[Federal Register: July 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 40643]
[DOCID:fr15jy08-104]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on July 17, 2008 at
10 a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(5), (7), (9)(B), and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(5),
(7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at
the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for July 17,
2008 will be:
    Formal orders of investigation; institution and settlement of
injunctive actions; institution and settlement of administrative
proceedings of an enforcement nature; other matters related to
enforcement proceedings; and an opinion.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 10, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-16085 Filed 7-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 18 (Monday, January 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8746-8747]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01940]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

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

    Docket Numbers: ER17-577-000.
    Applicants: Rock River I, LLC.
    Description: Amendment to December 19, 2016 Rock River I, LLC
tariff filing (Category 1 Seller Status in the Northwest Region).
    Filed Date: 1/17/17.
    Accession Number: 20170117-5321.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-843-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: GIA & DSA Green Beanworks C
Project SA Nos. 933 & 934 to be effective 1/25/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/24/17.
    Accession Number: 20170124-5068.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-844-000.
    Applicants: Indiana Michigan Power Company, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEP submits Original CIAC,
SA No. 4613 between NIPSCO and Indiana Michigan Power to be effective
1/25/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/24/17.
    Accession Number: 20170124-5072.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-845-000.
    Applicants: Indiana Michigan Power Company, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEP submits Original CIAC,
SA No. 4614 between NIPSCO and AEP I-M Transmission to be effective 1/
25/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/24/17.
    Accession Number: 20170124-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-846-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: GIA & DSA Green Beanworks D
Project SA Nos. 935 & 936 to be effective 1/25/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/24/17.
    Accession Number: 20170124-5088.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/14/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-847-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-01-24 Transition From
T+35M to T+33M Amendment to be effective 5/3/2017.
    Filed Date: 1/24/17.
    Accession Number: 20170124-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/14/17.

    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: January 24, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-01940 Filed 1-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 73 (Monday, April 19, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20276-20278]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07853]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31364; Amdt. No. 3951]

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

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

DATES: This rule is effective April 19, 2021. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of April 19, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30. 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Information Services, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to
register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg 29 Room 104, Oklahoma
City, OK 73169. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends 14 CFR part 97 by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums
and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its
associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed
on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this
amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20.
The applicable FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, 8260-15B,
when required by an entry on 8260-15A, and 8260-15C.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex
nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the
Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use
the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead
refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers or
aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of

incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the complete
description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form
documents is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR
sections and specifies the typed of SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs
with their applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies
the airport and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff
Minimums and/or ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part
97 of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flights safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less
than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary
to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d),
good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

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

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 2, 2021.
Wade Terrell,
Aviation Safety, Manager, Flight Procedures & Airspace Group, Flight
Technologies and Procedures Division.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CRF part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

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

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

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 17 June 2021

Fairbanks, AK, Fairbanks Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 6B
Fort Smith, AR, KFSM, ILS OR LOC RWY 7, Amdt 1A
St Johns, AZ, KSJN, VOR-A, Amdt 3
Mammoth Lakes, CA, Mammoth Yosemite, NIKOL TWO Graphic DP
San Jose, CA, KSJC, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 30L, Amdt 3
San Jose, CA, KSJC, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 30R, Amdt 2
Naples, FL, KAPF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 2C
Naples, FL, KAPF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1C
Tampa, FL, KTPA, LOC RWY 1R, Amdt 4B
Venice, FL, Venice Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4
Atlanta, GA, Atlanta Speedway, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2B
Hilo, HI, PHTO, ILS OR LOC RWY 26, Amdt 14A
Honolulu, HI, PHNL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 8R, Amdt 1
Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL, KMDH, ILS OR LOC RWY 18L, Amdt 13B
Carbondale/Murphysboro, IL, KMDH, NDB RWY 18L, Amdt 13B
Chicago, IL, KMDW, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 4R, Amdt 4
Chicago, IL, KMDW, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 4R, Amdt 1
Marion, IL, KMWA, ILS OR LOC RWY 20, Amdt 12C
Marion, IL, KMWA, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 1D
Marion, IL, KMWA, RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 1D
Marion, IL, KMWA, VOR RWY 2, Amdt 13E, CANCELLED
Beverly, MA, KBVY, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 2
Boston, MA, KBOS, ILS OR LOC RWY 33L, ILS RWY 33L (SA CAT I), ILS
RWY 33L (CAT II), ILS RWY 33L (CAT III), Amdt 5F
Ocean City, MD, KOXB, LOC RWY 14, Amdt 2B, CANCELLED
Ocean City, MD, KOXB, LOC RWY 32, Orig
Greenville, ME, Greenville Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 3
Presque Isle, ME, KPQI, ILS OR LOC RWY 1, Amdt 7A
Eveleth, MN, KEVM, VOR RWY 27, Amdt 1B, CANCELLED
Preston, MN, KFKA, RNAV (GPS) RWY 29, Amdt 1E
St Paul, MN, KSTP, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 1A
Cuba, MO, KUBX, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1
Grain Valley, MO, 3GV, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-A
Potosi, MO, 8WC, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 2D
Salem, MO, K33, VOR-A, Orig-A, CANCELLED
Billings, MT, KBIL, ILS OR LOC RWY 28R, Amdt 3A
Billings, MT, KBIL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 2A
Billings, MT, KBIL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 10L, Amdt 4A
Billings, MT, KBIL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 2A
Billings, MT, KBIL, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 28R, Amdt 4A
Billings, MT, KBIL, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 28R, Amdt 1A
Williston, ND, KXWA, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig
Williston, ND, KXWA, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig
Williston, ND, Williston Basin Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 1
Williston, ND, KXWA, VOR RWY 22, Orig
Concord, NH, KCON, ILS OR LOC RWY 35, Amdt 2
Concord, NH, KCON, RNAV (GPS) RWY 12, Amdt 1
Concord, NH, KCON, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
Concord, NH, KCON, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
Concord, NH, KCON, VOR-A, Amdt 1
Lebanon, NH, Lebanon Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3

