[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26201-26203]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11608]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80824; File No. SR-BX-2017-026]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Chapter
VI, Section 5

May 31, 2017.
    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 May 24, 2017, NASDAQ BX, Inc. (``BX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter VI, Section 5 (Minimum
Increments),\3\ to extend through December 31, 2017 or the date of
permanent approval, if earlier, the Penny Pilot Program in options
classes in certain issues (``Penny Pilot'' or ``Pilot''), and to change
the date when delisted classes may be replaced in the Penny Pilot.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ References herein to Chapter and Series refer to rules of
the BX Options Market (``BX Options''), unless otherwise noted.
    \4\ The Penny Pilot was established in June 2012 and extended in
2016. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67256 (June 26,
2012), 77 FR 39277 (July 2, 2012) (SR-BX-2012-030); 75326 (June 29,
2015), 80 FR 38481 (July 6, 2015) (SR-BX-2015-037); 78036 (June 10,
2016), 81 FR 39308 (June 16, 2016) (SR-BX-2016-021) (notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of a proposed rule change
relating to extension of the Exchange's Penny Pilot Program and
replacement of Penny Pilot Issues that have been delisted); and
79420 (November 29, 2016), 81 FR 87639 (December 5, 2016) (SR-BX-
2016-062) (notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed
rule change to amend Chapter VI, Section 5 to extend the Penny Pilot
Program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed new language is underlined and deleted text is in
brackets.
* * * * *

NASDAQ BX Rules

Options Rules

* * * * *

Chapter VI Trading Systems

* * * * *

Sec. 5 Minimum Increments

    (a) The Board may establish minimum quoting increments for options
contracts traded on BX Options. Such minimum increments established by
the Board will be designated as a stated policy, practice, or
interpretation with respect to the administration of this Section
within the meaning of Section 19 of the Exchange Act and will be filed
with the SEC as a rule change for effectiveness upon filing. Until such
time as the Board makes a change in the increments, the following
principles shall apply:
    (1)-(2) No Change.
    (3) For a pilot period scheduled to expire on [June 30, 2017]
December 31, 2017 or the date of permanent approval, if earlier, if the
options series is trading pursuant to the Penny Pilot program one (1)
cent if the options series is trading at less than $3.00, five (5)
cents if the options series is trading at $3.00 or higher, unless for
QQQQs, SPY and IWM where the minimum quoting increment will be one cent
for all series regardless of price. A list of such

options shall be communicated to membership via an Options Trader Alert
(``OTA'') posted on the Exchange's web site.
    The Exchange may replace any pilot issues that have been delisted
with the next most actively traded multiply listed options classes that
are not yet included in the pilot, based on trading activity in the
previous six months. The replacement issues may be added to the pilot
on the second trading day following [January 1, 2017] July 1, 2017.
    (4) No Change.
    (b) No Change.
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to amend Chapter VI, Section 5, to
extend the Penny Pilot through December 31, 2017 or the date of
permanent approval, if earlier,\5\ and to change the date when delisted
classes may be replaced in the Penny Pilot. The Exchange believes that
extending the Penny Pilot will allow for further analysis of the Penny
Pilot and a determination of how the program should be structured in
the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The options exchanges in the U.S. that have pilot programs
similar to the Penny Pilot (together ``pilot programs'') are
currently working on a proposal for permanent approval of the
respective pilot programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Penny Pilot, the minimum price variation for all
participating options classes, except for the Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking
Stock (``QQQQ''), the SPDR S&P 500 Exchange Traded Fund (``SPY'') and
the iShares Russell 2000 Index Fund (``IWM''), is $0.01 for all
quotations in options series that are quoted at less than $3 per
contract and $0.05 for all quotations in options series that are quoted
at $3 per contract or greater. QQQQ, SPY and IWM are quoted in $0.01
increments for all options series. The Penny Pilot is currently
scheduled to expire on June 30, 2017.
    The Exchange proposes to extend the time period of the Penny Pilot
through December 31, 2017 or the date of permanent approval, if
earlier, and to provide a revised date for adding replacement issues to
the Penny Pilot. The Exchange proposes that any Penny Pilot Program
issues that have been delisted may be replaced on the second trading
day following July 1, 2017. The replacement issues will be selected
based on trading activity in the previous six months.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The replacement issues will be announced to the Exchange's
membership via an Options Trader Alert (OTA) posted on the
Exchange's Web site. Penny Pilot replacement issues will be selected
based on trading activity in the previous six months, as is the case
today. The replacement issues would be identified based on The
Options Clearing Corporation's trading volume data. For example, for
the July replacement, trading volume from December 1, 2016 through
May 31, 2017 would be analyzed. The month immediately preceding the
replacement issues' addition to the Pilot Program (i.e., June) would
not be used for purposes of the six-month analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This filing does not propose any substantive changes to the Penny
Pilot Program; all classes currently participating in the Penny Pilot
will remain the same and all minimum increments will remain unchanged.
The Exchange believes the benefits to public customers and other market
participants who will be able to express their true prices to buy and
sell options have been demonstrated to outweigh the potential increase
in quote traffic.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change, which extends the Penny
Pilot for an additional six months through December 31, 2017 or the
date of permanent approval, if earlier, and changes the date for
replacing Penny Pilot issues that were delisted to the second trading
day following July 1, 2017, will enable public customers and other
market participants to express their true prices to buy and sell
options for the benefit of all market participants. This is consistent
with the Act.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, this proposal
is pro-competitive because it allows Penny Pilot issues to continue
trading on the Exchange.
    Moreover, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will
allow for further analysis of the Pilot and a determination of how the
Pilot should be structured in the future; and will serve to promote
regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on the
marketplace and facilitating investor protection.
    The Pilot is an industry-wide initiative supported by all other
option exchanges. The Exchange believes that extending the Pilot will
allow for continued competition between market participants on the
Exchange trading similar products as their counterparts on other
exchanges, while at the same time allowing the Exchange to continue to
compete for order flow with other exchanges in option issues trading as
part of the Pilot.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \9\ and

subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BX-2017-026 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-BX-2017-026. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
    To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2017-026 and
should be submitted on or before June 27, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11608 Filed 6-5-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59519-59520]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18594]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG23-262-000.
    Applicants: Steel Solar, LLC.
    Description: Steel Solar, LLC submits Notice of Self-Certification
of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5167.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/23.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2146-001.
    Applicants: SunZia Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Deficiency Letter Response of SunZia
Transmission, LLC (ER23-2146-) to be effective 8/15/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5141.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/5/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2344-001.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Concurrence Filed in
ER23-2344 to be effective 9/4/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5143.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2429-001.
    Applicants: Stonepeak Kestrel Energy Marketing LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: IROL-CIP Rate Schedule Amendment to
be effective 9/29/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5145.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2441-000.
    Applicants: Chevelon Butte RE II LLC.
    Description: Supplement to July 20, 2023, Chevelon Butte RE II LLC
tariff filing.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5175.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/1/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2447-001.
    Applicants: Desert Peak Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Desert Peak Energy Center, LLC
Amendment to the Shared Facilities Agreement to be effective 7/21/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/23/23.
    Accession Number: 20230823-5100.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2451-000.
    Applicants: Great Cove Solar II LLC.
    Description: Supplement to July 20, 2023, Great Cove Solar II LLC
tariff filing.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5173.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/1/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2684-000.
    Applicants: Steel Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authority to be effective 10/22/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5138.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2685-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-08-22-SA 3371
Termination of Orion Renewable-SIGE GIA (J856) to be effective 6/7/
2023.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5147.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2687-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Notice of Termination of Assignment Agreements of
MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Filed Date: 8/22/23.
    Accession Number: 20230822-5180.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/12/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2688-000.
    Applicants: NRG Business Marketing LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession and Request
for Waiver to be effective 8/23/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/23/23.
    Accession Number: 20230823-5045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2689-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company,
Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Alabama Power Company
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: CED Timberland Solar 2 LGIA
Amendment Filing to be effective 8/11/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/23/23.
    Accession Number: 20230823-5051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2690-000.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Concurrence with IPL (RLBAA)
to be effective 9/6/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/23/23.
    Accession Number: 20230823-5076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 9/13/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: August 23, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-18594 Filed 8-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80830-80832]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32525]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76716; File No. SR-MIAX-2015-72]

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

December 21, 2015.
    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 December 11, 2015, 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 (the ``Fee Schedule'').
    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 Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to: (i) Reduce the
transaction fee for options overlying EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY
executed by non-MIAX Market Makers; and (ii) modify the transaction fee
for options overlying EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ and SPY assessed to non-MIAX
Market Makers that achieve certain Priority Customer Rebate Program \3\
volume tiers.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Fee Schedule, Section (1)(a)(ii).
    \4\ See Securities Act Release No. 73850 (December 16, 2014), 79
FR 76424 (December 22, 2014) (SR-MIAX-2014-63).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to decrease the per contract transaction fee
for non-MIAX Market Makers for options overlying EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ,
and SPY from $0.55 to $0.50. The Exchange notes that the transaction
fees for non-MIAX Market Makers in all other options classes will not
change and thus will continue to be charged the same amount for non-
Penny Pilot options classes and Penny Pilot options classes as they do
today.
    The Exchange proposes to continue to offer non-MIAX Market Makers
the opportunity to reduce transaction fees by $0.02 per contract in
standard options in EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY. Specifically, any
Member or its affiliates of at least 75% common ownership between the
firms as reflected on each firm's Form BD, Schedule A, that qualifies
for Priority Customer Rebate Program volume tiers 3 or 4 and is a non-
MIAX Market Maker will be assessed a reduced transaction fee of $0.48
per contract for standard options in EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY. The
Exchange believes that these incentives will encourage non-MIAX Market
Makers to transact a greater number of orders on the Exchange.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed fee reduction for non-MIAX
Market Makers in EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY will benefit these market
participants and encourage them to send greater order flow to the
Exchange.
    The proposed changes to the Fee Schedule will be operative as of
January 1, 2016.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \5\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \6\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposed decrease in transaction fees for non-MIAX
Market Makers in EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ and SPY is reasonable because the
lower fees should encourage these market participants to send
additional order flow to the Exchange and the additional order flow
should benefit all market participants. The instant proposal is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the fee applies
equally to all non-MIAX Market Makers. The Exchange's continued higher
transaction fee for non-MIAX Market Makers compared to that for MIAX
Market Markers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
MIAX Market Markers have enhanced quoting obligations measured in both
quantity

