing and certification also includes testing of all
available quote types, quote throughput, quote management and
cancellation, Aggregate Risk Manager settings and triggers, and
confirmation of quotes within the trading engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ ``Electronic Exchange Member'' or ``EEM'' means the holder
of a Trading Permit who is a Member representing as agent Public
Customer Orders or Non-Customer Orders on the Exchange and those
non-Market Maker Members conducting proprietary trading. Electronic
Exchange Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \18\ ``Market Maker'' means a Member registered with the
Exchange for the purpose of making markets in options contracts
traded on the Exchange and that is vested with the rights and
responsibilities specified in Chapter VI of Exchange Rules. See
Exchange Rule 100. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The API Testing and Certification fees for Members are based upon
the type of interface that the Member has been credentialed to use. The
Exchange proposes to adopt an API testing and certification fee for
Members (i) initially per API for FIX,\19\ MEO,\20\ FXD \21\ and CTD
\22\ in the month the Member has been credentialed to use one or more
ports in the production environment for the tested API, and (ii) each
time a Member initiates a change to its system that requires testing
and certification. The Exchange also proposes that API Testing and
Certification fees will not be assessed in situations where the

Exchange initiates a mandatory change to the Exchange's System \23\
that requires testing and certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ ``FIX Interface'' means the Financial Information Exchange
interface for certain order types as set forth in Exchange Rule 516.
See Exchange Rule 100. See the Definitions Section of the Fee
Schedule.
    \20\ ``MEO Interface'' means a binary order interface for
certain order types as set forth in Rule 516 into the MIAX PEARL
System. See Exchange Rule 100. See the Definitions Section of the
Fee Schedule.
    \21\ ``FXD Interface'' or ``FIX Drop Copy Port'' means a
messaging interface that provides a copy of real-time trade
execution, trade correction and trade cancellation information to
FIX Drop Copy Port users who subscribe to the service. FXD Port
users are those users who are designated by an EEM to receive the
information and the information is restricted for use by the EEM
only. See the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \22\ ``CTD Port'' or ``Clearing Trade Drop Port'' provides an
Exchange Member with a real-time clearing trade updates. The updates
include the Member's clearing trade messages on a low latency, real-
time basis. The trade messages are routed to a Member's connection
containing certain information. The information includes, among
other things, the following: (i) Trade date and time; (ii) symbol
information; (iii) trade price/size information; (iv) Member type
(for example, and without limitation, Market Maker, Electronic
Exchange Member, Broker-Dealer); and (v) Exchange MPID for each side
of the transaction, including Clearing Member MPID. See the
Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \23\ The term ``System'' means the automated trading system used
by the Exchange for the trading of securities. See Exchange Rule
100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any Member can select any type of interface (FIX Interface, MEO
Interface, FXD Interface, and/or the CTD Port) to test and certify. The
Exchange proposes the following fees: Each Member who uses the FIX
Interface to connect to the System will be assessed an API Testing and
Certification fee of $1,000; each Member who uses the MEO Interface to
connect to the System will be assessed an API Testing and Certification
fee of $1,500; each Member who uses the FXD Interface to connect to the
system will be assessed an API Testing and Certification fee of $500;
and each Member who uses the CTD Port to connect to the system will be
assessed an API Testing and Certification fee of $500.
    Below is the proposed fee table for API Testing and Certification
fees for Members:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            API testing
                                                                and
                    Type of interface                      certification
                                                                fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIX.....................................................       $1,000.00
MEO.....................................................        1,500.00
FXD.....................................................          500.00
CTD.....................................................          500.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    API Testing and Certification Fees will be assessed (i) initially
per API for FIX, MEO, FXD and CTD in the month the Member has been
credentialed to use one or more ports in the production environment for
the tested API, and (ii) each time a Member initiates a change to its
system that requires testing and certification. API Testing and
Certification Fees will not be assessed in situations where the
Exchange initiates a mandatory change to the Exchange's system that
requires testing and certification.
API Testing and Certification Fee for Non-Members
    The Exchange proposes to adopt an API Testing and Certification fee
for Third Party Vendors,\24\ Service Bureaus \25\ and other non-Members
(such as clearing firms) (i) initially per API for FIX, MEO, FXD, and
CTD in the month the non-Member has been credentialed to use one or