Manchester, NH, KMHT, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 17, Amdt 1D
Pittstown, NJ, Alexandria, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Owyhee, NV, 10U, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig
Owyhee, NV, Owyhee, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
New York, NY, KLGA, COPTER ILS OR LOC RWY 13, Amdt 1
Saranac Lake, NY, KSLK, ILS OR LOC RWY 23, Amdt 11
Saranac Lake, NY, KSLK, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1
Athens/Albany, OH, KUNI, NDB RWY 25, Amdt 9D
Dayton, OH, 3I7, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig
Dayton, OH, 3I7, VOR OR GPS RWY 21, Amdt 3B, CANCELLED
Gallipolis, OH, KGAS, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1
Springfield, OH, KSGH, NDB RWY 24, Amdt 17, CANCELLED
Wilmington, OH, KILN, ILS OR LOC RWY 4L, Amdt 4E
Wilmington, OH, KILN, ILS OR LOC RWY 4R, Orig-D
Wilmington, OH, KILN, ILS OR LOC RWY 22L, ILS RWY 22L (SA CAT I),
ILS RWY 22L (CAT II), Orig-D
Wilmington, OH, KILN, ILS OR LOC RWY 22R, ILS RWY 22R (SA CAT I),
ILS RWY 22R (CAT II), ILS RWY 22R (CAT III), Amdt 6A
Wilmington, OH, KILN, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4L, Orig-D
Hinton, OK, 2O8, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1C
Hinton, OK, 2O8, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 1C
Hinton, OK, Hinton Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A
Abilene, TX, KABI, RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-B. CANCELLED
Abilene, TX, Abilene Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4A
Austin, TX, KEDC, RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1A
Barre/Montpelier, VT, KMPV, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 2
Seattle, WA, KSEA, ILS OR LOC RWY 16L, ILS RWY 16L (SA CAT I), ILS
RWY 16L (CAT II), ILS RWY 16L (CAT III), Amdt 8A
Green Bay, WI, KGRB, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Amdt 2B
Green Bay, WI, KGRB, RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1C
Green Bay, WI, KGRB, RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 3B
Ravenswood, WV, I18, RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Orig-B
Sheridan, WY, KSHR, RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1A
    RESCINDED: On March 24, 2021 (86 FR 15583), the FAA published an
Amendment in Docket No. 31359 Amdt No. 3947, to Part 97 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations under section 97.23 and 97.25. The
following entries for Beverly, MA, effective April 22, 2021, are
hereby rescinded in their entirety:
Beverly, MA, KBVY, LOC RWY 16, Amdt 8
Beverly, MA, Beverly Rgnl, VOR RWY 16, Amdt 5E, CANCELLED

[FR Doc. 2021-07853 Filed 4-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 207 (Friday, October 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60085-60086]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23602]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2021-0011]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt six individuals from
the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate
commerce. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons. The exemptions enable these individuals to operate
CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in
one eye.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on October 9, 2021. The
exemptions expire on October 9, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-
0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding
viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Dockets
Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number, FMCSA-2021-0011, in the keyword box, and click ``Search.''
Next, sort the results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first
notice listed, and click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access
to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets
Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
To be sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
(202) 366-9826 before visiting Dockets Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its regulatory process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On September 8, 2021, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt
of applications from six individuals requesting an exemption from
vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and requested comments from
the public (86 FR 50424). The public comment period ended on October 8,
2021, and one comment was received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level
that would be achieved by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(10).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with
corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen)
in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at
least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability
to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red,
green, and amber.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. Lee Cole submitted a
comment that was outside the scope of this notice.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such
exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at
the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the
FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a
driver's medical certification.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on medical reports about the applicants' vision, as well as their
driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency. The
qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in the September 8, 2021, Federal
Register notice (86 FR 50424) and will not be repeated here.
    FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision
requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their
limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The six
exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They
are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various

reasons, including amblyopia, complete loss of vision, refractive
amblyopia, retinal detachment, and retinal hemorrhage. In most cases,
their eye conditions did not develop recently. Three of the applicants
were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since
childhood. The three individuals that developed their vision conditions
as adults have had them for a range of 4 to 12 years. Although each
applicant has one eye that does not meet the vision requirement in
Sec.  391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the
other eye, and, in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient vision to perform
all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV.
    Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of a
valid license to operate a CMV. By meeting State licensing
requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a
CMV with their limited vision in intrastate commerce, even though their
vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. FMCSA
believes that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history
provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely
in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations,
involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and
on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in
congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and
vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction
to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances
between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and
driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions.
    The applicants in this notice have driven CMVs with their limited
vision in careers ranging from 5 to 44 years. In the past 3 years, one
driver was involved in a crash, and no drivers were convicted of moving
violations in CMVs. All the applicants achieved a record of safety
while driving with their vision impairment that demonstrates the
likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate
their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their
vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA
concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the
future.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the vision requirement in Sec.  391.41(b)(10) is likely
to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each driver must be physically examined every year (a) by an
ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in Sec.  391.41(b)(10) and
(b) by a certified medical examiner (ME) who attests that the
individual is otherwise physically qualified under Sec.  391.41; (2)
each driver must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or
optometrist's report to the ME at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) each driver must provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification
file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of
the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official.