(as a percentage of time) and quality (minimum bid-ask differentials)
that other market participants do not have.\7\ In addition, charging
non-members higher transaction fees is a common practice amongst
exchanges because Members are subject to other fees and dues associated
with their membership to the Exchange that do not apply to non-members.
The proposed differentiation between non-MIAX Market Makers and MIAX
Market Makers recognizes the differing contributions made to the
liquidity and trading environment on the Exchange by these market
participants. Maintaining a lower transaction fee for MIAX Market
Makers should encourage market participants and market makers on other
exchanges to register as Market Makers on the Exchange, which will
enhance the quality of quoting and should increase the volume of
contracts traded in options listed on MIAX. Enhanced market quality and
increased transaction volume that results from the increase in Market
Maker activity on the Exchange will benefit all market participants and
improve competition on the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See MIAX Rules 603, 604, 605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's proposal to continue to offer non-MIAX Market Makers
the opportunity to reduce transaction fees by $0.02 per contract in
standard options in EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY, provided certain
criteria are met, is reasonable because the Exchange desires to offer
all such market participants an opportunity to lower their transaction
fees. This proposal is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because the Exchange will offer this opportunity to all non-MIAX Market
Makers in EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY.
    The Exchange believes that establishing different pricing for EEM,
GLD, IWM, and SPY options is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly
discriminatory because EEM, GLD, IWM, QQQ, and SPY options are more
liquid options as compared to others and the Exchange wants to
encourage market participants to become members and register as MIAX
Market Makers.

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
believes the proposal is consistent with robust competition by
increasing the intermarket competition for order flow from market
participants. The Exchange believes that charging non-members higher
transaction fees is appropriate and is a common practice amongst
exchanges, because Members are subject to other fees and dues
associated with their Exchange that do not apply to non-members. The
proposed differentiation as between non-MIAX Market Makers and MIAX
Market Makers recognizes the differing contributions made to the
liquidity and trading environment on the Exchange by these market
participants. Maintaining a lower transaction fee for MIAX Market
Makers should encourage market participants and market makers on other
exchanges to register as MIAX Market Makers, which will enhance the
quality of quoting and increase the volume of contracts traded in
options listed on MIAX. Enhanced market quality and increased
transaction volume that results from the anticipated increase in order
flow submitted to the Exchange will benefit all market participants and
improve competition on the Exchange. 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 to remain competitive with other
exchanges and to attract order flow. The Exchange believes that the
proposal reflects this competitive environment.

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,\8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 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-2015-72 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.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2015-72. 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 Section, 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 will also 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-2015-72 and should be
submitted on or before January 19, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32525 Filed 12-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 26, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 57)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 13122-13124]
[DOCID:fr26mr09-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0942; FRL-8781-2]

Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Control of Emissions From
Existing Other Solid Waste Incinerator Units; Arizona; Pima County
Department of Environmental Quality

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a negative
declaration submitted by the Pima County Department of Environmental
Quality. The negative declaration certifies that other solid waste
incinerator units, subject to the requirements of sections 111(d) and
129 of the Clean Air Act, do not exist within the agency's air
pollution control jurisdiction.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 26, 2009 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by April 27, 2009. If we receive
such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will not take
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2008-0942, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California.
    While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4124<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Final EPA Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act)
require States to submit plans to control certain pollutants
(designated pollutants) at existing solid waste combustor facilities
(designated facilities) whenever standards of performance have been
established under section 111(b) for new sources of the same type, and
EPA has established emission guidelines (EG) for such existing sources.
A designated pollutant is any pollutant for which no air quality
criteria have been issued, and which is not included on a list
published under section 108(a) or section 112(b)(1)(A) of the CAA, but
emissions of which are subject to a standard of performance for new
stationary sources. However, section 129 of the CAA also requires EPA
to promulgate EG for solid waste incineration units that emit a mixture
of air pollutants. These pollutants include organics (dioxins/furans),
carbon monoxide, metals (cadmium, lead, mercury), acid gases (hydrogen
chloride, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) and particulate matter
(including opacity).

    On December 16, 2005, (70 FR 74870), EPA promulgated new source
performance standards and EG for other solid waste incineration (OSWI)
units, located at 40 CFR part 60, subparts EEEE and FFFF, respectively.
The designated facility to which the EG apply is each existing OSWI
unit, as defined in subpart FFFF, that commenced construction on or
before December 9, 2004.
    Subpart B of 40 CFR part 60 establishes procedures to be followed
and requirements to be met in the development and submission of State
plans for controlling designated pollutants. Also, 40 CFR part 62
provides the procedural framework for the submission of these plans.
When designated facilities are located in a State, the State must then
develop and submit a plan for the control of the designated pollutant.
However, 40 CFR 60.23(b) and 62.06 provide that if there are no
existing sources of the designated pollutant in the State, the State
may submit a letter of certification to that effect (i.e., negative
declaration) in lieu of a plan. The negative declaration exempts the
State from the requirements of subpart B for the submittal of a 111(d)/
129 plan.