more ports in the production environment for the tested API, and (ii)
each time a Third Party Vendor, Service Bureau, or other non-Member
initiates a change to its system that requires testing and
certification. The Exchange also proposes that API Testing and
Certification fees will not be assessed to non-Members in situations
where the Exchange initiates a mandatory change to the Exchange's
System that requires testing and certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Third party vendors are subscribers of MIAX PEARL's market
and other data feeds, which they in turn use for redistribution
purposes. Third party vendors do not provide connectivity and
therefore are not subject to Network testing and certification. See
the Definitions Section of the Fee Schedule.
    \25\ ``Service Bureau'' means a technology provider that offers
and supplies technology and technology services to a trading firm
that does not have its own proprietary system. See the Definitions
Section of the Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to adopt API Testing and Certification fees
for non-Members based upon the type of interface used by the non-Member
to connect to the Exchange--the FIX Interface, the MEO Interface, the
FXD Interface, and/or the CTD Port. Any non-Member can select any type
of interface (FIX Interface, MEO Interface, FXD Interface, and/or the
CTD Port) to test and certify. As with Members, an API makes it
possible for Third Party Vendors' and Service Bureaus' software to
communicate with MIAX PEARL's software applications, and is subject to
testing with, and certification by, MIAX PEARL. The higher proposed fee
charged to non-Members reflects the greater amount of time spent by
MIAX PEARL employees testing and certifying non-Members. It has been
MIAX PEARL's experience that Member testing takes less time than non-
Member testing because Members have more experience testing these
systems with exchanges, resulting in generally fewer questions and
issues arising during the testing and certification process. Also,
because Third Party Vendors and Service Bureaus are redistributing data
and reselling services to other Members and market participants, the
number and types of scenarios that need to be tested are more numerous
and complex than those tested and certified for a single Member.
    The Exchange proposes the following fees: each non-Member who uses
the FIX Interface to connect to the System will be assessed an API
Testing and Certification fee of $1,200; each non-Member who uses the
MEO Interface to connect to the System will be assessed an API Testing
and Certification fee of $2,000; each non-Member who uses the FXD
Interface to connect to the system will be assessed an API Testing and
Certification fee of $600; and each non-Member who uses the CTD Port to
connect to the system will be assessed an API Testing and Certification
fee of $600.
    Below is the proposed fee table for API Testing and Certification
fees for non-Members:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            API testing
                                                                and
                   Type of  interface                      certification
                                                                fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIX.....................................................       $1,200.00
MEO.....................................................        2,000.00
FXD.....................................................          600.00
CTD.....................................................          600.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    API Testing and Certification Fees for Third Party Vendors, Service
Bureaus and other non-Members will be assessed (i) initially per API
for FIX, MEO, FXD, and CTD in the month the non-Member has been
credentialed to use one or more ports in the production environment for
the tested API, and (ii) each time a Third Party Vendor, Service
Bureau, or other non-Member initiates a change to its system that
requires testing and certification. API Testing and Certification Fees
will not be assessed in situations where the Exchange initiates a
mandatory change to the Exchange's system that requires testing and
certification.
    The Exchange believes it is necessary to charge an API Testing and
Certification fee to Members and non-Members because of the time and
resources spent to ensure that Member and non-Member APIs function
correctly to prevent any System malfunction. Further, the Exchange
believes the price differential in API Testing and Certification fees
for Members and non-Members is not unfairly discriminatory because, in
the Exchange's experience, Member testing takes less time than non-
Member testing as Members have more experience testing these systems
with exchanges, resulting generally in fewer questions and issues
arising during the testing and certification process.
    The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for
competition over regulatory intervention in determining prices,
products, and services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS,
the Commission highlighted the importance of market forces in
determining prices and SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current
regulation of the market system ``has been remarkably successful in
promoting market competition in its broader forms that are most
important to investors and listed companies.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are currently 16 registered options exchanges competing for
order flow. Based on publicly-available information, and excluding
index-based options, no single exchange has more