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the six exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement, Sec.
391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:

Jason R. Flodin (WA)
Justin W. Green (AR)
Joshua L. Kupsch (WI)
Josue M. Rodriguez-Espinoza (CA)
Dana R. Williams (IL)
Larry L. Yow (NC)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each exemption
will be valid for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following
occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of
the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-23602 Filed 10-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: September 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 180)]
[Notices]
[Page 53273-53274]
[DOCID:fr18se07-78]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56386; File No. SR-OCC-2007-09]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Clearing Fee Reduction

 September 11, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on August 2, 2007, The
Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared
primarily by OCC. 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change would reduce certain OCC clearing fees.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC 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. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has modified parts of these statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The purpose of this rule change is to make additional fee
reductions. First, OCC is further reducing its currently discounted
standard clearing fee schedule, as described in the following chart.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The standard fee schedule currently applies to (i)
securities options, (ii) security futures where at least one side of
the trade is cleared by an OCC Clearing Member, and (iii) commodity
futures traded on the Philadelphia Board of Trade.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Current permanent     Discounted standard fee  Discounted standard fee
           Contracts/Trade              standard fee schedule,     schedule, effective     schedule, effective
                                        effective May 1, 2007         May 1, 2007           September 1, 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-500................................  $0.05/contract.........  $0.035/contract........  $0.02/contract.
501-1,000............................  $0.04/contract.........  $0.028/contract........  $0.016/contract.
1,001-2,000..........................  $0.03/contract.........  $0.021/contract........  $15.00 (capped).
>2,000...............................  $55.00 (capped)........  $35.00 (capped)........  $15.00 (capped).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, OCC is halving the standard market maker scratch fee to one
cent per side. The discounted clearing fees and market-maker scratch
fees will be effective from September 1 through December 31, 2007.
Third, OCC is converting the CBOE Futures Exchange (``CFE'') to its
standard rebate-eligible fee schedule, effective September 1, 2007. As
a result, clearing fees charged for CFE transactions will be reduced.
The outdated alternative fee schedule offered to futures markets also
will be eliminated.
    The reductions in OCC's clearing fees reflect the strong contract
volume experienced by OCC this year to date. OCC believes that these
fee changes will financially benefit clearing members and other market
participants without adversely affecting OCC's ability to meet its
expenses and maintain an acceptable level of retained earnings.
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A of the Act
because it benefits clearing members and other market participants by
reducing and discounting clearing fees and allocating them in a fair
and equitable manner. The proposed rule change is not inconsistent with
the existing rules of OCC, including any other rules proposed to be
amended.

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any
burden on competition.

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

    Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with
respect to the proposed rule change, and none have been received.

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

    Because the foregoing rule change changes fees charged clearing
members by OCC, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the

Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \5\ thereunder. At any time within sixty
days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may
summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-OCC-2007-09 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2007-09. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC. 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-OCC-2007-09 and should be
submitted on or before October 9, 2007.

Florence E. Harmon.
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-18271 Filed 9-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34867-34869]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12334]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2905-035]

Village of Enosburg Falls, Vermont; Notice of Application
Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests,
Ready for Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments,
Recommendations, Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Subsequent Minor License.
    b. Project No.: 2905-035.
    c. Date Filed: April 30, 2021.
    d. Applicant: Village of Enosburg Falls, Vermont (Village).
    e. Name of Project: Enosburg Falls Hydroelectric Project (project).
    f. Location: On the Missisquoi River in Franklin County, Vermont.
The project does not occupy any federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Abbey Miller, Director of Finance, Village of
Enosburg Falls, 42 Village Drive, Village of Enosburg Falls, VT 05450;
phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>; email at [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: John Baummer at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests, comments,
recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from
the issuance date of this notice; reply comments are due 105 days from
the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and protests, comments,

recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions using the
Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
https://ferconline.ferc.gov/QuickComment.aspx. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.
Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via
any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include docket
number P-2905-035.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on 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. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready
for environmental analysis.
    The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued a final rule on
April 20, 2022, revising the regulations under 40 CFR parts 1502, 1507,
and 1508 that federal agencies use to implement the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (see National Environmental Policy Act
Implementing Regulations Revisions, 87 FR 23,453-70). The final rule
became effective on May 20, 2022. Commission staff intends to conduct
its NEPA review in accordance with CEQ's new regulations.
    l. Project Description: The existing Enosburg Falls Project
consists of: (1) a 284-foot-long, 18.5-foot-high concrete and steel
gravity dam that includes the following sections: (a) a 5-foot-long
east abutment section; (b) a 105-foot-long east spillway section with a
2-foot-high pneumatic crest gate and an elevation of 386.87 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) at the top of the
gate; (c) a 4-foot-long pier; (d) a 60-foot-long west spillway section
with a 2-foot-high pneumatic crest gate and an elevation of 386.87 feet
NGVD 29 at the top of the gate; (e) a 46-foot-long west abutment
section; and (f) an approximately 64-foot-long, 24-foot-high steel
headgate structure that is equipped with: (i) a 60-foot-wide, 20-foot-
high inclined steel trashrack with 1-inch clear bar spacing; (ii) two
10-foot-wide, 8-foot-high hydraulically-powered sluice gates; and (iii)
a 12-foot-wide, 8-foot-high hydraulically-powered intake gate; (2) a
121-acre impoundment at surface elevation of 386.87 feet NGVD 29; (3)
an 80-foot-long, 5.6-foot-diameter steel penstock that extends from the
intake gate; (4) a 39.9-foot-long, 24.3-foot-wide concrete and brick
masonry powerhouse (Kendall Plant) containing a 375-kilowatt (kW) semi-
Kaplan regulated turbine-generator unit that discharges into the
Missisquoi River approximately 170 feet downstream of the project dam;
(5) an approximately 210-foot-long, 29-foot-wide headrace canal; (6) an
intake structure at the downstream end of the headrace canal that is
equipped with an approximately 30.1-foot-wide, 11.4-foot-high stoplog
slot and an approximately 30.1-foot-wide, 11.4-foot-high inclined
trashrack; (7) a 28.7-foot-long, 29.9-foot-wide concrete and brick
masonry powerhouse (Village Plant) containing a 600-kW vertical Kaplan
turbine-generator unit that discharges to an approximately 240-foot-
long, 25-foot-wide tailrace; (8) two 2.4-kilovolt (kV) generator lead
lines, respectively 200-foot-long and 250-foot-long, and a 4.16/12.47-
kV transformer that connect the project to the local utility
distribution system; and (9) appurtenant facilities. The project
creates an approximately 1,400-foot-long bypassed reach of the
Missisquoi River.
    The Village voluntarily operates the project in a run-of-river mode
using an automatic pond level control system to regulate turbines
operation, such that outflow from the project approximates inflow.
Article 401 of the current license requires the Village to: (1)
maintain a minimum flow of 293 cubic feet per second (cfs) from April
15-June 15, and 120 cfs from J une 16-April 14, or inflow, whichever is
less, from the Kendall Plant to the bypassed reach; and (2) maintain a
year-round minimum flow of 293 cfs or inflow, whichever is less, from
the Village Plant to the downstream reach of the Missisquoi River.
Downstream fish passage is provided by a bypass facility located on the
west abutment that consists of a 3-foot-wide, 5-foot-high weir gate, a
3-foot-wide, 6-foot-long concrete fish collection box, and an
approximately 65-foot-long, 2-foot-diameter concrete encased fish
passage pipe that empties into the bypassed reach approximately 110
feet downstream of the dam.
    The Village proposes to: (1) continue operating the project in a
run-of-river mode; (2) provide a year-round minimum flow of 243 cfs or
inflow, whichever is less, from the Kendall Plant to the bypassed
reach; (3) develop a recreation management plan for improving
recreation at the project; (4) release 1 inch of spill over the top of
the project dam crest gates to provide an aesthetic veil of flow over
the dam; (5) develop an operation compliance monitoring plan for
maintaining minimum flows, impoundment levels, and run-of-river
operation; and (6) develop a historic properties management plan to
address and mitigate project effects on historic properties.
    m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's
website at https://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, contact FERC Online
Support.
    n. 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, and .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.
    All filings must: (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST,'' ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' ``COMMENTS,'' ``REPLY COMMENTS,''
``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or ``PRESCRIPTIONS;''
(2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project
number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the
name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or
intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, terms and
conditions, or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served

upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. A copy of all other filings in reference to this
application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed on the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    You may also register online at https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related
to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online
Support.
    o. The applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date
of issuance of this notice: (1) a copy of the water quality
certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including
proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request;
or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification. Please note
that the certification request must comply with 40 CFR 121.5(b),
including documentation that a pre-filing meeting request was submitted
to the certifying authority at least 30 days prior to submitting the
certification request. Please also note that the certification request
must be sent to the certifying authority and to the Commission
concurrently.
    p. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following preliminary schedule. Revisions to the schedule will
be made as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline for filing interventions, protests,  August 2022.
 comments, recommendations, preliminary
 terms and conditions, and preliminary
 fishway prescriptions.
Deadline for filing reply comments..........  September 2022.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    q. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    Dated: June 2, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-12334 Filed 6-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 27, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 28997]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13399]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0537]

Safety Zone; Three Rivers Regatta Fireworks/EQT 4th of July
Celebration, Pittsburgh, PA

AGENCY:  Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION:  Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for the ``Three
Rivers Regatta Fireworks/EQT 4th of July Celebration'' on the Allegheny
River, Monongahela River, and Ohio River. The safety zone is necessary
to provide for the safety of life and to protect vessels from the
hazards associated with the ``Three Rivers Regatta Fireworks/EQT 4th of
July Celebration'' barge fireworks displays. During the enforcement
period, entry into the safety zone is prohibited for all vessels not
registered with the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels,
unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety
Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 1, line 47, will be
enforced from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m., on July 4, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email MST1 Jennifer Haggins, Marine
Safety Unit Pittsburgh, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone
for the annual ``Three Rivers Regatta Fireworks/EQT 4th of July
Celebration'' barge fireworks display, listed in the regulations in 33
CFR 165.801, Table 1, Sector Ohio Valley, No. 47 from 9 p.m. until
10:30 p.m., on July 4, 2017. Our Sector Ohio Valley Annual and
Recurring Safety Zones, Sec.  165.801, specifies the location of the
regulated area for the Ohio River, Mile 0.0-0.5, Alleghany River, Mile
0.0-0.5, and Monongahela River, Mile 0.0-0.5. Entry into the safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine
Safety Unit Pittsburgh (COTP) or a designated representative. Persons
or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through the safety zone
must request permission from the COTP or a designated representative.
If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply with the
instructions of the COTP or designated representative.
    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR
165.801 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice of enforcement
in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of this enforcement period via Local Notice to Mariners
and updates via Marine Information Broadcasts.

