[Federal Register: February 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 36)]
[Notices]
[Page 8325-8326]
[DOCID:fr24fe10-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-727-000]

AEP Retail Energy Partners, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

February 18, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
AEP Retail Energy Partner, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC, 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket

authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities
and assumptions of liability, is March 9, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC, 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

 Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3631 Filed 2-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 231 (Monday, December 4, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57305-57306]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25988]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82160; File No. SR-CboeBZX-2017-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule
19.6, Series of Options Contracts Open for Trading

November 28, 2017.
    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 15, 2017, Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it 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).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Rule 19.6, Series of Options
Contracts Open for Trading.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.markets.cboe.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant 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 purpose of this filing is to amend Rule 19.6 to modify the
strike setting regime for IVV, SPY, and DIA options. Specifically, for
IVV, SPY, and DIA options the Exchange proposes to explicitly allow $1
strike price intervals. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change would make IVV, SPY, and DIA options easier for investors and
traders to use and more tailored to their investment needs, as well as
to better align BZX's strike regime with other options exchange. The
Exchange notes that this proposal is based on the rules of BOX Options
Exchange LLC (``Box'') and the Cboe Exchange, Inc. (f/k/a Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Inc.) (``Cboe'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Box Rule IM-5050-1 and Cboe Rule 5.5.08(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 19.6(d)(4) provides that:

    The interval between strike prices of series of options on Fund
Shares approved for options trading pursuant to Rule 19.3(i) shall
be fixed at a price per share which is reasonably close to the price
per share at which the underlying security is traded in the primary
market at or about the same time such series of options is first
open for trading on BZX Options, or at such intervals as may have
been established on another options exchange prior to the initiation
of trading on BZX Options.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Rule 19.6(d)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 19.6.02(a) provides:
    BZX Options may list $1 Strike Prices on any other option
classes if those classes are specifically designated by other
national securities exchanges that employ a similar $1 Strike Price
Program under their respective rules.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Rule 19.6.02(a).

Pursuant to Rule 19.6.02(a) and the last clause in Rule 19.6(d)(4),
IVV, SPY, and DIA options may be listed in $1 strike price intervals
when another options exchange lists $1 strikes. The Exchange seeks to
amend Rule 19.6(d)(4) to explicitly allow $1 strike price intervals
regardless of whether another exchange has already listed series of
IVV, SPY, and DIA options.
    The SPY and IVV exchange-traded funds (``ETFs'') are designed to
roughly track the performance of the S&P 500 Index. The DIA ETF is
designed to roughly track the performance of the Dow Jones Industrial
Average (``DJIA'') with the price of SPY and IVV designed to roughly
approximate 1/10th of the price of the S&P 500 Index and the price of
DIA designed to roughly approximate 1/100th of the price of the DJIA.
Accordingly, SPY and IVV strike prices reflect a value roughly equal to
1/10th of the value of the S&P 500 Index and DIA strike prices reflect
a value roughly equal to 1/100th of the value of the DJIA with each
having a multiplier of $100. For example, if the S&P 500 Index is at
1972.56, SPY options might have a value of approximately 197.26 with a
notional value of $19,726. If the DJIA is at 16,569.98, DIA options may
have a value of 165.70 with a notional value of $16,570. In general,
SPY, IVV, and DIA options provide retail investors and traders with the
benefit of trading the broad market in a manageably sized contract. As
options with an ETP underlying, SPY, IVV, and DIA options are listed in
the same manner as equity options under the Rules.
    Unlike other options exchanges, BZX rules do not specifically
identify the strike price interval for IVV, SPY, and DIA options. This
proposed rule change seeks to match the strike setting regime for IVV,
SPY, and DIA options available on other options exchanges.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Box Rule IM-5050-1 and Cboe Rule 5.5.08(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Due to the Exchange's current ability to list $1 strikes in IVV,
SPY, and DIA options when another options exchange lists such strikes,
this proposed rule change is unlikely to augment the potential total
number of options series available on the Exchange. However, the
Exchange believes it and the Options Price Reporting Authority
(``OPRA'') have the necessary systems capacity to handle any potential
additional traffic associated with this proposed rule change. The
Exchange also believes that Trading Permit Holders will not have a
capacity issue due to the proposed rule change. In addition, the
Exchange represents that it does not believe that this expansion will
cause fragmentation of liquidity.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) requirements that the rules of an exchange be 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 regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in

securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
    In particular, the proposed rule change will allow investors to
more easily use SPY, IVV, DIA options, which protects investors and the
public interest. The Exchange also believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act, which provides that the
Exchange be organized and have the capacity to be able to carry out the
purposes of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder, and the
rules of the Exchange. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed
rule would create additional capacity issues or affect market
functionality. The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change,
like other strike price programs currently offered by the Exchange,
will benefit investors by giving them increased flexibility to more
closely tailor their investment and hedging decisions. Moreover, the
proposed rule change is consistent with the rules of other
exchanges.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Box Rule IM-5050-1 and Cboe Rule 5.5.08(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(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 that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change will result in additional
investment options and opportunities to achieve the investment and
trading objectives of market participants seeking efficient trading and
hedging vehicles, to the benefit of investors, market participants, and
the marketplace in general. Additionally, this proposed rule change
seeks to match the strike setting regime for IVV, SPY, and DIA options
available on other options exchanges; thus, the proposed rule change
may alleviate any potential burden on competition.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (A)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (B) impose any significant burden on competition; and (C) by
its terms, become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed or such shorter time as the Commission may designate it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\12\ the Exchange has
designated this rule filing as non-controversial. The Exchange has
given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBZX-2017-002 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBZX-2017-002. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change. 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-CboeBZX-2017-002 and should
be submitted on or before December 26, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-25988 Filed 12-1-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 19 (Monday, January 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 5957]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01758]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1384; Summary Notice No. 2022-45]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Venture
Travel, LLC dba Taquan Air

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion nor omission of information in the
summary is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its
final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before February 21, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2022-1384
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: 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 http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Nelson,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office
of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

Angela O. Anderson,
Director, Regulatory Support Division, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2022-1384.
    Petitioner: Venture Travel, LLC dba Taquan Air (Taquan Air).
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  119.73.
    Description of Relief Sought: Taquan Air requests an exemption in
order to employ a former Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aviation
safety inspector (ASI) who had responsibility to oversee the operations
of the petitioner from February 17, 2021 until May 26, 2021.

[FR Doc. 2023-01758 Filed 1-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17205-17206]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05791]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. CP15-17-000]

Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request for Extension of
Time

    Take notice that on March 10, 2023, Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC
(Sabal Trail) requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) grant an extension of time, until May 1, 2025, to complete
Phase III of their Sabal Trail Project, originally authorized in the
February 2, 2016 Order Issuing Certificate Under Section 7 of the
Natural Gas Act (February 2 Order).\1\ This project involved the
construction, in three phases, of interstate pipeline facilities that
would allow Sabal Trail to provide up to 1,075,000 dekatherms per day
(Dth/d) of transportation service to delivery points in the
southeastern United States. Ordering Paragraph (F)(1) of the February 2
Order, as amended, provided a deadline of May 1, 2021, to make Phase
III of their project facilities available for service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Florida Southeast Connection, LLC, et al., 154 FERC ]
61,080 (2016) (February 2 Order), order on reh'g, Florida Southeast
Connection, LLC, et al., 156 FERC ] 61,160 (2016), order on remand,
Florida Southeast Connection, LLC, et al., 162 FERC ] 61,233 (2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 7, 2021, Sabal Trail filed a request for an extension of
time, until May 1, 2023, to complete construction of the project and
place Phase III of the remaining facilities--two compressor units--into
service. The Commission granted that requested extension of time on
June 15, 2021.\2\ That delegated order recognized that Sabal Trail had
placed all other facilities into service and its pipeline system was
capable of providing up to 999,000 Dth/d of firm transportation
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC, Docket No. CP15-17-000 (June
15, 2021) (delegated order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sabal Trail now states that, due to adverse economic and logistical
conditions induced, in part, by the COVID-19 pandemic, commercial
progress was slowed. Sabal Trail now states that these unforeseen
circumstances precluded the project from reaching full
commercialization, and that additional time is now required to complete
the installation of the remaining two compressor units and make them
available for service.
    This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment
period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on the applicant's
request for an extension of time may do so. No reply comments or
answers will be considered. If you wish to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this request, you should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Only motions to intervene from entities that were party to
the underlying proceeding will be accepted. Algonquin Gas
Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 39 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on
requests for extensions of time to complete construction for Natural
Gas Act facilities when such requests are contested before order
issuance. For those extension requests that are contested,\4\ the
Commission will aim to issue an order acting on the request within 45
days.\5\ The Commission will address all arguments relating to whether
the applicant has demonstrated there is good cause to grant the
extension.\6\ The Commission will not consider arguments that re-
litigate the issuance of the certificate order, including whether the
Commission properly found the project to be in the public convenience
and necessity and whether the Commission's environmental analysis for
the certificate complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.\7\
At the time a pipeline requests an extension of time, orders on
certificates of public convenience and necessity are final and the
Commission will not re-litigate their issuance.\8\ The OEP Director, or
his or her designee, will act on all of those extension requests that
are uncontested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Contested proceedings are those where an intervenor disputes
any material issue of the filing. 18 CFR 385.2201(c)(1) (2019).
    \5\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
    \6\ Id. at P 40.
    \7\ Similarly, the Commission will not re-litigate the issuance
of an NGA section 3 authorization, including whether a proposed
project is not inconsistent with the public interest and whether the
Commission's environmental analysis for the permit order complied
with NEPA.
    \8\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments
in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. 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.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 30, 2023.

