MEMORANDUM

DATE: 11/18/14

FROM: 		Ken Mitchell/EPA Region 4

TO:CLEAN POWER PLAN FOR EXISTING POWER PLANTS; DOCKET ID: OAR - 2013-0602

SUBJECT:DISCUSSION OF THE CLEAN POWER Plan State Goal for South Carolina with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control

SUMMARY:
REGION 4 PROVIDED INFORMATION ON THE CLEAN POWER PLAN state goal for South Carolina to the
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control on June 13, 2014.  The Clean Power
Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.  (A follow-up call occurred on
6/16/14 to clarify remaining questions.)
ATTENDEES:

EPA
Beverly Banister/EPA R4
Carol Kemker/EPA R4
Todd Rinck/EPA R4
Gregg Worley/EPA R4
Lora Strine/EPA OAQPS
Jack Bowles/EPA OCIR
Mikhail Adamantiades/EPA OAP
Erika Wilson/EPA OAP
Brian Fisher/EPA OAP
Kevin Culligan/EPA OAQPS

External Stakeholders
Myra Reece/SC DHEC
Robbie Brown/SC DHEC
Henry Porter/SC DHEC


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24427-24433]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9809]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 38

[Docket No. RM05-5-020]

Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for
Public Utilities

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
proposing to amend its regulations to incorporate by reference the
business practice standards adopted by the Wholesale Electric Quadrant
of the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) that pertain to
the measurement and verification of demand response and energy
efficiency resources participating in organized wholesale electricity
markets. NAESB adopted the measurement and verification of demand
response standards in response to the Commission's findings in Order
No. 676-F.

DATES: Comments are due June 25, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number RM05-5-020, may be
filed in the following ways:
     Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment
Procedures Section of this document.
    These standards can be obtained from NAESB at 801 Travis Street,
Suite 1675, Houston, TX 77002, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, http://www.naesb.org, and are available for viewing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Kathan (Technical Issues), Office of Energy Policy and
Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Dennis Hough (Legal Issues), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

                                                               Paragraph
                                                                 Nos.

I. Background...............................................           2
II. Discussion..............................................          10

    A. NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards.........          11
        1. Description......................................          12
        2. Discussion.......................................          15
    B. NAESB Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards......          20
        1. Description......................................          21
        2. Discussion.......................................          23
III. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards.........          25
IV. Information Collection Statement........................          26
V. Environmental Analysis...................................          32
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification................          33
VII. Comment Procedures.....................................          35
VIII. Document Availability.................................          39

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(April 19, 2012)

    1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR), the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to amend its regulations at
18 CFR 38.2 under the Federal Power Act \1\ to incorporate by reference
the business practice standards adopted by the Wholesale Electric
Quadrant (WEQ) of the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB)
that pertain to the measurement and verification of demand response and
energy efficiency resources participating in organized wholesale
electricity markets.\2\ Adoption of these standards is intended to
improve the methods and procedures used to accurately measure demand
response and energy efficiency resource performance. Additionally,
these standards should help Regional Transmission Organizations (RTO)
and Independent System Operators (ISO) to properly credit demand
response and energy efficiency resources for their services.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 791a et seq. (2006).
    \2\ See Report, North American Energy Standards Board,
Measurement and Verification of Demand Response Products, Docket No.
RM05-5-020 (filed May 3, 2011) (May 3 Report) (providing a status
update and description of the proposed standards). In accordance
with applicable copyright laws, complete versions of the standards
are available from NAESB at 801 Travis Street, Suite 1675, Houston,
TX 77002, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, http://www.naesb.org, and are
available for viewing in the Commission's Public Reference Room.
    \3\ The Commission has also sought RTO and ISO proposals
regarding their measurement and verification methodologies,
including in Order No. 745, Demand Response Compensation in
Organized Wholesale Energy Markets, Order No. 745, 76 Fed. Reg.
16,658 (Mar. 24, 2011), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,322, at P 93-95
(2011), order on reh'g, Order No. 745-A, 137 FERC ] 61,215, at P 123
(2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. NAESB is a private consensus standards developer that divides
its activities among four quadrants, each of which is composed of
members from all segments of its respective industry.\4\ NAESB is an
accredited standards organization under the auspices of the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI). NAESB's procedures are designed to
ensure that all industry members can have input into the development of
a standard, whether or not they are members of NAESB, and each
wholesale electricity standard that NAESB's WEQ adopts is supported by
a consensus of the seven industry segments: end users, distribution/
load serving entities, transmission, generation, marketers/brokers,
independent grid operators/planners and technology/services. Under the
WEQ process, for a standard to be approved, it must receive a super-
majority vote of 67 percent of the members of the WEQ's Executive
Committee, with support from at least 40 percent of each of the seven
industry segments.\5\ For final approval, 67 percent of the WEQ's
general membership must ratify the standard.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The four quadrants are the wholesale and retail electric
quadrants and the wholesale and retail natural gas quadrants.
    \5\ Under NAESB's procedures, interested persons may attend and
participate in NAESB committee meetings and phone conferences, even
if they are not NAESB members.
    \6\ See May 3 Report at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. In 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 676, a Final Rule that
incorporated by reference business practice standards for the WEQ
adopted by NAESB applicable to public utilities.\7\ Since 2006, the
NAESB consensus industry stakeholder process has reviewed the NAESB
business practice standards for public utilities with a view to
creating a more efficient marketplace and it has adopted revisions
that, in a number of instances, the Commission has made mandatory by
incorporating by reference into the Commission's regulations.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Standards for Business Practices and Communication
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,216, (2006), reh'g denied, Order No. 676-A, 116 FERC ] 61,255
(2006).
    \8\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols
for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,309
(2010); Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299 (2009); Order
No. 676-D, 124 FERC ] 61,317 (2008), Order No. 676-C, FERC Stats. &
Regs. ] 31,274 (2008), Order No. 676-B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,246
(2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. NAESB began work on the development of business practice
standards pertaining to the measurement and verification of demand
response \9\ products and services in July 2007, when the NAESB WEQ
Demand Side Management--Energy Efficiency (DSM-EE) subcommittee began
work on this issue. This effort led to the adoption and ratification by
NAESB of initial measurement and verification standards early in 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Demand response means a reduction in the consumption of
electric energy by customers from their expected consumption in
response to an increase in the price of electric energy or to
incentive payments designed to induce lower consumption of electric
energy. 18 CFR 35.28(b)(4) (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. On April 17, 2009, NAESB filed a report (April 2009 Report)
informing the Commission that it had adopted an initial set of business
practice standards to categorize various demand response products and
services and to support the measurement and verification of these
products and services in organized wholesale electricity markets (Phase
I Demand Response M&V Standards).\10\ Key to obtaining consensus on the
initial set of standards was the agreement to proceed with further work
on more detailed technical standards for the measurement and
verification of demand response resources. The NAESB report recognized
that these standards would need to be followed by the development of
more detailed technical standards for the measurement and verification
of demand response