    Dated: June 19, 2017.
L. McClain, Jr.,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Marine Safety Unit
Pittsburgh.
[FR Doc. 2017-13399 Filed 6-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 131 (Friday, July 8, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40262-40263]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17050]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0512; FRL-9430-6]

Determination of Attainment, Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On March 12, 2010, EPA published a final rule making a
determination that the entire Chicago-Gary-Lake County, Illinois-
Indiana (IL-IN) 1997 eight-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained
the 1997 eight-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). This action corrects an omission in the regulatory text of the
aforementioned Federal Register document.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on July 8, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This action provides a
technical correction to the regulatory language in the final rulemaking
published at 75 FR 12088 on March 12, 2010. In that rulemaking, EPA
made a determination that the entire Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN
ozone nonattainment area has attained the 1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS.
The determination was based on complete, quality-assured ambient air
quality monitoring data for the period of 2006-2008. Additional
background on the applicable NAAQS and EPA's data are contained in the
September 24, 2009 proposed rule at 74 FR 48703-48706.
    As published on March 12, 2010, the regulatory language contained
an omission which needs to be corrected. Our determination was properly
codified for the Indiana portion of the area (Lake and Porter Counties)
in the final rule at 75 FR 12089 with the addition of 40 CFR
52.777(mm)). However, an amendment to 40 CFR 52 codifying our
determination for the Illinois portion of the area, Cook, DuPage, Kane,
Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties, and portions of Grundy County (Aux
Sable and Goose Lake Townships) and Kendall County (Oswego Township),
was inadvertently omitted. Therefore, EPA is correcting this error by
adding paragraph (jj) to 40 CFR 52.726 for Illinois.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing
notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that
there is good cause for making today's rule final without prior
proposal and opportunity for comment because this rule is not
substantive and imposes no regulatory requirements, but merely corrects
an omitted citation in a previous action. Thus, notice and public
procedure are unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). Because
the agency has made a ``good cause'' finding that this action is not
subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative
Procedures Act or any other statute as indicated in the Supplementary
Information section above, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C 601
et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a
significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and
204 of UMRA. This rule also does not have a substantial direct effect
on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor
will it have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62
FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    This technical correction action does not involve technical
standards; thus the requirements of section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do
not apply. The rule also does not involve special consideration of
environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In issuing this rule, EPA has
taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity,
minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, as required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996).

EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15,
1998) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance
with the ``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued
under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
    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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to
make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the
agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. This
determination must be supported by a brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
As stated previously, EPA had made such a good cause finding, including
the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of July 8,
2011. EPA will submit a report containing this rule 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. This correction to 40 CFR part 52 for
Illinois is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

    Dated: June 24, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart O--Illinois

0
2. Section 52.726 is amended by adding paragraph (jj) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.726  Control strategy. Ozone.

* * * * *
    (jj) Determination of attainment. On June 5, 2009, the state of
Indiana requested that EPA find that the Indiana portion of the
Chicago-Gary-Lake County, Illinois-Indiana (IL-IN) ozone nonattainment
area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS). After review of Indiana's submission and 2006-2008
ozone air quality data for this ozone nonattainment area, EPA finds
that the entire Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN area has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, EPA has determined, as of March 12,
2010, that Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties, and
portions of Grundy County (Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships) and
Kendall County (Oswego Township) in Illinois have attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard.

[FR Doc. 2011-17050 Filed 7-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4691-4693]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01234]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0676; FRL-9903-12]

Pesticides; Consideration of Spray Drift in Pesticide Risk
Assessment: Notice of Availability and Request for Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the availability of two draft guidance
documents for public comment. These documents describe how off-site
spray drift will be evaluated for ecological and human health risk
assessments for pesticides. Once final, these guidance documents will
be posted on EPA's Web site, to ensure consistent risk assessment
practices and provide transparency for pesticide registrants and other
interested stakeholders.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 31, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0676, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the ecological risk assessment
guidance document, Faruque Khan, Environmental Fate and Effects
Division, (7507P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For the human health risk assessment guidance document, Jeff
Dawson, Health Effects Division, (7509P), same address; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    Pesticides are regulated under both the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et. seq., and
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 21
U.S.C. 346a.

B. Does this action apply to me?

    you may be potentially affected by this action if you are a
producer of pesticide products (NAICS 32532), importers of such
products, or any person or company who seeks to obtain a tolerance for
such a pesticide. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) code is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Other types of entities not listed could also be affected.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

D. What action is the Agency taking?

    Pesticide drift can be characterized as the physical movement of a
pesticide through the air at the time of application or soon thereafter
from the target site to any non- or off-target site. This does not
include pesticide movements by erosion, migration, volatility, or
windblown soil particles after application. Drift is dependent on the
design of application equipment, size of spray droplets or dry
particles, weather conditions, and other factors.
    Once off-target, pesticide drift can potentially deposit in
unintended areas or directly onto people or nontarget species. To
provide guidance to EPA staff and stakeholders, EPA has developed two
documents describing EPA's approach to assessing pesticide drift in
human health and ecological risk assessments. Both documents are
available in the docket for this action using the docket identifier
EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0676.
     Guidance on Modeling Offsite Deposition of Pesticides via
Spray Drift for Ecological and Drinking Water Assessments for the
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (Draft dated 11/1/2013) (Ref.
1), and
     Residential Exposure Assessment Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs), Addenda 1: Consideration of Spray Drift (Draft dated
11/1/2013) (Ref. 2).
    The draft Ecological and Drinking Water Assessment Guidance
provides information on estimating spray drift fractions of liquid
sprays for modeling offsite deposition of a pesticide for ecological
and drinking water assessment and on estimating distances from the
treated field where adverse effects may be observed due to exposure to
spray drift. The draft guidance also provides default assumptions for
modeling inputs to use when estimating spray drift in terrestrial and
aquatic assessments.
    The Residential Exposure Addenda describes a screening approach for
defining when assessments are needed and the methodology for estimating
risks for indirect exposures to pesticide drift, such as children
playing on a lawn that has pesticide residues that drifted from a
nearby treated field. The draft