II. Final EPA Action

    The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) has
determined that there are no designated facilities subject to the OSWI
unit EG requirements in its air pollution control jurisdiction. On
April 14, 2008, PDEQ submitted to EPA a negative declaration letter
certifying this fact. EPA is amending 40 CFR part 62, subpart D--
Arizona, to reflect the receipt of this negative declaration letter.
    After publication of this Federal Register notice, if an OSWI
facility is later found within the PDEQ jurisdiction, then the
overlooked facility will become subject to the requirements of the
Federal OSWI 111(d)/129 plan, including the compliance schedule. The
Federal plan would no longer apply if EPA were to subsequently receive
and approve a 111(d)/129 plan from PDEQ.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. This action simply reflects already existing Federal
requirements for State air pollution control agencies under 40 CFR
parts 60 and 62. In the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as
the proposal to approve PDEQ's negative declaration should relevant
adverse or critical comments be filed.
    This rule will be effective May 26, 2009 without further notice
unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by April 27, 2009.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
state plan submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7429(b)(2); 40 CFR 62.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing state plan submissions, EPA's role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because it is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the
state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs
on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Aluminum, Fertilizers, Fluoride,
Intergovernmental relations, Paper and paper products industry,
Phosphate, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Sulfuric acid plants, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: February 18, 2009.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 62, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 62--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart D--Arizona

0
2. Subpart D is amended by adding an undesignated center heading and
Sec.  62.660 to read as follows:

Emissions From Existing Other Solid Waste Incineration Units

Sec.  62.660  Identification of plan--negative declaration.

    Letter from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality,
submitted on April 14, 2008, certifying that there are no existing
other solid waste incineration units in its jurisdiction subject to 40
CFR part 60, subpart FFFF, of this chapter.

 [FR Doc. E9-6641 Filed 3-25-09; 8:45 am]


[Federal Register: March 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 59)]
[Notices]
[Page 16028-16029]
[DOCID:fr26mr08-87]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0098]

Certificate of Alternative Compliance for Tug LAURA K. MORAN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) the Coast Guard is
providing notice that a Certificate of Alternative Compliance was
issued for the Tug Laura K. Moran.

DATES: The letter in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) was effective on
February 22, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call Mr. Dennis Spain, Prevention Branch, U.S. Coast Guard, telephone
757-398-6558.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Tug Laura K. Moran will be used for ship
assist, escorting, and fire fighting operations. Full compliance with
72 COLREGS will hinder the Tug's ability to maneuver within close
proximity of the side of vessels during maneuvering operations. Due to
the design of the Tug and the required height of the side running
lights it would be difficult and impractical to build supporting
structure that would put the lights within 3.2' from the side of Tug,
as required by Annex I paragraph 3(b) of the 72 COLREGS. Compliance
with the rule will cause the lights to be in a location which will be
highly susceptible to damage from ships hulls or towlines. Locating the
side running lights 11'2'' from the vessel side on top of the pilot
house roof will provide a shelter location for the lights and allow
maneuvering within close proximity to ships hulls.
    A Certificate of Alternative Compliance, as allowed under Title 33,
Code of Federal Regulation, Parts 81 and 89, has been issued for the
towing vessel LAURA K. MORAN, O.N. 1208410. The Certificate of
Alternative Compliance allows for the placement of the running lights
to deviate from requirements set forth in Annex I paragraph 3(b) of 72
COLREGS.

    Viewing of the Certificate: To view the Certificate of Alternative
Compliance, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Enter the
docket number for this notice (USCG-2008-0098) in the Search box, and
click ``Go >>.'' You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Dated: March 4, 2008.
Fred M. Rosa, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
 [FR Doc. E8-6122 Filed 3-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 102 (Thursday, May 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 33518]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12409]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL00-95-291; EL00-98-263]

San Diego Gas & Electric Company v. Sellers of Energy and
Ancillary Services Into Markets Operated by the California Independent
System Operator Corporation and the California Power Exchange;
Investigation of Practices of the California Independent System
Operator and the California Power Exchange; Notice of Compliance Filing

    Take notice that on May 4, 2016, the California Independent System
Operator Corporation submitted its Refund Rerun Compliance Filing
pursuant to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
July 15, 2011 Order Accepting Compliance Filings and Providing
Guidance.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ San Diego Gas & Elec. Co. v. Sellers of Energy and Ancillary
Servs., 136 FERC ] 61,036 (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to 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 5 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 May 25, 2016.