products and services in RTO and ISO areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Report, North American Energy Standards Board, Measurement
and Verification of Demand Response Products, Docket No. RM05-5-017,
at 2 (filed Apr. 17, 2009) (April 2009 Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. On April 15, 2010, the Commission issued Order No. 676-F,
incorporating by reference \11\ the Phase I Demand Response M&V
Standards \12\ that categorize various demand response products and
services and support the measurement and verification of these products
and services in organized wholesale electricity markets.\13\ The
Commission stated that ``[w]hile NAESB's Phase I [Demand Response] M&V
Standards represent a good first step, additional substantive standards
would appear beneficial in creating transparent and consistent
measurement and verification of demand response products and services
in wholesale electric markets.'' \14\ The Commission also stated that
``we expect Phase II will address issues related to baseline
development * * *'' \15\ The Commission anticipated that the
measurement and verification standards needed to accomplish this goal
would be a focus of NAESB's Phase II measurement and verification
standards development efforts.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Incorporation by reference makes compliance with these
standards mandatory for public utilities subject to Part 38 of the
Commission's regulations.
    \12\ See Standards for Business Practices and Communication
Protocols for Public Utilities, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 32,646 (2009) (2009 NOPR).
    \13\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs.
] 31,309 (2010).
    \14\ Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,309 at P 32.
    \15\ Id. P 37.
    \16\ Id. P 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. NAESB subsequently initiated specific plans to improve and adopt
additional technical standards and filed a report \17\ with the
Commission on May 3, 2011 (May 3 Report) that informed the Commission
that NAESB had adopted a revised set of standards covering measurement
and verification (Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards) and a new set
of standards covering energy efficiency,\18\ and explained its efforts
to develop these standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra n.2.
    \18\ Energy efficiency:
    [r]efers to programs that are aimed at reducing the energy used
by specific end-use devices and systems, typically without affecting
the services provided. These programs reduce overall electricity
consumption (reported in megawatthours), often without explicit
consideration for the timing of program-induced savings. Such
savings are generally achieved by substituting technologically more
advanced equipment to produce the same level of end-use services
(e.g. lighting, heating, motor drive) with less electricity.
Examples include high-efficiency appliances, efficient lighting
programs, high-efficiency heating, ventilating and air conditioning
(HVAC) systems or control modifications, efficient building design,
advanced electric motor drives, and heat recovery systems.
    U.S. Energy Information Administration Glossary, http://www.eia.gov/tools/glossary/index.cfm?id=E (last visited Feb. 24,
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. As discussed in more detail below, the Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards add more specifications to the existing Phase I Demand
Response M&V Standards' definitions and business practice standards in
the following areas: meter data reporting deadline, advanced
notification, telemetry interval, meter accuracy for after-the-fact
metering, meter data reporting interval, and adjustment window.\19\
During NAESB's work on Phase II, the WEQ DSM-EE Wholesale Demand
Response Work Group (WEQ DR work group) discussed the level of detail
to be included in the standards, with most participants agreeing that
the standards developed should not ``duplicate efforts undertaken in
the ISO-RTO stakeholder process,'' which vetted the adopted programs
extensively.\20\ NAESB states that a majority of the WEQ DR work group
agreed that ``impacting the stakeholder process would require guidance
from the FERC.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ NAESB states that ``advance notification'' involves a
communication to the demand response resource made prior to when its
services are required. The ``telemetry interval,'' as described by
NAESB, is the period of time between submissions of data. NAESB
defines ``adjustment window'' as a period of time used to calculate
a baseline adjustment.
    \20\ May 3 Report at 1-2.
    \21\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. In addition to demand response standards, NAESB drafted,
discussed, and adopted business practice standards for the measurement
and verification of energy efficiency in organized wholesale
electricity markets (Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards). NAESB
reports that the work took place between July 2009 and December 2010,
and was considered in NAESB's DSM-EE subcommittee meetings and WEQ's
Executive Committee meetings. The standards are designed to create a
standard method for quantifying the energy reductions from energy
efficiency measures. The Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards
include six new definitions and 63 business practice standards.
Included are definitions for energy efficiency baseline and demand
reduction value. The standards contain criteria for the use of energy
efficiency products in organized wholesale electricity markets, general
measurement and verification plan requirements, and detailed criteria
of acceptable measurement and verification methodologies. NAESB states
that the standards are built upon PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and ISO
New England Inc. manuals, the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP)
measurement and verification standards,\22\ the International
Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP),\23\ and
several state protocols.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ U.S. Department of Energy, FEMP, M&V Guidelines:
Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Projects, Version
3.0, April 2008, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/mv_guidelines.pdf.
    \23\ Efficiency Valuation Organization, IPMVP Public Library of
Documents, http://www.evo-world.org/.
    \24\ May 3 Report at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    10. The Commission proposes to incorporate by reference into our
regulations both the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards and
associated terms, and the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards and
associated terms.

A. NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards

    11. The Commission proposes to incorporate by reference into its
regulations the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards as a further
step toward transparency and consistency in the methods RTOs and ISOs
use to measure and verify demand response in their organized wholesale
electricity markets.\25\ Additionally, the Commission seeks comment on
the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards and on certain aspects of
measurement and verification of demand response more generally,

including the degree to which standardization is important, the
appropriate degree of detail and specificity that any such standards
should contain, and the appropriate mechanism for achieving any
necessary improvements in this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ We propose to incorporate by reference the following
standards collectively identified by NAESB as 2010 Wholesale
Electric Quadrant Annual Plan Item 4(a) and 4(b): General--Section
015-1.0; Telemetry--Section 015-1.1; After-the-Fact Metering--
Section 015-1.2; Performance Evaluation--Section 015-1.3; General--
Section 015-1.4; Telemetry--Section 015-1.5; After-the-Fact
Metering--Section 015-1.6; Performance Evaluation--Section 015-1.7;
General--Section 015-1.8; Telemetry--Section 015-1.9; After-the-Fact
Metering--Section 015-1.10; Performance Evaluation--Section 015-
1.11; General--Section 015-1.12; Telemetry--Section 015-1.13; After-
the-Fact Metering--Section 015-1.14; Performance Evaluation--Section
015-1.15; Baseline Information--Section 015-1.16; Event
Information--Section 015-1.17; Special Processing--Section 015-1.18;
Baseline Information--Section 015-1.19; Event Information--Section
015-1.20; Special Processing--Section 015-1.21; Baseline
Information--Section 015-1.22; Event Information--Section 015-1.23;
Special Processing--Section 015-1.24; Baseline Information--Section
015-1.25; Event Information--Section 015-1.26; Special Processing--
Section 015-1.27; Baseline Information--Section 015-1.28; Event
Information--Section 015-1.29; and Special Processing--Section 015-
1.30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Description
    12. The Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards build on the Phase I
Demand Response M&V Standards. These new standards also include updates
to certain associated definitions as well as some formatting and
organizational changes. The collective set of Phase I and Phase II
Demand Response M&V Standards comprise two parts: the first part
establishes criteria for the use of equipment, technology, and
procedures to quantify the demand reduction value \26\ of four product
categories,\27\ and the second part includes business practice
requirements for five performance evaluation types.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ NAESB defines ``demand reduction value'' as the amount of a
demand resource's reduced electricity usage.
    \27\ The four product categories are energy service, capacity
service, reserve service, and regulation service.
    \28\ The five performance evaluation types are maximum base
load, meter before/meter after, baseline type-I, baseline type-II,
and metering generator output.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. In the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards, NAESB
consistently replaced references to the ``System Operator'' with the
term ``Governing Documents'' \29\ throughout most of the standards.
Other changes include adding a meter data reporting deadline (103 days
for the energy and capacity product categories and 55 days for reserve
and regulation product categories); specifying an advanced notification
of one day maximum to the demand response resource that its capacity
product category will be required; establishing a telemetry interval of
six seconds for the provider of the regulation product category to
submit data to the system operator; tightening the requirement for
meter accuracy for after-the-fact metering for all four product
categories; and defining an adjustment window of four hours for
calculating baseline adjustments for the baseline type-I and baseline
type-II performance evaluation types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ ``Governing Documents'' are documents that control or
affect the interaction and relationship between a system operator
and other parties, for example, applicable statutes and regulations,
tariffs, contracts, manuals, and other relevant procedures. The DSM-
EE subcommittee made this change to remove system operator
discretion and to more accurately reflect that rules are developed
by markets not the system operator. See 2008 WEQ AP Item 5(a)
Recommendation to the NAESB WEQ Executive Committee at 37 (Sept. 30,
2010) (available at May 3 Report, Appendix B, Page 5, http://www.naesb.org/pdf4/dsmee_group3_093010reqcom_a1.doc).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. As characterized by NAESB, the set of business practice
standards represented by the combination of Phase I and Phase II
efforts ``provide a framework that may be used to develop performance
evaluation methodologies for specific Demand Response services; they do
not specify detailed characteristics of performance evaluation
methodologies.'' \30\ The standards state that, should a conflict arise
between the business practice standards and a System Operator's
Governing Documents, the Governing Documents would have precedence.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 2010 WEQ AP Item 4(a) and 4(b) Final Action at 12 (ratified
Mar. 21, 2011).
    \31\ Id. at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Discussion
    15. As noted above, when the Commission approved the Phase I Demand
Response M&V Standards in Order No. 676-F, it recognized that
``additional substantive standards would appear beneficial in creating
transparent and consistent measurement and verification * * * in
wholesale electric markets.'' \32\ The Commission agreed with
commenters ``that more detailed measurement and verification standards
will reduce costs for customers and market participants, particularly
those participating in multiple markets'' and that ``demand response
providers that participate in more than one RTO or ISO should not have
to incur the costs of developing different business processes to adapt
to the differing RTO/ISO requirements, increasing the cost and
complexity of their business.'' \33\ While the Commission acknowledged
that NAESB's efforts may not result in a single performance evaluation
method, the Commission emphasized that ``greater standardization of the
performance evaluation methods will improve the accuracy of measuring
and verifying demand response performance and may reduce costs.'' \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,309 at P 32.
    \33\ Id. P 33.
    \34\ Id. P 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. The 2009 NOPR noted that the key to several NAESB participants'
willingness to accept the Phase I Demand Response M&V Standards was an
agreement among participants to include more specific technical
measurement and verification standards in NAESB's annual work plan and
to proceed with further work on more detailed technical standards.\35\
Similarly, in its April 2009 Report, NAESB stressed that ``more
technical standards would be needed to support the standards provided
in the recommendation,'' that ``[a]ll WEQ [Executive Committee] members
agreed to have a follow-up development effort to provide additional
technical context to the standards,'' and that ``the DSM-EE
subcommittee [had already] begun efforts to scope the development of
more detailed technical standards for the measurement and verification
of demand response products and services in ISO-RTO footprint areas.''
\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,646 at P 6.
    \36\ April 2009 Report at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. As noted above, NAESB acknowledges that the resulting set of
business practice standards represented by the combination of Phase I
and Phase II efforts set forth a generalized performance evaluation
methodology that lacks specific provisions or detailed
requirements.\37\ The Commission invites comments on the proposed Phase
II standards. Further, in light of the Commission's statements in Order
No. 676-F regarding the importance of consistency and specificity, we
invite comment as to whether the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards
that we propose to adopt herein are sufficiently detailed to provide
transparent measurement and verification among regions, and whether
greater detail or prescriptiveness would be appropriate. We also seek
comment on the degree to which encouraging greater consistency among
markets and regions would reduce costs for customers and market
participants or otherwise facilitate participation by end users in
multiple markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See 2010 WEQ AP Item 4(a) and 4(b) Final Action at 12
(ratified Mar. 21, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. To the extent that greater detail is recommended, the
Commission seeks comment as to whether sufficient experience in demand
response is available to identify best practices in the area of
measurement and verification, particularly for performance evaluation
types such as baseline calculations. Similarly, we seek comment about
the particular areas where enhancing such detail or consistency would
be most useful. For example, are consistent telemetry and metering
requirements more or less important than consistent approaches to the
determination of baselines; would it be worthwhile to address
procedures for weather adjustments; or are any other particular aspects
of measurement and verification appropriate for further effort
regarding the addition of increased specificity and more consistency
across RTOs and ISOs?