guidance describes when quantitative risk assessments for spray drift
are generally needed, and also provides the modeling inputs needed to
complete the exposure and risk assessments.
    EPA expects the model-generated values for spray drift fractions to
provide realistic exposure and risk estimates for both ecological and
human health assessments. These policies will promote consistency
within EPA, as well as with other federal agencies and international
regulatory partners that rely on predicted spray drift values.

II. Spray Drift Estimates Used for Risk Assessment

    EPA uses two peer-reviewed spray drift models (AgDRIFT and AGDISP)
to estimate the contribution of spray drift to ecological and human
health risk assessments. Both models estimate drift fractions, as
applicable to spray of liquid materials. In general, OPP uses the
AgDRIFT model to assess spray drift from agricultural applications,
whereas AGDISP is used for other types of pesticide applications, such
as aerial application of mosquito adulticides. It is noted that AGDISP
has limited capability to estimate drift fractions from dry materials
application.
    EPA has prepared a support document (Ref. 3), which is available in
the docket for this action, explaining the scientific basis for AgDRIFT
and AGDISP, and providing information on this harmonized approach for
estimating spray drift fractions.

III. Consideration of Spray Drift in Ecological Risk Assessment

    To enhance consistency and provide more realistic risk estimates,
the Agency has developed the draft ecological guidance (Ref. 1) to
apply a uniform approach for estimating drift fractions for all tiers
of ecological risk assessments. Unit III. provides historical
information on OPP's approach for estimation of spray drift.
    Prior to the adoption of AgDRIFT and AGDISP, for aquatic exposure
assessment purposes, default values of 5% were recommended to OPP for
use as estimates for the spray drift loading from aerial and air-blast
applications to a pond (Ref. 4). However, beginning in the 1990s, OPP's
practice was to use default drift values--developed using best
professional judgement--of 5% (aerial application), 3% (airblast
application), and 1% (ground application) in terrestrial and aquatic
assessments. Then, to make more realistic calculations of exposure from
spray drift deposition, EPA implemented the use of AgDRIFT model-
generated values for spray drift fractions for:
     Screening-level (Tier I) aquatic exposure model GENEEC
(GENeric Estimated Exposure Concentration) for ecological exposure
assessments, and
     Tier I--FIRST (FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool) and
Tier II--PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model)/EXAMS (Exposure Analysis
Modeling System) for drinking water assessments.
    However, the practice of using default drift values of 5% (aerial
application), 3% (airblast application), and 1% (ground application) in
terrestrial and Tier II aquatic assessments continued.
    In 2004, EPA staff performed a comparison study of these
previously-specified, percentage-based default spray drift deposition
levels and AgDRIFT predictions. The comparison indicated these default
values can potentially underestimate off-site deposition of spray drift
under certain scenarios when compared to model-predicted values (Ref.
5).
    Based upon continued model refinements, EPA is now revising its
approach for terrestrial and Tier II aquatic assessments. As a result
of these revisions, EPA has developed default model input parameters to
estimate the spray drift fraction for all tiers of aquatic and
terrestrial exposure assessments. Use of these inputs in the AgDRIFT
model should result in more realistic estimates of exposure from spray
drift deposition for all terrestrial and aquatic environments.

IV. Consideration of Spray Drift in Human Health Risk Assessment

    The draft guidance for considering spray drift in human health risk
assessment has been developed as an addendum to the EPA's existing SOPs
For Residential Exposure Assessment (SOPs), which are available at
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/residential-exposure-sop.html.
EPA routinely uses the SOPs as the basis for evaluating the risks
associated with residential exposures to pesticides, including
residential turf assessments.
    The predominant sources of potential human health risks associated
with spray drift is from direct contact with sprays and from contact
with contaminated surfaces such as lawns in areas adjacent to pesticide
applications. Direct contact with sprays is considered a violation of
standard label language, and as applicable, EPA's Worker Protection
Standard (40 CFR part 170). This means that direct contact is not
evaluated in risk assessment but is addressed through enforcement
action against persons not complying with label prohibitions/
directions, through applicator education, and through other means. The
primary focus on spray drift in the human health risk assessment
process is through indirect contact with contaminated surfaces such as
lawns. The draft guidance document describes scenarios for which
quantitative risk assessments for spray drift would generally be
appropriate, and provides the information needed to complete a
residential turf assessment using spray drift fractions predicted by
AgDRIFT.
    Spray drift is governed by a variety of factors which govern how
much of the pesticide application deposits on surfaces where contact
with residues can eventually lead to indirect exposures (e.g., children
playing on lawns that are next to treated fields and where residues
have deposited). The potential risk estimates from these residues can
be calculated using drift modeling coupled with methods employed for
residential risk assessments for turf products. There is a regulatory
precedent for this approach as it has been used by the Agency in a
number of previous situations that include:
     Response to a petition to cancel 14 pesticides, (69 FR
30042; May 26, 2004; FRL-7355-7),
     Development of buffer zone estimates for two
organophosphate insecticides used on orchard crops in the Pacific
Northwest, and
     Development of a recent spray drift risk assessment for
all uses of an organophosphate insecticide, available at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0850-0105.
    Using default assumptions, the AgDRIFT model is used to predict
spray drift estimates (similar to the ecological assessment process
described in Unit III.) in the absence of application parameters such
as droplet size spectrum, release height, wind speed, and percent of
swath displacement (i.e., the same Tier 1 input parameters are used to
compute drift fractions for both human health and ecological risk
assessment). In the human health risk assessment process, deposition
estimates are integrated over 50 feet wide lawns to account for the
fact that small children can play anywhere on an impacted lawn. In the
draft guidance document (Ref. 2), drift estimates are then used to
adjust deposition values for the standard methods for evaluating
children's exposure from treated turf. Small children are the focus of
this methodology because they have the highest exposures. Values are
calculated using lawns at different distances away from a treatment
area--adjoining it to 300 feet away. Also, additional spray

