[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 206 (Friday, October 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67535-67536]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23464]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ- OAR-2018-0575; FRL 10016-09-OAR]

Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is requesting comment on applications from Volkswagen
Group of America, Inc. (``Volkswagen '') for off-cycle carbon dioxide
(CO2) credits under EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
emissions standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission reductions can be achieved
by employing technologies that result in real-world benefits, but where
that benefit is not adequately captured on the test procedures used by
manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with emission standards. EPA's
light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas program acknowledges these benefits
by giving automobile manufacturers several options for generating
``off-cycle'' CO2 credits. Under the regulations, a
manufacturer may apply for CO2 credits for off-cycle
technologies that result in off-cycle benefits. In these cases, a
manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed methodology for
determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Volkswagen has submitted
an application that describe methodologies for determining off-cycle
credits from technologies described in their application. Pursuant to
applicable regulations, EPA is making these off-cycle credit
calculation methodologies available for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 23, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2018-0575, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linc Wehrly, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Phone: (734) 214-
4286. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance
with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a
predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies
that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This pathway allows
manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for
a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In
cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional
laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway
allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as
``5-cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies
were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and
therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use
these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek
EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-
cycle CO2 credits.\3\ This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the
5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option to
demonstrate reductions that exceed those available via use of the
predetermined list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
    \2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
    \3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-
cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third
pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the
following criteria:
     Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
     Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;
     Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
     Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
    Further, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.
     The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
     The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.

    Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to
EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.\4\ EPA
will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve
or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications

    Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above,
Volkswagen is applying for credits for model years 2016, 2017, 2018 and
2019 model years for off-cycle credits using the alternative
demonstration methodology pathway for high-efficiency alternators.
Automotive alternators convert mechanical energy from a combustion
engine into electrical energy that can be used to power a vehicle's
electrical systems. Alternators inherently place a load on the engine,
which results in increased fuel consumption and CO2
emissions. High efficiency alternators use new technologies to reduce
the overall load on the engine yet continue to meet the electrical
demands of the vehicle systems, resulting in lower fuel consumption and
lower CO2 emissions. Some comments on EPA's proposed rule
for GHG standards for the 2016-2025 model years suggested that EPA
provide a credit for high-efficiency alternators on the pre-defined
list in the regulations. While EPA agreed that high-efficiency
alternators can reduce electrical load and reduce fuel consumption, and
that these impacts are not seen on the emission test procedures because
accessories that use electricity are turned off, EPA noted the
difficulty in defining a one-size-fits-all credit due to lack of data.
Since then, however a methodology has been developed that scales
credits based on the efficiency of the alternator; alternators with
efficiency (as measured using an accepted industry standard procedure)
above a baseline value could get credits. EPA has previously approved
credits for high-efficiency alternators using this methodology for Ford
Motor Company, General Motors Corporation, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles,
Hyundai, Kia, and Toyota Motor Company. Details of the testing and
analysis can be found in the manufacturer's applications.

III. EPA Decision Process

    EPA has reviewed the applications for completeness and is now
making the applications available for public review and comment as
required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit applications
submitted by the manufacturer (with confidential business information
redacted) have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section
above) and on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards. EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications
for off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of
comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in
response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any
rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests. EPA will make its decision
available to the public by placing a decision document (or multiple
decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's website at the same
manufacturer-specific pages shown above. While the broad methodologies
used by these manufacturers could potentially be used for other
vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle specific data needed
to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions would likely be
different. In such cases, a new application would be required,
including an opportunity for public comment.