    Dated: May 20, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-12409 Filed 5-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 208 (Monday, October 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 57721]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23519]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP20-78-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Pre-Arranged/Pre-Agreed (Offer of Settlement and
Petition for Approval) Filing of Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC under
RP20-78.
    Filed Date: 10/18/19.
    Accession Number: 20191018-5233.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1546-001.
    Applicants: Gas Transmission Northwest LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Compliance to RP19-1546-000 (36-
month ROFR) to be effective 10/6/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/21/19.
    Accession Number: 20191021-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-79-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Algonquin Request for Waivers and
Request for Shortened Comment Period.
    Filed Date: 10/21/19.
    Accession Number: 20191021-5220.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/28/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 22, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-23519 Filed 10-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 8, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55386-55387]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17597]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 543

[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0081]

Exemption From Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Clarification
of Data Submission Requirement

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notification clarifying content requirement for petitions for
exemption from vehicle theft prevention standard.

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

SUMMARY: NHTSA is issuing this notification to aid manufacturers in
understanding what type of information must be submitted when
petitioning for an exemption from NHTSA's Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard under agency rules.

DATES: September 8, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For programmatic issues: Carlita
Ballard, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy, and Consumer
Standards. Ms. Ballard's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For legal issues: Hannah Fish, Office of the Chief
Counsel,<PHONE_NUMBER>. National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This informational notification is to
clarify the type of information that can serve as a valid basis for
granting a request for exemption from the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). NHTSA is providing
this clarification because it has received a few petitions in which the
petitioners have sought to support their request for exemption with
data comparing the theft rate of a particular vehicle line to the
industry median or average vehicle theft rate for a specific model year
(MY)/calendar year (CY), or with the 1990/91 median theft rate that is
used to determine whether any new light duty truck line is likely to be
a high theft line. As discussed below, NHTSA's regulations at 49 CFR
543.6(a)(5) require petitioners to submit information to support their
belief that a line of passenger motor vehicles equipped with the
antitheft device is likely to have a theft rate equal to or less than
that of passenger motor vehicles of the same, or a similar, line which
have parts marked in compliance with Part 541. This notification does
not impose any new requirements for manufacturers seeking exemptions
from the parts-marking requirement or otherwise change Part 541.
    Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 331, the Secretary of Transportation (and
NHTSA by delegation) is required to promulgate a theft prevention
standard to provide for the identification of certain motor vehicles
and their major replacement parts to impede motor vehicle theft. NHTSA
promulgated regulations at Part 541 (Theft Prevention Standard) to
require parts-marking for specified passenger motor vehicles and light
trucks. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.

33106, manufacturers that are subject to the parts-marking requirements
may petition the Secretary of Transportation for an exemption for a
line of passenger motor vehicles equipped as standard equipment with an
antitheft device that the Secretary decides is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements. That chapter defines a ``line'' as
``a name that a manufacturer of motor vehicles applies to a group of
motor vehicle models of the same make that have the same body or
chassis, or otherwise are similar in construction or design.'' \1\ In
accordance with this statute, NHTSA promulgated 49 CFR part 543, which
establishes the process through which manufacturers may seek an
exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard for lines of passenger
motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 49 U.S.C. 33101(5). NHTSA's regulations at 49 CFR 541.4
further elaborate that ``A `line' may, for example, include 2-door,
4-door, station wagon, and hatchback vehicles of the same make.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, of 49
CFR specifies the showing that manufacturers must make in a request for
exemption from the parts-marking requirement. In relevant part, 49 CFR
543.6(a)(5) requires the petitioner to submit:

    The reasons for [its] belief that the agency should determine
that the antitheft device is likely to be as effective as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of part 541 in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft, including any statistical data that
are available to the petitioner and form a basis for the
petitioner's belief that a line of passenger motor vehicles equipped
with the antitheft device is likely to have a theft rate equal to or
less than that of passenger motor vehicles of the same, or a
similar, line which have parts marked in compliance with part 541.
(Emphasis added.)