drift deposition values are included which account for more options
available in the AgDRIFT model which allows for flexibility in the risk
management process. These include:
     All canopy types for orchard airblast sprayers,
     All boom height and spray quality combinations available
for groundboom sprayers, and
     Different options for aircraft including consideration of
helicopter use and differing spray qualities (e.g., coarse instead of
fine to medium spray quality).

V. Request for Comment

    EPA is providing an opportunity, through this notice, for the
public to provide comments and input on any additional information that
may impact the Agency's assessment of spray drift in pesticide risk
assessments. Specifically included within the Agency's request for
comments are the model-generated spray drift values as described in
either or both of the draft guidance documents.
    With regards to the Ecological and Drinking Water Assessment
Guidance, as discussed in Unit III., EPA currently uses spray drift
estimates, developed in the 1990s, using best professional judgement:
5% (aerial application), 3% (air-blast application) and 1% (ground
application) in selected terrestrial and Tier II aquatic exposure
assessments. Based upon continued model refinements, EPA is revising
this approach and is beginning to incorporate AgDRIFT model estimates
in all tiers for terrestrial and aquatic environments to estimate more
realistic exposure from spray drift deposition. This approach is more
consistent with current approaches throughout OPP. EPA is seeking
comment on this approach.
    While EPA does not intend to formally respond to all comments made,
comments in response to this notice will be taken into consideration as
EPA finalizes these guidance documents. If substantive comments are
made that may substantially change the EPA's consideration of spray
drift in pesticide risk assessment, EPA will notify the public of these
comments and describe how EPA has responded to them.

VI. References

    As indicated under ADDRESSES, a docket has been established for
this notice under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0676. The following
is a listing of the documents that are specifically referenced in this
action. The docket includes these documents and other information
considered by EPA, including documents that are referenced within the
documents that are included in the docket, even if the referenced
document is not physically located in the docket. For assistance in
locating these other documents, please consult the persons listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

1. USEPA. Guidance on Modeling Offsite Deposition of Pesticides via
Spray Drift for Ecological and Drinking Water Assessments for the
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (Draft dated 11/1/2013).
2. USEPA. Residential Exposure Assessment Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs), Addenda 1: Consideration of Spray Drift (Draft
dated 11/1/2013).
3. USEPA. Use of AgDRIFT and AGDISP in OPP Risk Assessments.
4. RESOLVE. 1992. Improving Aquatic Risk Assessment under FIFRA:
Report of the Aquatic Effects Dialogue Group. Published by World
Wildlife Fund, Suite 500, 1250 24th Street NW., Washington, DC
20037.
5. Birchfield N B. 2004. Pesticide spray drift and ecological risk
assessment in the U.S. EPA: A comparison between current default
spray drift deposition levels and AgDRIFT predictions in screening-
level risk assessments. Aspects of Applied Biology 71: 125-131.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: January 13, 2014.
Steve Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-01234 Filed 1-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 38 (Monday, February 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8304-8305]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03786]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82740; File No. SR-MIAX-2018-04]