    Dated: October 19, 2020.
Byron Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2020-23464 Filed 10-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 203)]
[Notices]
[Page 61277-61278]
[DOCID:fr21oc05-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL03-40-003; EL03-40-004; EL05-51-003; and EL05-51-004]

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation v. Midwest Independent
Transmission System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 17, 2005.
    Take notice that on October 6, 2005, the Midwest Independent
Transmission System Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) tendered for filing an
amended compliance filing and withdrawal of an alternative request for
rehearing or clarification of the Commission's July 22

Order approving the settlement among the Midwest ISO, Wisconsin Public
Corporation, and Excel Energy Services.
    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, 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 comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    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>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on November 7, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5832 Filed 10-20-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 129)]
[Notices]
[Page 38391]
[DOCID:fr06jy06-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER06-963-001]

Central Maine Power Company; Notice of Amendment To Filing

June 21, 2006.
    On June 8, 2006, Central Maine Power filed an answer to a protest
providing additional information in support of its request recover
Regional Transmission Organization formation costs in its transmission
rates. This additional information constitutes an amendment to Central
Maine Power's pending filing in Docket No. ER06-963-000.
    Comment Due Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time, June 30, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-10486 Filed 7-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 46 (Thursday, March 8, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13997]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5585]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

29 CFR Part 1910

[Docket No. OSH-2011-0183]
RIN No. 1218-AC64

Revising Standards Referenced in the Acetylene Standard

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: With this document, OSHA is withdrawing the proposed rule that
accompanied its direct-final rule revising the Acetylene Standard for
general industry.

DATES: Effective March 8, 2012, the proposed rule published December 5,
2011 (76 FR 75840), is withdrawn.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  General information and press
inquiries: Contact Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office of
Communications, Room N-3647, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Technical information: Contact Ken Stevanus, Directorate of
Standards and Guidance, Room N-3609, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202)
693-2260; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Copies of this Federal Register notice: Electronic copies of this
Federal Register notice are available at http://www.regulations.gov.
This Federal Register notice, as well as news releases and other
relevant information, is also available at OSHA's Web page at http://www.osha.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 5, 2011, OSHA published a
direct-final rule to update the incorporated references in its
Acetylene Standard for general industry at 29 CFR 1910.102 (76 FR
75782). OSHA also published a companion proposed rule along with the
direct-final rule (76 FR 75840). In the direct-final rule, OSHA stated
that it would withdraw the companion proposed rule and confirm the
effective date of the direct-final rule if it received no significant
adverse comments on the direct-final rule by January 4, 2012. OSHA
received one comment on the direct-final rule by that date, which it
determined was not a significant adverse comment. OSHA is publishing a
notice announcing this determination and confirming the effective date
of the direct-final rule as March 5, 2012. Accordingly, OSHA is not
proceeding with the proposed rule, and is withdrawing it from the
rulemaking process.

List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1910

    Acetylene, General industry, Occupational safety and health,
Safety.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, authorized the
preparation of this document. OSHA is issuing this document pursuant to
Sections 4, 6, and 8 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(29 U.S.C. 653, 655, and 657), 5 U.S.C. 553, Secretary of Labor's Order
1-2012 (77 FR 3912), and 29 CFR part 1911.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on March 2, 2012.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2012-5585 Filed 3-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3206-3207]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00971]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76892; File No. SR-MIAX-2016-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities
Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its Fee Schedule