    19. The Commission appreciates the efforts of the WEQ thus far in
developing these standards. The Commission also understands that
various participants in the NAESB process expressed concern that the
NAESB process should not duplicate efforts undertaken in the
stakeholder processes of the RTOs and ISOs, which vetted their
individual programs extensively.\38\ As a result, many of the standards
defer to the existing Governing Documents of the RTOs and ISOs. The
Commission seeks comment on whether further development of more
substantive measurement and verification standards broadly applicable
to RTOs and ISOs are required and, if so, whether a NAESB or a
Commission-led, or other process should carry out the task. If
commenters prefer the NAESB process, we request comment on the best
relationship framework between NAESB and the RTO and ISO stakeholder
processes to facilitate the formulation of standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See May 3 Report at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. NAESB Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards

    20. The Commission proposes to incorporate by reference into our
regulations the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards.\39\ These
business practice standards provide criteria for energy efficiency
resources participating in organized wholesale electricity markets,
general requirements for the structure of a measurement and
verification plan, and detailed criteria for acceptable measurement and
verification methodologies. The standards incorporate documentation and
reporting requirements applicable to installed energy efficiency
measures. The standards also consider technical requirements such as
identification of energy efficiency baseline conditions, statistical
significance requirements for measurement methodologies requiring
statistical estimation techniques, and technical requirements for
measurement equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ We propose to incorporate by reference the following
standards collectively identified by NAESB as 2010 Wholesale
Electric Quadrant Annual Plan Item 4(d): Energy Efficiency Resource
Use Criteria in Wholesale Markets--Section 021-3.1; General
Measurement and Verification Plan Requirements--Section 021-3.2;
Post Installation M&V Report Components--Section 021-3.3;
Performance Reporting--Section 021-3.4; M&V Supporting Documents--
Section 021-3.5; M&V Methodologies--Section 021-3.6; Energy
Efficiency Baseline Conditions--Section 021-3.7; Statistical
Significance--Section 021-3.8; Nominated Energy Efficiency Value
Calculations/Demand Reduction Value Calculations--Section 021-3.9;
Measurement and Monitoring--Section 021-3.10; Measurement Equipment
Specifications--Section 021-3.11; and Data Validation--Section 021-
3.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Description
    21. The purpose of these business practice standards is to
establish a standard method for quantifying the energy reductions
associated with energy efficiency measures such as lighting,
appliances, industrial process improvements, and building management.
NAESB describes the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards as an
initial set of standards for the participation of energy efficiency
products in organized wholesale electricity markets.
    22. NAESB adopted its Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards
under its consensus procedures. The consensus process developed by
NAESB requires the organization to be fully aware of the positions of
each of NAESB's six wholesale electric segments (i.e., end users,
distribution/load serving entities, transmission, generation,
marketers/brokers, and independent grid operators/planners).
2. Discussion
    23. The Commission preliminarily finds that the Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards provide substantive detail to assure more
effective evaluation of the performance of energy efficiency products
and services. The standards provide the means for demonstrating
consistent and reliable evidence of reductions in electricity usage
attributable to energy efficiency resources that qualify to participate
in organized wholesale electricity markets. The NAESB standards are
intended to provide for proper measurement and verification of energy
efficiency resources so that the resources may be compensated in
accordance with how well they perform, and how performance continues as
equipment or systems age. The standards should also help to ensure that
energy efficiency resources and other electricity resources are treated
comparably.
    24. The Commission appreciates the detail provided within the
Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards. The standards provide four
measurement and verification methodologies (Sections 021-<IP_ADDRESS>-021-
<IP_ADDRESS>), as well as a mechanism by which energy efficiency resource
providers may propose, and RTOs and ISOs may consider, alternative
measurement and verification methodologies (Section 021-3.6.2). The
Commission recognizes that the establishment of baseline performance
data and monitoring of post-installation performance of energy
efficiency measures is conducted by directly measuring and monitoring
system loads, or extrapolating from a selection of available
measurement variables. The standards contain 15 technical requirements
for all measurement equipment devices used by energy efficiency
resource providers (Sections 021-3.11.1-021-3.11.15). Specifically, the
15 technical requirements provide standards for interval meters that
record electricity usage data as well as for the measurement or
monitoring of ``proxy variables'' that do not directly measure
electricity consumption. The technical requirements for proxy variable
measurement include detailed accuracy and precision requirements. The
standards also contain five statistical requirements intended to ensure
accuracy for the measurement methodologies requiring statistical
estimation techniques (Sections 021-3.8.2-021-3.8.6). The Commission
invites comment on the proposed standards.

III. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards

    25. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119 (section 11)
(Feb. 10, 1998) provides that federal agencies should publish a request
for comment in a NOPR when the agency is seeking to issue or revise a
regulation proposing to adopt a voluntary consensus standard or a
government-unique standard. In this NOPR, the Commission is proposing
to incorporate by reference voluntary consensus standards developed by
the NAESB WEQ.

IV. Information Collection Statement

    26. The collections of information contained in this proposed rule
have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3507(d). The Commission solicits comments on the Commission's
need for this information, whether the information will have practical
utility, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected,
and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including
the use of automated information techniques. Respondents subject to the
filing requirements of this rule will not be penalized for failing to
respond to these collections of information unless the collections of
information display a valid OMB control number.
    27. The following burden estimate is based on the projected costs
for the

industry to implement revisions to the WEQ Standards currently
incorporated by reference into the Commission's regulations at 18 CFR
38.2 and to implement the new standards adopted by NAESB that we
propose here to incorporate by reference.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of
                                 FERC Collection     Number of     responses per     Hours per     Total number
                                       No.          respondents     respondent       response        of hours
                                                             (A)             (B)             (C)     (A) x (B) x
                                                                                (C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demand Response Standards.....  FERC-516 \40\...               6               1               4              24
                                FERC-717 \41\...               6               1               9              54
Energy Efficiency Standards...  FERC-516........               6               1               6              36
                                FERC-717........               6               1              12              72
    Total for FERC-516........  ................  ..............  ..............  ..............              78
    Total for FERC-717........  ................  ..............  ..............  ..............             108
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total One-Time Burden.....  ................  ..............  ..............  ..............             186
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Annual Hours for Collection: (Reporting and Recordkeeping,
(if appropriate)) = 186 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ ``FERC-516'' is the Commission's identifier that
corresponds to OMB control no. 1902-0096 which identifies the
information collection associated with Electric Rate Schedules and
Tariff Filings.
    \41\ ``FERC-717'' is the Commission's identifier that
corresponds to OMB control no. 1902-0173 which identifies the
information collection associated with Standards for Business
Practices and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Information Collection Costs: The Commission seeks comments on the
costs to comply with these requirements. It has projected the average
annualized cost for all respondents to be the following: \42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The Total Annual Cost for information collection is
$10,974. This number is reached by multiplying the total hours to
prepare responses (186) by an hourly wage estimate of $59 (a
composite estimate of wages plus benefits that includes legal,
technical and support staff rates. Based on data from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm
and http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). (78 hours for
demand response standards + 108 hours for energy efficiency
standards) x $59/hour = $10,974.
    \43\ We note that 24 hours at $59/hour = $1,416 and 54 hours at
$59/hour = $3,186.
    \44\ We note that 36 hours at $59/hour = $2,124 and 72 hours at
$59/hour = $4,248.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             FERC-516        FERC-717
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demand Response Standards Annualized              $1,416          $3,186
 Capital/Startup Costs..................
Demand Response Standards Annualized                 N/A             N/A
 Costs (Operations & Maintenance).......
Energy Efficiency Standards Annualized             2,124           4,248
 Capital/Startup Costs..................
Energy Efficiency Standards Annualized               N/A             N/A
 Costs (Operations & Maintenance).......
Demand Response Standards Total                    1,416      \43\ 3,186
 Annualized Costs.......................
Energy Efficiency Standards Total                  2,124      \44\ 4,248
 Annualized Costs.......................
                                         -------------------------------
    All Standards Total Annualized Costs           3,540           7,434
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    28. OMB regulations require OMB to approve certain information
collection requirements imposed by agency rule. The Commission is
submitting notification of this proposed rule to OMB. These information
collections are mandatory requirements.
    Title: Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols
for Public Utilities (formerly Open Access Same Time Information
System) (FERC-717); Electric Rate Schedule Filings (FERC-516).
    Action: Proposed collection.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0096 (FERC-516); 1902-0173 (FERC-717).
    Respondents for This Rulemaking: RTOs and ISOs.
    Frequency of Responses: One-time implementation (business
procedures, capital/start-up).
    Necessity of the Information: This proposed rule, if implemented,
will help to standardize the methods and procedures used by RTOs and
ISOs to accurately measure demand response and energy efficiency
resource performance, thereby improving an RTO's or ISO's capability to
detect anti-competitive or manipulative behavior. Additionally, this
proposed rule will help RTOs and ISOs to properly credit demand
response and energy efficiency resources for their efforts.
    29. Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the business
practice standards proposed in this NOPR and has made a preliminary
determination that these standards are necessary to maintain
consistency and help increase the effectiveness of RTO and ISO rules
pertaining to measurement and verification of demand response and
energy efficiency resource practices. The Commission has assured
itself, by means of its internal review, that there is specific,
objective support for the burden estimate associated with the
information requirements.
    30. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Office of the Executive Director, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:
(202) 502-8663, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>].
    31. Comments concerning the information collections proposed in
this NOPR and the associated burden estimates, should be sent to the
Commission in this docket and may also be sent to the Office of
Management and Budge, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission]. For security reasons, comments should be sent
by email to OMB at the following email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please reference FERC-xxx and the docket number
of this proposed rulemaking (Docket No. RM05-5-020) in your submission.