than approximately 16% market share.\27\ Therefore, no exchange
possesses significant pricing power. More specifically, as of September
9, 2019, the Exchange had an approximately 5.30% market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed equity and exchange traded fund
(``ETF'') options.\28\ The Exchange believes that the ever-shifting
market share among the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that
market participants can discontinue or reduce use of certain categories
of products, or shift order flow, in response to non-transaction and
transaction fee changes. For example, on September 28, 2018, the
Exchange filed with the Commission a proposal to decrease a transaction
fee for certain types of orders (which fee was to be effective October
1, 2018).\29\ The Exchange experienced an increase in total market
share in the month of October 2018, after the proposal went into
effect. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the October 1, 2018 fee
change, decreasing a transaction fee, may have contributed to the
increase in the Exchange's market share and, as such, the Exchange
believes competitive forces constrain MIAX PEARL's, and other options
exchanges, ability to set non-transaction and transaction fees and
market participants can shift order flow based on fee changes
instituted by the exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') publishes
options and futures volume in a variety of formats, including daily
and monthly volume by exchange, available here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
    \28\ See id.
    \29\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84387 (October 9,
2018), 83 FR 52039 (October 15, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, as there are currently 16 registered options exchanges
competing for order flow with no single exchange accounting for more
than approximately 16% of market share,\30\ the Exchange cannot predict
with certainty whether any market participant is planning to utilize
any of the services of the Exchange such that API testing and
certification would be required, in which the Member or non-Member
would be subject to the proposed API Testing and Certification fees
established herein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See supra note 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \31\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \32\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange also believes the proposal furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers and dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \32\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4) and (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes its proposal to adopt API Testing and
Certification fees provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable
dues and fees and is not unfairly discriminatory for the following
reasons. First, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive market.
The Commission has repeatedly expressed its preference for competition
over regulatory intervention in determining prices, products, and
services in the securities markets. In Regulation NMS, the Commission
highlighted the importance of market forces in determining prices and
SRO revenues and, also, recognized that current regulation of the
market system ``has been remarkably successful in promoting market
competition in its broader forms that are most important to investors
and listed companies.'' \33\ There are currently 16 registered options
exchanges competing for order flow. Based on publicly-available
information, and excluding index-based options, no single exchange has
more than approximately 16% of the market share of executed volume of
multiply-listed equity and ETF options.\34\ Therefore, no exchange
possesses significant pricing power. More specifically, as of September
9, 2019, the Exchange had approximately a 5.30% market share of
executed volume of multiply-listed equity and ETF options.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51808 (June 9,
2005), 70 FR 37496 (June 29, 2005).
    \34\ The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') publishes
options and futures volume in a variety of formats, including daily
and monthly volume by exchange, available here: https://www.theocc.com/market-data/volume/default.jsp.
    \35\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also believes that the ever-shifting market share
among the exchanges from month to month demonstrates that market
participants can discontinue or reduce use of certain categories of
products, or shift order flow, in response to non-transaction and
transaction fee changes. For example, on September 28, 2018, the
Exchange filed with the Commission a proposal to decrease a transaction
fee for certain types of orders (which fee was to be effective October
1, 2018).\36\ The Exchange experienced an increase in total market
share in the month of October 2018, after the proposal went into
effect. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that the October 1, 2018 fee
change, decreasing a transaction fee, may have contributed to the
increase in the Exchange's market share and, as such, the Exchange
believes competitive forces constrain MIAX PEARL's, and other options
exchanges, ability to set non-transaction and transaction fees and
market participants can shift order flow based on fee changes
instituted by the exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84387 (October 9,
2018), 83 FR 52039 (October 15, 2018) (SR-PEARL-2018-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the Exchange believes its proposal to adopt API Testing and
Certification fees for Member and non-Members is an equitable
allocation of reasonable dues and fees pursuant to Section 6(b)(4) of
the Act \37\ because of the time and resources spent to ensure that
Member and non-Member APIs function correctly to prevent any System
malfunction. Further, the Exchange believes the price differential in
API Testing and Certification fees for Members and non-Members is not
unfairly discriminatory because, in the Exchange's experience, Member
testing utilizes less Exchange resources and employee time than non-
Member testing as Members have more experience testing these systems
with exchanges, resulting generally in fewer questions and issues
arising during the testing and certification process. Also, with
respect to API testing and certification, because Third Party Vendors
and Service Bureaus are redistributing data and reselling services to
other Members and market participants the number and types of scenarios
that need to be tested are more numerous and complex than those tested
and certified for Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Exchange no longer believes it is necessary to
waive API Testing and Certification fees to attract market participants
to the MIAX PEARL market since this market is now established and MIAX
PEARL no longer needs to rely on such waivers to attract market
participants. The Exchange believes its proposed API Testing and
Certification fees are reasonable and well within the range of non-
transaction fees assessed among other exchanges, including the
Exchange's affiliate, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC
(``MIAX).\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See the MIAX Options Fee Schedule, Section (4)a and (4)b.