    As discussed above, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.8
(b), the agency grants a petition for exemption from the parts-marking
requirements of Part 541, either in whole or in part, if it determines
that, based upon supporting evidence, the standard equipment antitheft
device is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor
vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part
541.
    In order to determine whether an exemption is warranted under Part
543, NHTSA must determine the relative effectiveness of a particular
antitheft device versus parts marking in reducing vehicle theft. This
is because, to make a valid comparison, petitioners must carefully
choose two sets of vehicles that are as nearly similar as possible so
that NHTSA can be reasonably certain that any differences or
similarities in the theft rates of the two sets of vehicles can be
attributed to the presence of an antitheft device or parts marking and
not to extraneous, confounding variables.
    NHTSA publishes data, by notice and on the agency's website, on
vehicle theft rates based on information provided by the National Crime
Information Center (NCIC) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\2\ In
the notices, NHTSA publishes theft data available for model year
vehicles stolen in a calendar year. The data include the average theft
rate for MY vehicles in that CY, how that data compare to data from the
prior CY, and how that data compare to the established median theft
rate for MYs 1990/91,\3\ which is used to designate high-theft vehicle
lines (now only for light trucks).\4\ Those notices also include theft
rate data for individual vehicle lines. These data show that theft
rates for different vehicle lines vary widely within a CY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Vehicle
Theft Prevention, Vehicle Theft Rates Search, https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle-theft-prevention/vehicle-theft-rates-search.
    \3\ See, e.g., 82 FR 28246 (June 21, 2017).
    \4\ 49 CFR 542.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the past, NHTSA had considered relative theft rate data of a
vehicle that is the subject of an exemption petition and one or more
models in the same segment, of a similar size, and equipped with
similar equipment as an appropriate comparative basis. NHTSA's Vehicle
Theft Rates Search tool is one resource that petitioners may use to
reference relative theft rate data for a similar line. In addition,
petitioners have referenced data from outside sources that has provided
comparative theft rate data for the specific line for which the
petitioner is requesting an exemption.\5\ NHTSA reaffirms today that
such relative theft rate data may be persuasive supporting evidence to
enable the agency to make a determination that the standard equipment
antitheft device is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements
of Part 541. Again, to make a valid comparison, petitioners must
carefully choose two sets of vehicles that are as nearly similar as
possible so that NHTSA can be reasonably certain that any differences
or similarities in the theft rates of the two sets of vehicles can be
attributed to the presence of an antitheft device or parts marking and
not to extraneous, confounding variables.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This includes data from the Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety's Highway Loss Data Institute or other comparative internal
confidential or non-confidential data the manufacturer may have.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, a petitioner citing the industry average theft rate
for a CY for purposes of determining whether an antitheft device is
likely to be as effective as a same or similar vehicle line that has
parts marked in compliance with Part 541 is not particularly meaningful
for the agency's comparison considering the range of individual vehicle
line theft rates; citing the 1990/1991 median theft rate is even less
meaningful considering that median theft rate was based on the range of
vehicle lines available almost 30 years ago. For this reason, NHTSA
will not consider comparisons of the theft rate of the subject vehicle
in a petition to the industry-wide median or average theft rate for a
specific MY/CY, or to the 1990/91 median theft rate as persuasive
evidence when evaluating a request for exemption under Part 543.
    NHTSA believes this information will be helpful for manufacturers
contemplating how to petition for exemption from the parts-marking
requirements of Part 541.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.8.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2020-17597 Filed 9-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22240-22243]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08691]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2021-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood
Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)
boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways
(hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on
the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities
listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance
Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities.
The flood hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to
calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their
contents.