V. Environmental Analysis

    32. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\45\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from these
requirements as not having a significant effect on the human
environment.\46\ The actions proposed to be taken here fall within
categorical exclusions in the Commission's regulations for rules that
are corrective, clarifying, or procedural, for information gathering,
analysis, and dissemination, and for sales, exchange, and
transportation of electric power that requires no construction of
facilities.\47\ Therefore an environmental review is unnecessary and
has not been prepared in this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs.
Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \46\ 18 CFR 380.4.
    \47\ See 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii), 380.4(a)(5), and 380.4(a)(27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    33. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \48\ generally
requires an administrative agency to perform an analysis of rulemakings
that will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory
alternatives that accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed
rulemaking while minimizing any significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The Small Business Administration
(SBA) develops the numerical definition of a small business.\49\ The
SBA has established a size standard for electric utilities, stating
that a firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily
engaged in the transmission, generation, and/or distribution of
electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the
preceding fiscal year did not exceed four million megawatt hours.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
    \49\ 13 CFR 121.101.
    \50\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22 Utilities n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. The regulations proposed here impose requirements only on RTOs
and ISOs, which are not small businesses. Moreover, these requirements
are designed to benefit all customers, including small businesses.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby certifies, pursuant to section
605(b) of the RFA,\51\ that the regulations proposed herein will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Comment Procedures

    35. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including
any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish
to discuss. Comments are due June 25, 2012. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM05-5-020, and must include the commenter's name, the
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their
comments.
    36. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
    37. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    38. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.

VIII. Document Availability

    39. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426.
    40. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in
the docket number field.
    41. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 38

    Conflicts of interests, Electric power plants, Electric utilities,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend
Part 38, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.

PART 38--BUSINESS PRACTICE STANDARDS AND COMMUNICATION PROTOCOLS
FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES

    1. The authority citation for part 38 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42
U.S.C. 7101-7352.

    2. Section 38.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(12) and adding
paragraph (a)(13) to read as follows:
    Sec.  38.2 Incorporation by reference of North American Energy
Standards Board Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.
    (a) * * *
    (12) Business Practices for Measurement and Verification of
Wholesale Electricity Demand Response (WEQ-015, 2010 Annual Plan Items
4(a) and 4(b), March 21, 2011).
    (13) Business Practice Standards for Measurement and Verification
of Energy Efficiency Products (WEQ-021, 2010 Annual Plan Item 4(d), May
13, 2011).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-9809 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 86 (Friday, May 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26025-26026]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10470]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP10-729-000.
    Applicants: Portland Natural Gas Transmission System.
    Description: Portland Natural Gas Transmission System submits
Compliance Filing including pro forma tariff sections and all
supporting workpapers.
    Filed Date: 4/22/13.
    Accession Number: 20130422-5213.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/6/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-817-000.
    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC submits Imbalance Cash-
out Report for 2012 Activity.
    Filed Date: 4/25/13.
    Accession Number: 20130425-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-818-000.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: ETNG 2013 Map Filing to be effective 6/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/26/13.
    Accession Number: 20130426-5036.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/13.
    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.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP12-805-001.
    Applicants: Ryckman Creek Resources, LLC.
    Description: Revised Tariff Records--Unredacted FSS Agreements to
be effective 5/25/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/25/13.
    Accession Number: 20130425-5057.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-802-001.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Non-Conforming TSAs and Minor Housekeeping Amendment
to be effective 5/20/2013.
    Filed Date: 4/25/13.
    Accession Number: 20130425-5209.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-792-002.
    Applicants: ANR Storage Company.
    Description: Compliance to RP12-792 Phase II to be effective 6/1/
2013.
    Filed Date: 4/26/13.
    Accession Number: 20130426-5043.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/8/13.
    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing

requirements, interventions, protests, and service 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 (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: April 26, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10470 Filed 5-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26722-26724]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11932]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0030]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from four individuals
for an exemption from the prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against persons with a clinical diagnosis
of epilepsy or any other condition that is likely to cause a loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) to drive in interstate commerce. If granted, the
exemptions would enable these individuals who have had one or more
seizures and are taking anti-seizure medication to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 8, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0030 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 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 Docket
Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0030), indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
put the docket number, FMCSA-2019-0030, in

the keyword box, and click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears,
click on the ``Comment Now!'' button and type your comment into the
text box on the following screen. Choose whether you are submitting
your comment as an individual or on behalf of a third party and then
submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.

B. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2019-0030, in the keyword box, and
click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking 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.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for a five-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
five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-
year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical
certification.
    The four individuals listed in this notice have requested an
exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(8). Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications
of each applicant to determine whether granting the exemption will
achieve the required level of safety mandated by statute.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist Medical Examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. [49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A TO PART 391--MEDICAL
ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8), paragraphs
3, 4, and 5.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=e47b48a9ea42dd67d999246e23d97970&mc=true&node=pt49.5.391&rgn=div5#ap49.5.391_171.a and https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The advisory criteria states the following:
    If an individual has had a sudden episode of a non-epileptic
seizure or loss of consciousness of unknown cause that did not require
anti-seizure medication, the decision whether that person's condition
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or loss of ability to
control a CMV should be made on an individual basis by the Medical
Examiner in consultation with the treating physician. Before
certification is considered, it is suggested that a six-month waiting
period elapse from the time of the episode. Following the waiting
period, it is suggested that the individual have a complete
neurological examination. If the results of the examination are
negative and anti-seizure medication is not required, then the driver
may be qualified.
    In those individual cases where a driver had a seizure or an
episode of loss of consciousness that resulted from a known medical
condition (e.g., drug reaction, high temperature, acute infectious
disease, dehydration, or acute metabolic disturbance), certification
should be deferred until the driver has recovered fully from that
condition, has no existing residual complications, and is not taking
anti-seizure medication.
    Drivers who have a history of epilepsy/seizures, off anti-seizure
medication and seizure-free for 10 years, may be qualified to operate a
CMV in interstate commerce. Interstate drivers with a history of a
single unprovoked seizure may be qualified to drive a CMV in interstate
commerce if seizure-free and off anti-seizure medication for a five-
year period or more.
    As a result of Medical Examiners misinterpreting advisory criteria
as regulation, numerous drivers have been prohibited from operating a
CMV in interstate commerce based on the fact that they have had one or
more seizures and are taking anti-seizure medication, rather than an
individual analysis of their circumstances by a qualified Medical
Examiner based on the physical qualification standards and medical best
practices.
    On January 15, 2013, FMCSA announced in a Notice of Final
Disposition titled, Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications;
Epilepsy and Seizure Disorders, (78 FR 3069), its decision to grant
requests from 22 individuals for exemptions from the regulatory
requirement that interstate CMV drivers have ``no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.'' Since the January 15, 2013 notice, the Agency has
published additional notices granting requests from individuals for
exemptions from the regulatory requirement regarding epilepsy found in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(8).
    To be considered for an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8), applicants must meet the
criteria in the 2007 recommendations of the Agency's Medical Expert
Panel (MEP) (78 FR 3069).

III. Qualifications of Applicants

Robert Broxson

    Mr. Broxson is a 53-year-old class DMV driver in Alabama. He has a
history of epilepsy and has been seizure free since 1991. He takes
anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the
same since 2015. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Broxson receiving an exemption.

Douglas Day

    Mr. Day is a 40-year-old driver in Indiana. He has a history of
epilepsy and has been seizure free since 2008. He takes anti-seizure
medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the same since 2008.
His physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Day receiving an
exemption.

Logan J. Hertzler

    Mr. Hertzler is a 25-year-old class C driver in Pennsylvania. He
has a history of epilepsy and has been seizure free since 2010. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining
the same since 2010. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Hertzler receiving an exemption.

Alexandria Lockhart

    Ms. Lockhart is a 27-year-old class C driver in Pennsylvania. She
has a history of epilepsy and has been seizure free since April 2011.
She takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since 2011. Her physician states that she is
supportive of Ms. Lockhart receiving an exemption.

IV. Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the dates
section of the notice.

     Issued on: May 29, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-11932 Filed 6-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 1 (Thursday, January 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 161]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28305]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Restoration and Enhancement Grants Program

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO or notice); extension and
supplemental funding notice.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is adding funding to and extending the application
submittal period for its NOFO for the Restoration and Enhancement
Grants Program (R&E Program) published on November 6, 2019. The basis
for the funding increase and extension is the appropriation of
additional amounts for the Restoration and Enhancement Grants Program
in Fiscal Year 2020 together with the government's goal of efficiently
administering such funds.

DATES: The original due date for applications was January 6, 2020. The
period for submitting applications to the NOFO published on November 6,
2019 (84 FR 59907) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-11-06/pdf/2019-24225.pdf, is extended. Applications must now be submitted by
5:00 p.m. eastern on February 5, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding the
R&E Program and projects, please contact Ruthie Americus, Office of
Policy and Planning, Federal Railroad Administration,1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Room W36-403, Washington, DC 20590; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Grant application
submission and processing questions should be addressed to Amy Houser,
Office of Program Delivery, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Room W36-412, Washington, DC 20590; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Amendment

    FRA amends its NOFO for the Restoration and Enhancement Grants
Program published on November 6, 2019 (84 FR 59907) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-11-06/pdf/2019-24225.pdf by: (1)
Adding an additional $1,918,600 for a total of $26,337,600 and (2)
extending the period for submitting applications to February 5, 2020.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Ronald L. Batory,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 2019-28305 Filed 12-31-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: April 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 68)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18961-18963]
[DOCID:fr08ap08-10]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2007-0140]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Colorado River, Parker, AZ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone within
the Lake Moolvalya region on the navigable waters of the Colorado River
in Parker, Arizona for the Bluewater Resort and Casino American
Powerboat Association (APBA) National Tour/Regional Championship. This
temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels of the race, and
general users of the waterway. Persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designation
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on May 2, 2008
through May 4, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2007-0140 and are available for inspection or
copying at Coast Guard Sector San Diego, 2710 N. Harbor Drive, San
Diego, CA 92101-1064 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MST3 Kristen Beer, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On February 7, 2008, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Safety zone, Colorado River, Parker, AZ in the Federal
Register (73 FR 7231). We received no letters commenting on the
proposed rule. No public hearing was requested, and none was held.