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

February 20, 2018.
    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 February 9, 2018, Miami International
Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX'' or ``MIAX Options'' 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 change the application of a fee waiver
relating to certain market data feed products.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://www.miaxoptions.com/rule-filings, 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 change the
application of a fee waiver relating to certain market data feed
products offered by the Exchange--namely, the Exchange's Administrative
Information Subscriber (``AIS'') market data feed, and the Exchange's
Complex Top of Market (``cToM'') market data feed.
    When the Exchange first launched trading in complex orders in
October 2016, the Exchange began offering its cToM market data feed.\3\
The cToM market data feed is complex order specific and is available to
those who wish to subscribe to it. cToM provides subscribers with the
same information as the ToM market data product (for the simple
market), but it relates to the complex market of orders on the Strategy
Book (i.e., the Exchange's best bid and offer for a complex strategy,
known as the ``cMBBO,'' with aggregate size, based on displayable order
and quoting interest in the complex strategy on the Exchange).\4\
Additionally, cToM provides subscribers with the identification of the
complex strategies currently trading on MIAX Options; complex strategy
last sale information; and the status of securities underlying the
complex strategy (e.g., halted, open, or resumed). Since the launch of
complex orders on the Exchange and the availability of cToM, and
continuing through the present time, the Exchange has made the cToM
market data feed available to subscribers free of charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79146 (October 24,
2016), 81 FR 75171 (October 28, 2016) (SR-MIAX-2016-36).
    \4\ For a complete description of ToM, see Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 69007 (February 28, 2013), 78 FR 14617 (March 6,
2013) (SR-MIAX-2013-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange began offering its AIS market data feed product in
April 2013.\5\ The AIS market data feed currently includes
administrative information for both simple and complex orders. The AIS
market data feed includes, among other information, opening imbalance
condition information; opening routing information; expanded quote
range information; post-halt notification; and liquidity refresh
condition information. The Exchange assesses a monthly fee of $1,250.00
for all AIS Internal Distributors and a monthly fee of $1,750.00 for
all AIS External Distributors. However, the monthly fee for
Distributors of AIS is waived if the Distributor also subscribes to ToM
or cToM. Presently, the Exchange assesses a monthly fee of $1,250.00
for ToM Internal Distributors and a monthly fee of $1,750.00 for ToM
External Distributors. As stated previously, the Exchange does not
presently assess any fee on Internal or External Distributors of cToM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69320 (April 5,
2013), 78 FR 21661 (April 11, 2013) (SR-MIAX-2013-13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the AIS fee waiver provision, a subscriber who only
subscribes to AIS will be charged the AIS monthly fee ($1,250.00 for
Internal Distributors and $1,750.00 for External Distributors). A
subscriber who subscribes to both ToM and AIS will be charged the ToM
monthly fee ($1,250.00 for Internal Distributors and $1,750.00 for
External Distributors). However, a subscriber who subscribes to both
cToM and AIS will be charged no fees.
    The Exchange did not intend for subscribers to receive the AIS feed
for free as a result of receiving the cToM feed for free. Thus, until
such time as the Exchange adopts a fee for cToM, the Exchange proposes
to eliminate the fee waiver for subscribers to receive the AIS feed for
free solely by receiving the cToM feed.
    The Exchange is not proposing to modify any other aspect of either
the AIS market data feed product or the cToM market data feed product.
The Exchange is solely eliminating the fee waiver for a subscriber of
cToM, which is currently free, to also receive a subscription to AIS
for free. Accordingly, effective with this change, a subscriber who
wishes to subscribe to both cToM and AIS will be charged the AIS
monthly fee ($1,250.00 for Internal Distributors and $1,750.00 for
External Distributors).
    The Exchange initially filed the proposal on January 30, 2018 (SR-
MIAX-2018-03). That filing was withdrawn and replaced with the current
filing (SR-MIAX-2018-04).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) \6\ of the Act in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \7\ of the Act, in that it is
designed to provide for an equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among Exchange Members \8\ and other persons
using its

facilities, because it applies equally to all Members and any persons
using the facilities or services of the Exchange. The Exchange also
believes that the proposal furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5)
\9\ of the Act 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, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest, and it is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination among customers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \8\ The term ``Member'' means an individual or organization
approved to exercise the trading rights associated with a Trading
Permit. Members are deemed ``members'' under the Exchange Act. See
Exchange Rule 100.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to the
application of a fee waiver relating to certain market data feed
products offered by the Exchange--namely, the Exchange's AIS market
data feed, and the Exchange's cToM market data feed--is reasonable,
equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory. The proposal to eliminate
the ability of a subscriber to subscribe to cToM (for free), to also
subscribe to the AIS feed (for free), is designed to promote just and
equitable principles of trade by providing MIAX Options participants
with access to the same market data products with a reasonably designed
fee structure and fee incentives. Because there is no charge to
subscribe to the cToM market data feed, the Exchange believes that a
subscription to cToM should not entitle a subscriber to receive for
free, another market data feed product which, when subscribed to
without the cToM market data feed, is fee liable. Furthermore, the
proposed changes to the application of the fee waiver are fair and
equitable and not unreasonably discriminatory because they apply
equally to all MIAX Options participants as the market data feeds are
available for purchase for all MIAX Options participants, and access to
such market data is offered on terms that are not unfairly
discriminatory.

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. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change would promote transparency by providing MIAX
Options participants with access to the same market data products with
a reasonably designed fee structure and fee incentives. Because there
is no charge to subscribe to the cToM market data feed, the Exchange
believes that a subscription to cToM should not entitle a subscriber to
receive for free, another market data feed product which, when
subscribed to without the cToM market data feed, is fee liable.
Additionally, respecting intra-market competition, the value-added
features relating to complex orders in the [sic] either the AIS feed or
the cToM market data product are available to all subscribers, thus
providing all subscribers to the data products with an even playing
field with respect to information and access to trade complex orders on
MIAX Options. 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 and fee waivers to remain competitive with other exchanges and
to attract order flow to the Exchange.

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,\10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \11\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \11\ 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 protected]. Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2018-04 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-MIAX-2018-04. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2018-04 and should be submitted on
or before March 19, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-03786 Filed 2-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


TITLE:  Audit Reports under the International Safety Management Code.

OMB CONTROL NUMBER:  1625-0084.

SUMMARY:  This information helps to determine whether U.S. vessels,
subject to SOLAS 74, engaged in international trade, are in compliance
with that treaty.  Organizations recognized by the Coast Guard conduct
ongoing audits of vessels’ and companies’ safety management systems.

NEED:  Title 46 U.S.C. 3203 authorizes the Coast Guard to prescribe
regulations regarding safety management systems.  Title 33 CFR part 96
contains the rules for those systems and hence the safe operation of
vessels.

FORM:  N/A.

RESPONDENTS:  Owners and operators of vessels, and organizations
authorized to issue ISM Code certificates for the United States.

FREQUENCY:  On occasion.

BURDEN:  The estimated burden has decreased from 17,660 hours to 10,221
hours a year due to a decrease in the estimated annual number of
responses.

CG-REG

31 Aug 2016