DATES: Each LOMR was finalized as in the table below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers
of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication.
The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is
shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the
floodplain management measures that the community is required either to
adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain
qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to
calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new
buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Location and  case   Chief executive officer  of                                                                        Community
  State and county           No.                    community                 Community map  repository           Date of  modification          No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado:
    Douglas (FEMA    Town of Castle Rock  The Honorable Jason Gray,     Water Department, 175 Kellog Court,   Mar. 12, 2021................       080050
     Docket No.: B-   (20-08-0462P).       Mayor, Town of Castle Rock,   Castle Rock, CO 80109.
     2100).                                100 North Wilcox Street,
                                           Castle Rock, CO 80104.
    Douglas (FEMA    Unincorporated       Mr. Doug DeBord, Douglas      Department of Public Works,           Mar. 12, 2021................       080049
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Douglas     County Manager, 100 3rd       Engineering Department, 100 3rd
     2100).           County (20-08-       Street, Castle Rock, CO       Street, Castle Rock, CO 80104.
                      0462P).              80104.
Florida:
    Broward (FEMA    City of Fort         The Honorable Dean J.         Department of Sustainable             Mar. 1, 2021.................       125105
     Docket No.: B-   Lauderdale (19-04-   Trantalis, Mayor, City of     Development, 700 Northwest 19th
     2073).           3955P).              Fort Lauderdale, 100 North    Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311.
                                           Andrews Avenue, 8th Floor,
                                           Fort Lauderdale, FL 33311.
    Broward (FEMA    City of Tamarac (19- The Honorable Michelle J.     City Hall, 7525 Northwest 88th        Mar. 1, 2021.................       120058
     Docket No.: B-   04-3955P).           Gomez, Mayor, City of         Avenue, Tamarac, FL 33321.
     2073).                                Tamarac, 7525 Northwest
                                           88th Avenue, Tamarac, FL
                                           33321.
    Collier (FEMA    City of Naples (20-  The Honorable Teresa          Building Department, 295 Riverside    Mar. 8, 2021.................       125130
     Docket No.: B-   04-5222P).           Heitmann, Mayor, City of      Circle, Naples, FL 34102.
     2100).                                Naples, 735 8th Street
                                           South, 2nd Floor, Naples,
                                           FL 34102.
    Lake (FEMA       City of Leesburg     Mr. Al Minner, Manager, City  City Hall, 501 West Meadow Street,    Mar. 12, 2021................       120136
     Docket No.: B-   (20-04-1242P).       of Leesburg, 501 West         Leesburg, FL 34748.
     2076).                                Meadow Street, Leesburg, FL
                                           34748.
    Lake (FEMA       Unincorporated       The Honorable Jeff Cole,      Lake County Administration Building,  Mar. 12, 2021................       120421
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Lake        Manager, Lake County, P.O.    315 West Main Street, Tavares, FL
     2076).           County (20-04-       Box 7800, Tavares, FL         32778.
                      1242P).              32778.
    Leon (FEMA       City of Tallahassee  The Honorable John E.         Stormwater Management Department,     Feb. 22, 2021................       120144
     Docket No.: B-   (19-04-5234P).       Dailey, Mayor, City of        408 North Adams Street,
     2073).                                Tallahassee, 300 South        Tallahassee, FL 32301.
                                           Adams Street, Tallahassee,
                                           FL 32301.
    Leon (FEMA       Unincorporated       The Honorable Bryan Desloge,  Leon County Department of             Feb. 22, 2021................       120143
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Leon        Chairman, Leon County         Development Support and
     2073).           County (19-04-       Commission, 301 South         Environmental Management, 435 North
                      5234P).              Monroe Street, Tallahassee,   Macomb Street, 2nd Floor,
                                           FL 32301.                     Tallahassee, FL 32301.
    Monroe (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable Heather         Monroe County Building Department,    Feb. 22, 2021................       125129
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Monroe      Carruthers, Mayor, Monroe     2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 300,
     2073).           County (20-04-       County Board of               Marathon, FL 33050.
                      4048P).              Commissioners, 500
                                           Whitehead Street, Suite
                                           102, Key West, FL 33040.
    Pinellas (FEMA   City of Clearwater   The Honorable Frank V.        Engineering Department, 100 South     Mar. 11, 2021................       125096
     Docket No.: B-   (20-04-4362P).       Hibbard, Mayor, City of       Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL
     2076).                                Clearwater, P.O. Box 4748,    33756.
                                           Clearwater, FL 33758.
    Sarasota (FEMA   Unincorporated       The Honorable Michael A.      Sarasota County Planning and          Mar. 12, 2021................       125144
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Sarasota    Moran, Chairman, Sarasota     Development Services Department,
     2076).           County (20-04-       County Board of               1001 Sarasota Center Boulevard,
                      5135P).              Commissioners, 1660           Sarasota, FL 34240.
                                           Ringling Boulevard,
                                           Sarasota, FL 34236.
Maryland:
    Anne Arundel     Unincorporated       The Honorable Steuart         Anne Arundel County Heritage Office   Mar. 9, 2021.................       240008
     (FEMA Docket     areas of Anne        Pittman, Anne Arundel         Complex, 2664 Riva Road, Annapolis,
     No.: B-2076).    Arundel County (20-  County Executive, 44          MD 21401.
                      03-1079P).           Calvert Street, Annapolis,
                                           MD 21401.
    Prince George's  City of Laurel (20-  The Honorable Craig A. Moe,   City Hall, 8103 Sandy Spring Road,    Mar. 9, 2021.................       240053
     (FEMA Docket     03-1079P).           Mayor, City of Laurel, 8103   Laurel, MD 20707.
     No.: B-2076).                         Sandy Spring Road, Laurel,
                                           MD 20707.
    Prince George's  Unincorporated       The Honorable Angela D.       Prince George's County Department of  Mar. 9, 2021.................       245208
     (FEMA Docket     areas of Prince      Alsobrooks, Prince George's   Environment, 1801 McCormick Drive,
     No.: B-2076).    George's County      County Executive, 14741       Suite 500, Largo, MD 20774.
                      (20-03-1079P).       Governor Oden Bowie Drive,
                                           Upper Marlboro, MD 20772.
Montana: Gallatin    City of Bozeman (20- Mr. Jeff Mihelich, Manager,   Alfred M. Stiff Building, 20 East     Mar. 1, 2021.................       300028
 (FEMA Docket No.:    08-0561P).           City of Bozeman, P.O. Box     Olive Street, 1st Floor, Bozeman,
 B-2073).                                  1230, Bozeman, MT 59771.      MT 59715.
North Carolina:
    Forsyth (FEMA    City of Winston-     The Honorable Allen Joines,   Inspection Department, 100 East 1st   Mar. 4, 2021.................       375360
     Docket No.: B-   Salem (20-04-        Mayor, City of Winston-       Street, Suite 328, Winston-Salem,
     2106).           2834P).              Salem, P.O. Box 2511,         NC 27101.
                                           Winston-Salem, NC 27102.