Background and Purpose

    RPM Racing Enterprises is sponsoring the Bluewater Resort and
Casino APBA National Tour/Regional Championship, which is held on the
Lake Moolvalya region on the Colorado River in Parker, AZ. This
temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels, and other users of the
waterway.
    This event involves powerboats racing along a circular track. The
size of the boats varies from eight to 15 feet. Approximately 130 to
150 boats will participate in this event. The sponsor has provided two
water rescue and two patrol vessels to patrol this event.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    No changes will be made to the rule, since no comments were
received.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that

Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under
that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the regulatory policies and
procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
    We expect the impact of this rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. The safety zone is of a limited
duration, and is limited to a relatively small geographic area. A race
Patrol Commander will be on-scene and will authorize recreational
traffic when vessel movement is safe.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in a portion of the Colorado River, Parker, AZ from 6
a.m. to 6 p.m. on May 4, 2008. This safety zone will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reasons. This rule will be in effect for only twelve
(12) hours in the day for a period of three (3) days. Before the
effective period, we will submit an inclusion in the Local Notice to
Mariners (LNM).

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If your
small business or organization is affected by this rule, or if you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact MST3 Kristen Beer, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector San Diego at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it 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.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit
the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction, from further
environmental documentation.
    A final ``Environmental Analysis Check List'' and a final
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 22 CFR

1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a new temporary Sec.  165.T11-261 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-261  Safety Zone; Colorado River, Parker, AZ.

    (a) Location. The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary
safety zone for the Bluewater Resort and Casino APBA National Tour/
Regional Championship. The limits of this proposed temporary safety
zone would include that portion of the Colorado River from Headgate Dam
to 0.5 miles north of Bluewater Marine, Parker, AZ.
    (b) Effective Period. This section is effective from 6 a.m. to 6
p.m. from May 2 through May 4, 2008.
    (c) Regulations. Entry into, transit through or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port San Diego or his designated on-scene representative. Mariners
requesting permission to transit through the safety zone may request
authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM
may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16.

    Dated: March 17, 2008.
C.V. Strangfeld,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego.
[FR Doc. E8-7385 Filed 4-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 232 (Friday, December 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87111-87112]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28933]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79411; File No. SR-BatsEDGX-2016-66]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Make
Non-Substantive Changes to the Fee Schedule

November 28, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on November 18, 2016, Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange''
or ``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to make several non-substantive
changes to the fee schedule applicable to Members \5\ and non-members
of the Exchange pursuant to Exchange Rules 15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ A Member is defined as ``any registered broker or dealer
that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See Exchange
Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 parts 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 make certain clarifying and non-
substantive changes to its fee schedule in order to improve formatting,
eliminate certain redundancies, increase overall readability, and
provide users with straightforward descriptions to augment overall
comprehensibility and usability of the existing fee schedule. The
Exchange notes that these changes are purely clerical and do not
substantively amend any fee or rebate, nor do they alter the manner in
which the Exchange assesses fees or calculates rebates. The proposed
changes are simply intended to provide greater transparency to market
participants regarding how the Exchange assesses fees and calculates
rebates. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to:
     Capitalize the title of the column setting forth each
tier's rate under footnotes 1 and 2;
     ensure each tier requiring multiple criteria is conjoined
using ``; and'' to clarify that all of a tier's criteria must be
satisfied to receive the applicable rate;
     amend the name under first column of the tiers listed
under footnote 2 to simply state ``Tier 1'', Tier 2'' to remove added
language that is clearly set forth in and redundant with the tier's
title;
     replace the phrases ``equal to or greater than'' and ``of
at least'' with ``>='' in all required criteria cells under footnotes 1
and 2.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder that are applicable to a national securities exchange, and,
in particular, with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\6\
Specifically, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Sections 6(b)(4) of the Act of the Act [sic],\7\ in
that it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees
and other charges among members and other persons using any facility or
system which the Exchange operates or controls. The Exchange believes
that the proposed changes are reasonable and equitable because they are
intended to simplify the Exchange's fee schedule and provide greater
transparency to market participants regarding how the Exchange assesses
fees and calculates rebates. The Exchange notes that these changes are
purely clerical and do not substantively amend any fee or rebate, nor
do they alter the manner in which the Exchange assesses fees or
calculates rebates. The Exchange also believes that the proposal is
non-discriminatory because it applies uniformly to all Members.
Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes will make the
fee schedule clearer and eliminate potential investor confusion,
thereby removing impediments to and

perfecting the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, protecting investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. To
the contrary, the Exchange believes that the [sic] will not impose any
burden on competition as the changes are purely clerical and do not
amend and [sic] fee or rebate.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any written comments from members or other interested parties.

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) of the Act \8\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-66 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-BatsEDGX-2016-66. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BatsEDGX-2016-66, and should
be submitted on or before December 23, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[FR Doc. 2016-28933 Filed 12-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P