    Dated: March 15, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05791 Filed 3-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 28006]
[FR Doc No: 2022-09945]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL -9817-01-OA]

Public Meeting of the Science Advisory Board Drinking Water
Committee (DWC) Augmented for the Contaminant Candidate List 5 Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory
Board (SAB) Staff Office announces one public meeting of the Science
Advisory Board Drinking Water Committee (DWC) Augmented for the
Contaminant Candidate List 5 (CCL 5) Review. The purpose of the meeting
is for the Committee to discuss their draft report reviewing EPA's
Draft Fifth Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 5) (86 FR
37948) and three associated support documents: Technical Support
Document for the Draft Fifth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 5)--
Contaminant Information Sheets; Technical Support Document for the
Draft Fifth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 5)--Chemical Contaminants;
and Technical Support Document for the Draft Fifth Contaminant
Candidate List (CCL 5)--Microbial Contaminants.

DATES: The public meeting for the Science Advisory Board DWC Augmented
for the CCL 5 Review to review its draft document will be held on June
6, 2022, from 12:30 p.m.--5:00 p.m. (Eastern Time).

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be conducted virtually. Please refer to the
SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov for information on how to attend the
meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wants
further information concerning this notice may contact Carolyn Kilgore,
Designated Federal Officer (DFO), via telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email at [email protected]. General information about the SAB, as
well as any updates concerning the meetings announced in this notice
can be found on the SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: The SAB was established pursuant
to the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration
Authorization Act (ERDDAA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide
independent scientific and technical advice to the EPA Administrator on
the scientific and technical basis for agency positions and
regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The SAB
will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff
Office procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is
hereby given that the Science Advisory Board DWC Augmented for the CCL
5 5 Review will hold a public meeting to discuss their draft report
reviewing EPA's Draft Fifth Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List
and associated support documents.
    Availability of Meeting Materials: All meeting materials, including
the agenda will be available on the SAB web page at https://sab.epa.gov.
    Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for
consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a
different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices.
Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory
committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an
EPA program office. Federal advisory committees and panels, including
scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to the EPA.
Members of the public can submit relevant comments pertaining to the
committee's charge or meeting materials. Input from the public to the
SAB will have the most impact if it provides specific scientific or
technical information or analysis for the SAB to consider or if it
relates to the clarity or accuracy of the technical information.
Members of the public wishing to provide comment should follow the
instruction below to submit comments.
    Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an
oral presentation at a meeting conducted by telephone will be limited
to three minutes. Each person making an oral statement should consider
providing written comments as well as their oral statement so that the
points presented orally can be expanded upon in writing. Persons
interested in providing oral statements should contact the DFO, in
writing (preferably via email) at the contact information noted above
by May 31, 2022, to be placed on the list of registered speakers.
    Written Statements: Written statements will be accepted throughout
the advisory process; however, for timely consideration by SAB members,
statements should be submitted to the DFO by May 24, 2022, for
consideration at the June 6, 2022, meeting. Written statements should
be supplied to the DFO at the contact information above via email.
Submitters are requested to provide a signed and unsigned version of
each document because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents
with signatures on its websites. Members of the public should be aware
that their personal contact information, if included in any written
comments, may be posted to the SAB website. Copyrighted material will
not be posted without explicit permission of the copyright holder.
    Accessibility: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, please contact the DFO, at the contact
information noted above, preferably at least ten days prior to the
meeting, to give the EPA as much time as possible to process your
request.

Thomas H. Brennan,
Director, Science Advisory Board Staff Office.
[FR Doc. 2022-09945 Filed 5-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 29, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52218-52219]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21162]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0411; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-26]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Montgomery, AL, Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment, correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects geographic coordinates that were not
adjusted in the airspace description of a final rule, technical
amendment published in the Federal Register on July 31, 2012, amending
controlled airspace in the Montgomery, AL, area. The corrected
coordinates for Maxwell AFB and Wetumpka Municipal Airport, are
included in this final.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, September 20, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On July 31, 2012, the FAA published a final rule, technical
amendment, in the Federal Register amending the Class E airspace area
for Montgomery, AL, by recognizing the name change to Prattville-Grouby
Field Airport (formerly Autauga Airport) (77 FR