January 13, 2016.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 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 January 12, 2016, Miami International
Securities Exchange LLC (``MIAX'' 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 Options Fee
Schedule (``Fee Schedule'') to eliminate certain Web CRD Fees which
relate to Series 56 and will no longer apply from and after January 4,
2016 and to include certain Web CRD Fees which relate to Series 57 and
Web-based delivery of continuing education that will apply from and
after January 4, 2016.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/filter/wotitle/rule_filing, at
MIAX'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 purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the Fee
Schedule to delete the Continuing Education Fees and the Qualification
Examination Fee which relate to the Series 56 registration category
under the Regulatory Fees section of the Fee Schedule. The Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') is retiring the Proprietary
Traders Qualification Examination (Series 56) and the S501 Proprietary
Traders Continuing Education Program and replacing them with the
Securities Trader Qualification Examination (Series 57) and the S101
Continuing Education Program, including via Web-based delivery.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 75783 (August 28,
2015), 80 FR 53369 (September 3, 2015) (approving SR-FINRA-2015-017)
and 75581 (July 31, 2015), 80 FR 47018 (August 6, 2015) (approving
SR-FINRA-2015-015) collectively referred to herein as the ``FINRA
Amendments''. According to the approval orders, FINRA's expected
effective date for the FINRA Amendments is January 4, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to delete the (i) $60.00
Continuing Education Fee for Series 56 and (ii) $195.00 Series 56
Examination Fee. The Exchange also proposes to delete the phrase
``except the Series 56'' with respect to the $100.00 Continuing
Education Fee for All Registrations except the Series 56. The Exchange
further proposes to add a (i) $55.00 Continuing Education Fee for All
Registrations if Web-based and (ii) $120.00 Series 57 Examination Fee.
    MIAX is proposing such Fee Schedule amendments in consultation with
FINRA and the other exchanges, and anticipates that the other exchanges
will make corresponding changes to their respective fee schedules.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 76391 (November 9,
2015), 80 FR 70862 (November 16, 2015) (SR-FINRA-2015-044) and 75581
(July 31, 2015), 80 FR 47018 (August 6, 2015) (SR-FINRA-2015-015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    MIAX has amended its rules to establish the Securities Trader and
Securities Trader Principal registration categories, to establish the
Series 57 examination as the appropriate qualification examination for
Securities Traders and retire the Series 56 examination for Proprietary
Traders, and to establish S101 as the appropriate continuing education
program for Securities Traders and retire the S501 continuing education
program for Proprietary Traders, from and after January 4, 2016. The
Exchange also amended its rules to provide for Web-based delivery of
the continuing education Regulatory Element for registered persons from
and after January 4, 2016.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 76691 (December 18,
2015), 80 FR 80425 (December 24, 2015) (SR-MIAX-2015-71).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with MIAX's amended rules relating to the new
Securities Trader registration category, individual Members and
associated persons of Members \6\ engaged in proprietary trading, the
execution of transactions on an agency basis, or the direct supervision
of such activities, with respect to transactions in equity, preferred
or convertible debt securities, or foreign currency options on the
Exchange, will be required to register with the Exchange as Securities
Traders and be qualified by passing the new Securities Trader
qualification examination (Series 57) being implemented by FINRA,
unless grandfathered as provided for in the Rules. In addition, the
Series 57 examination replaces the Series 56 examination for those
exchange registration categories, such as the Proprietary Trader
Principal registration category, where the Series 56 examination is
currently an acceptable prerequisite.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Other than any person associated with a Member whose trading
activities are conducted principally on behalf of an investment
company that is registered with the Commission pursuant to the
Investment Company Act of 1940 and that controls, is controlled by
or is under common control, with the Member. See id.
    \7\ See supra note 5. These amended rules will become effective
as of January 4, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has further amended its Rules, in consultation with
FINRA and the other exchanges, to provide for Web-based delivery of the
CE Regulatory Element for registered persons. The personalized S101 CE
Program will be the required CE Program for all registered persons
including Securities Traders.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to delete the (i)
$60.00 Continuing Education Fee for Series 56, (ii) $195.00 Series 56
Examination Fee, and (iii) the phrase ``except the Series 56'' with
respect to the $100.00 Continuing Education Fee for All