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

    Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be
excessive. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust
its fees for services and products, in addition to order flow, to
remain competitive with other exchanges. The Exchange believes that the
proposed changes reflect this competitive environment.

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

    MIAX PEARL does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Intra-Market Competition
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
place certain market participants at the Exchange at a relative
disadvantage compared to other market participants or affect the
ability of such market participants to compete. Unilateral action by
MIAX PEARL in the assessment of certain non-transaction fees for
services provided to its Members and others using its facilities will
not have an impact on competition. As a more recent entrant in the
already highly competitive environment for equity options trading, MIAX
PEARL does not have the market power necessary to set prices for
services that are unreasonable or unfairly discriminatory in violation
of the Act. MIAX PEARL's proposed API Testing and Certification fee
levels, as described herein, are comparable to fee levels charged by
other options exchanges for the same or similar services, including
those fees assessed by the Exchange's affiliate, MIAX.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See the MIAX Options Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed API Testing and
Certification fees do not place certain market participants at a
relative disadvantage to other market participants because the fees do
not apply unequally to different size market participants, but instead
would allow the Exchange charge for the time and resource necessary for
API testing and certification for Members and non-Members to ensure
proper functioning of all available order types, new order entry, order
management, order throughput and mass order cancellation (as well as,
for Market Makers, all available quote types, quote throughput, quote
management and cancellation, Aggregate Risk Manager settings and
triggers, and confirmation of quotes within the trading engines).
Accordingly, the proposed API Testing and Certification fees do not
favor certain categories of market participants in a manner that would
impose a burden on competition.
Inter-Market Competition
    The Exchange believes the proposed API Testing and Certification
fees do not place an undue burden on competition on other SROs that is
not necessary or appropriate. The Exchange operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor one
of the 16 competing options venues if they deem fee levels at a
particular venue to be excessive.\40\ Based on publicly-available
information, and excluding index-based options, no single exchange has
more than 16% market share. Therefore, no exchange possesses
significant pricing power in the execution of multiply-listed equity
and ETF options order flow. As of September 9, 2019, the Exchange had
an approximately 5.30% market share \41\ and the Exchange believes that
the ever-shifting market share among exchanges from month to month
demonstrates that market participants can discontinue or reduce use of
certain categories of products, or shift order flow, in response to fee
changes. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually adjust
its fees and fee waivers to remain competitive with other exchanges and
to attract order flow to the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See supra note 34.
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,\42\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \43\ thereunder.
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change,
the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such
action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether
the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \43\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-PEARL-2019-26 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PEARL-2019-26. 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-PEARL-2019-26 and should be submitted on
or before October 30, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-22010 Filed 10-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 14, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2003-16803

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  VOLGA-DNEPR J.S. CARGO AIRLINE
   Amendment Filed:  January 12, 2004

Relief requested:  Amend exemption from 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g),
granted December 31, 2003, and effective through January 11, 2004,
permitting the applicant to operate a one-way, cargo charter flight from
Philadelphia to Moffet Field, using its AN-124-100 aircraft, carrying a
Lockheed Martin Space Systems satellite, to extend the effectiveness of
that authority through January 16, 2004.  The applicant stated that
Lockheed Martin needed to extend the carriage date beyond January 11 due
to a production delay.

Applicant representative:  Glenn P. Wicks,<PHONE_NUMBER>         DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  Volga-Dnepr had served its initial application on
those U.S. carriers operating large all-cargo aircraft.  Each carrier
indicated that it did not have aircraft available to conduct the
proposed operations and that it had no comment or did not oppose grant
of the requested authority.

Statutory Standards:  Under 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g), we may authorize
a foreign air carrier to carry commercial traffic between U.S. points
(i.e., cabotage traffic) under limited circumstances.  Specifically, we
must find that the authority is required in the public interest; that
because of an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in
the normal course of business the traffic cannot be accommodated by U.S.
carriers holding certificates under 49 U.S.C. section 41102; that all
possible efforts have been made to place the traffic on U.S. carriers;
and that the transportation is necessary to avoid unreasonable hardship
to the traffic involved (an additional required finding, concerning
emergency transportation during labor disputes, was not relevant here).