    Forsyth (FEMA    Unincorporated       The Honorable David R.        Forsyth County Planning Board,        Mar. 4, 2021.................       375349
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Forsyth     Plyler, Chairman, Forsyth     Department, 309 East Market Street,
     2106).           County (20-04-       County Board of               Smithfield, NC 27577.
                      2834P).              Commissioners, 201 North
                                           Chestnut Street, Winston-
                                           Salem, NC 27101.
    Pamlico (FEMA    Town of Vandemere    The Honorable Judy H.         Town Hall, 1042 Pennsylvania Avenue,  Mar. 11, 2021................       370438
     Docket No.: B-   (20-04-5047P).       Thaanum, Mayor, Town of       Vandemere, NC 28587.
     2076).                                Vandemere, P.O. Box 338,
                                           Vandemere, NC 28587.
Pennsylvania:
    Allegheny (FEMA  Township of Moon     Ms. Dawn Lane, Manager,       Township Hall, 1000 Beaver Grade      Mar. 12, 2021................       421082
     Docket No.: B-   (20-03-0739P).       Township of Moon, 1000        Road, Moon Township, PA 15108.
     2100).                                Beaver Grade Road, Moon
                                           Township, PA 15108.
    Allegheny (FEMA  Township of Shaler   The Honorable David Shutter,  Township Hall, 300 Wetzel Road,       Mar. 1, 2021.................       421101
     Docket No.: B-   (20-03-0720P).       President, Township of        Glenshaw, PA 15116.
     2076).                                Shaler Board of
                                           Commissioners, 300 Wetzel
                                           Road, Glenshaw, PA 15116.
South Carolina:
    Dillon (FEMA     Town of Latta (20-   Mr. Jarett Taylor, Town of    Town Hall, 107 Northwest Railroad     Feb. 24, 2021................       450067
     Docket No.: B-   04-2341P).           Latta Administrator, 107      Avenue, Latta, SC 29565.
     2076).                                Northwest Railroad Avenue,
                                           Latta, SC 29565.
    Dillon (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable Stevie Grice,   Dillon County Administrative          Feb. 24, 2021................       450064
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Dillon      Chairman, Dillon County       Building, 211 West Howard Street,
     2076).           County (20-04-       Council, P.O. Box 449,        Dillon, SC 29536.
                      2341P).              Dillon, SC 29536.
Texas:
    Collin (FEMA     City of McKinney     The Honorable George Fuller,  Engineering Department, 221 North     Mar. 1, 2021.................       480135
     Docket No.: B-   (20-06-1287P).       Mayor, City of McKinney,      Tennessee Street, McKinney, TX
     2073).                                P.O. Box 517, McKinney, TX    75069.
                                           75070.
    Dallas (FEMA     City of Coppell (20- The Honorable Karen Hunt,     Department of Public Works, 265 East  Feb. 22, 2021................       480170
     Docket No.: B-   06-1839P).           Mayor, City of Coppell,       Parkway Boulevard, Coppell, TX
     2100).                                P.O. Box 9478, Coppell, TX    75019.
                                           75019.
    Dallas (FEMA     City of Dallas (20-  The Honorable Eric Johnson,   Floodplain and Drainage Management    Feb. 22, 2021................       480171
     Docket No.: B-   06-1839P).           Mayor, City of Dallas, 1500   Department, 320 East Jefferson
     2100).                                Marilla Street, Suite 5EN,    Boulevard, Room 312, Dallas, TX
                                           Dallas, TX 75201.             75203.
    Dallas (FEMA     City of Dallas (20-  The Honorable Eric Johnson,   Floodplain and Drainage Management    Mar. 1, 2021.................       480171
     Docket No.: B-   06-3047P).           Mayor, City of Dallas, 1500   Department, 320 East Jefferson
     2100).                                Marilla Street, Suite 5EN,    Boulevard, Room 312, Dallas, TX
                                           Dallas, TX 75201.             75203.
    Dallas (FEMA     City of Irving (20-  The Honorable Rick Stopfer,   Engineering Department, 825 West      Feb. 22, 2021................       480180
     Docket No.: B-   06-1839P).           Mayor, City of Irving, 825    Irving Boulevard, Irving, TX 75060.
     2100).                                West Irving Boulevard,
                                           Irving, TX 75060.
    Guadalupe (FEMA  City of Cibolo (20-  Mr. Robert T. Herrera,        Geographic Information Systems (GIS)  Mar. 4, 2021.................       480267
     Docket No.: B-   06-0816P).           Manager, City of Cibolo,      Department, 200 South Main Street,
     2073).                                200 South Main Street,        Cibolo, TX 78108.
                                           Cibolo, TX 78108.
    Hays (FEMA       Unincorporated       The Honorable Ruben Becerra,  Hays County Development Services      Mar. 11, 2021................       480321
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Hays        Hays County Judge, 111 East   Department, 2171 Yarrington Road,
     2073).           County (20-06-       San Antonio Street, Suite     Kyle, TX 78640.
                      1997P).              300, San Marcos, TX 78666.
    Tarrant (FEMA    City of Arlington    The Honorable Jeff Williams,  Public Works and Transportation       Mar. 8, 2021.................       485454
     Docket No.: B-   (20-06-2041P).       Mayor, City of Arlington,     Department, 101 West Abram Street,
     2076).                                P.O. Box 90231, Arlington,    Arlington, TX 76010.
                                           TX 76004.
    Tom Green (FEMA  City of San Angelo   The Honorable Brenda Gunter,  City Hall, 301 West Beauregard        Feb. 22, 2021................       480623
     Docket No.: B-   (20-06-2379P).       Mayor, City of San Angelo,    Avenue, San Angelo, TX 76902.
     2076).                                72 West College Avenue, San
                                           Angelo, TX 76903.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2021-08691 Filed 4-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P