Registrations except the Series 56, since such CE fee will become
applicable to all registration categories without exception. The
Exchange further proposes to add a (i) $55.00 Continuing Education Fee
for All Registrations which will be applicable for Web-based delivery
of the CE Regulatory Element for registered persons, and (ii) $120.00
Series 57 Examination Fee which will be applicable with respect to the
new Securities Trader Qualification Examination (Series 57).
    The $100.00 fee charged for administration of the S101 CE program
applicable to registrants required to take examinations other than the
Series 56 will remain in effect, and become applicable to all
registrants, if a CE session is conducted at a testing center from
January 4, 2016 through no later than six months thereafter when the CE
program will no longer be offered at testing centers. A new $55.00 fee
will be applicable to all registrants from and after January 4, 2016
for Web-based administration of the S101 CE program. The $195.00 fee
currently charged for the Series 56 examination will be replaced with a
$120.00 fee for the Series 57 examination from and after January 4,
2016. Therefore, the Exchange is proposing to add the $55.00 Web-based
delivery CE fee and $120.00 Series 57 examination fee to the current
Fee Schedule. Additionally, the $60.00 fee currently charged for
administration of the S501 CE Program applicable to Series 56 is being
retired from and after January 4, 2016. Therefore, the Exchange is
proposing to delete both the $195.00 Series 56 examination fee and
$60.00 S501 CE fee from the current Fee Schedule.
    Since the Series 57 and the S101 CE Program will fall within
FINRA's jurisdiction, the related fees will be billed directly through
FINRA commencing as of January 4, 2016.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \10\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \11\ in
particular, in that it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees
and other charges among Exchange members and issuers and other persons
using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposal is fair, equitable and not
unreasonably discriminatory because the fee change applies equally to
all Members and persons associated with Members. The proposed deletion
of the S501 Continuing Education Fees and Series 56 Qualification
Examination Fee is further reasonable because such CE program and exam
will be replaced by the S101 CE program (including via Web-based
delivery) and Series 57 Qualification Examination program. In addition,
the Exchange believes that the fees added to the Fee Schedule and
amended fee are equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory as
they will apply uniformly to all Members and persons associated with
the Members who choose [sic] to take the Series 57 examination and
participate in the continuing education program through FINRA.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange
further believes that the proposal does not impose any burden on
competition because it believes that the other exchanges will also be
making the same changes to their fee schedules.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See supra notes 3 and 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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,\13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \14\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \14\ 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-MIAX-2016-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2016-01. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2016-01 and
should be submitted on or before February 10, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-00971 Filed 1-19-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 11, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 48)]
[Notices]
[Page 12974-12975]
[DOCID:fr11mr08-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12959-000]

Green River 2 Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments

March 4, 2008.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit.
    b. Project No.: 12959-000.
    c. Date filed: August 14, 2007.
    d. Applicant: Green River 2 Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Green River Lock and Dam 2
Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: Green River in McLean County, Kentucky. It would use
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Green River Lock and Dam 2.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC,
P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Robert Bell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be
filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12959-000) on
any comments or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person in the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed project using the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers' Green River Lock and Dam 2 and operated in
a run-of-river mode would consist of: (1) A new powerhouse and
switchyard; (2) three turbine/generator units with a combined installed
capacity of 19 megawatts; (3) a new 1.3-mile-long above ground 46-
kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an
interconnection point with the Kenergy Corporation's distribution
system; and (4) appurtenant facilities. The proposed Green River Lock
and Dam 2 Project would have an average annual generation of
60 gigawatt-hours.
    l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site 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. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy
is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in
item h above.
    m. Competing Preliminary Permit--Anyone desiring to file a
competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project
must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to
file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36).
Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to
file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days
after the specified comment date for the particular application. A
competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30
and 4.36.
    n. Competing Development Application--Any qualified development
applicant desiring to file a competing development application must
submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the
particular application, either a competing development application or a
notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested
person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after
the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing
license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36.
    o. Notice of Intent--A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary
permit application or a development application (specify which type of
application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s)
named in this public notice.
    p. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit--A preliminary permit, if
issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed
preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the
preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of
preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts.
Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide
whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to
construct and operate the project.
    q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    r. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``NOTICE OF INTENT
TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION'', ``COMPETING APPLICATION'',
``PROTEST'', and ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the
Project Number of the particular application to which the filing
refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the
original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's
regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be
sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance,
Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of
intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    s. Agency Comments--Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-4739 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P