        DISPOSITION

Action: Approved
                                             Action date:  January 14,
2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  January 14, 2004, through January
16, 2004

Basis for approval:  On December 31, 2003, we granted (see NOAT issued
on that date in this Docket) Volga-Dnepr’s request to operate its
proposed one-way flights from Philadelphia to Moffet Field, through
January 11, 2004.  In taking that action, we found that its request met
all the relevant criteria of 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g) for the grant of
an exemption of this type and that the grant was required in the public
interest.  Volga-Dnepr asserts that Lockheed needed to extend the
shipping date through January 16, 2004, because of a production delay.
Under the circumstances, we also find that this request to extend the
duration of the authority meets all the relevant statutory criteria
warranting grant.  Thus, we are granting Volga-Dnepr’s request to
conduct this one flight through January 16, 2004. Moreover, based on the
representations of the U.S. carriers, we continue to conclude that no
U.S. carrier has aircraft available that could be used to conduct the
operation at issue here.  We also found that grant of this authority
would prevent unreasonable hardship to Lockheed Martin Space Systems,
and that the applicant remains qualified to perform its proposed
operation.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to our
standard exemption conditions and to the condition that the applicant
must comply with an FAA-approved flight routing for the authorized
operation.

Action taken by:        Karan K. Bhatia

                                  Assistant Secretary

                     for Aviation and International Affairs

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register: March 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 50)]
[Notices]
[Page 13370]
[DOCID:fr15mr06-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-176-113]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Negotiated
Rate

March 7, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 17, 2006, Natural Gas Pipeline Company
of America (Natural) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to
become effective April 1, 2006:

First Revised Sheet No. 26W.29.
First Revised Sheet No. 26W.30.
Third Revised Sheet No. 26W.31.
First Revised Sheet No. 26W.31a.
First Revised Sheet No. 26W.32.
Second Revised Sheet No. 26W.33.
Second Revised Sheet No. 26W.34.

    Natural states that the purpose of this filing is to implement an
extension to an existing negotiated rate transaction.
    Natural further states that copies of the filing are being mailed
to all parties set out on the Commission's official service list.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-3658 Filed 3-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 74 (Thursday, April 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21075-21076]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08028]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0954; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANM-6]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Hardin, MT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at Big Horn County
Airport, Hardin, MT. The airspace extends upward from 700 feet above
the surface and contains arriving and departing IFR aircraft operating
to/from the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, July 16, 2020. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov//air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you
can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11D at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Van Der Wal, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S. 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would establish Class E airspace at Big Horn County Airport,
Hardin, MT, to ensure the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (85 FR 2330; January 15, 2020) for Docket No. FAA-2019-0954 to
establish Class E airspace at Big Horn County Airport, Hardin, MT.
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E5 airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet or
more above the surface at the Big Horn County Airport, Hardin, MT. The
Class E airspace area supports the airport's transition from VFR to IFR
operations. It contains IFR departures until reaching 1,200 feet above
the surface and IFR arrivals descending below 1,500 feet above the
surface.
    The airspace area is described as follows: That airspace extending

upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile radius of the
airport, and within 2 miles each side of the 090[deg] bearing from the
airport, extending from the 6.4-mile radius to 10.4 miles east of the
Big Horn County Airport.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ANM MT E5--Hardin, MT

Big Horn County Airport, Hardin, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]44'40'' N, long. 107[deg]39'38'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of the airport, and within 2.0 miles each
side of the 090[deg] bearing from the airport, extending from the
6.4-mile radius to 10.4 miles east Big Horn County Airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on April 10, 2020.
Shawn M. Kozica,
Group Manager,Western Service Center, Operations Support Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-08028 Filed 4-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 31, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 65874]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26714]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. PR13-3-000]

Michigan Consolidated Gas Company; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on October 19, 2012, Michigan Consolidated Gas
Company (MichCon) filed to revise its Statement of Operating Conditions
(SOC) for transportation services. The revisions include a revised
definition of ``Fuel Use and Gas Lost and Unaccounted For,'' and to add
several new sections to the SOC as more fully described in the filing.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 1, 2012.

    Dated: October 24, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-26714 Filed 10-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P