45238). After publication, the FAA found that the geographic
coordinates of Maxwell AFB and Wetumpka Municipal Airport need to be
adjusted to be in concert with the FAAs aeronautical database. This
action makes the administrative adjustment that does not affect the
altitude, boundaries, or operating requirements of the airspace.
Therefore, notice and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
unnecessary.
    The Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraphs 6005
of FAA order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Correction to Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the
geographic coordinates for Maxwell AFB and Wetumpka Municipal Airport,
as listed in the airspace designation of the Class E airspace,
Montgomery, AL, as published in the Federal Register of July 31, 2012,
(77 FR 45238), FR Doc. 2012-18522, are corrected as follows:

Sec.  71.1  [Corrected]

* * * * *

ASO AL E5 Montgomery, AL [Corrected]

    On page 45238, column 3, line 51, under Maxwell AFB, remove,
lat. 32[deg]22'45''N., long. 86[deg]21'45''W, and insert lat.
32[deg]22'59''N., long. 86[deg]21'57''W, and on page 45238, column
3, line 55, under Wetumpka Municipal Airport, remove lat.
32[deg]31'46''N., long. 86[deg]19'42''W, and insert lat.
32[deg]31'38''N., long. 86[deg]19'52''W.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August 16, 2012.
Barry A. Knight,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2012-21162 Filed 8-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 197 (Tuesday, October 13, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61545-61551]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25861]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76082; File No. SR-FINRA-2015-034]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Merge
FINRA Dispute Resolution, Inc. Into and With FINRA Regulation, Inc.

October 6, 2015.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 29, 2015, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
and II below, which Items have been prepared by FINRA. 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

    FINRA is proposing to merge its dispute resolution subsidiary,
FINRA Dispute Resolution, Inc. (``FINRA Dispute Resolution'') into and
with its regulatory subsidiary, FINRA Regulation, Inc. (``FINRA
Regulation''). To implement the merger, FINRA would make conforming
amendments to the Plan of Allocation and Delegation of Functions by
NASD to Subsidiaries (``Delegation Plan''); amend the By-Laws of FINRA
Regulation (``FINRA Regulation By-Laws'') to make relevant conforming
amendments and to incorporate substantive provisions from the By-Laws
of FINRA Dispute Resolution (``FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws'') that
apply to the dispute resolution forum only; delete the FINRA Dispute
Resolution By-Laws in their entirety; and make conforming amendments to
FINRA rules.\3\ The proposed rule change would also amend the FINRA
Regulation By-Laws to increase the total number of directors who could
serve on the FINRA Regulation board. FINRA's existing dispute
resolution program would continue to operate as a separate department
within FINRA Regulation, and would be referred to as the Office of
Dispute Resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The current FINRA rulebook consists of: (1) FINRA Rules; (2)
NASD Rules; and (3) rules incorporated from New York Stock Exchange
LLC (``NYSE'') (``Incorporated NYSE Rules'') (together, the NASD
Rules and Incorporated NYSE Rules are referred to as the
``Transitional Rulebook''). While the NASD Rules generally apply to
all FINRA members, the Incorporated NYSE Rules apply only to those
members of FINRA that are also members of the NYSE (``Dual
Members''). The FINRA Rules apply to all FINRA members, unless such
rules have a more limited application by their terms. For more
information about the rulebook consolidation process, see
Information Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook Consolidation Process).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on FINRA's Web
site at http://www.finra.org, at the principal office of FINRA 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, FINRA 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. FINRA 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
    FINRA is proposing to merge FINRA Dispute Resolution into FINRA
Regulation. To undertake the merger, FINRA would make conforming
amendments to the Delegation Plan, amend the FINRA Regulation By-Laws
to incorporate substantive and unique provisions from the FINRA Dispute
Resolution By-Laws and to make other conforming amendments, delete the
FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws in their entirety, and make conforming
amendments to FINRA rules. The proposed rule change would also amend
the FINRA Regulation By-Laws to increase the total number of directors
who could serve on the FINRA Regulation board in order to provide
additional flexibility to meet the compositional requirements under the
FINRA Regulation By-Laws.
I. Background
    Prior to 1996, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'') Arbitration Department operated the NASD's arbitration and
mediation programs. In 1996, upon the combined recommendations of two
committees (the ``Ruder Task Force'' and the ``Rudman Committee'')
formed by the NASD of individuals with significant securities industry
and NASD governance experience,\4\ NASD reorganized as a parent
corporation with two operating subsidiaries: The Nasdaq Stock Market,
Inc. (``Nasdaq''), which was charged with operating the Nasdaq market,
and NASD Regulation, Inc. (``NASD Regulation''), focused on regulatory
and investor protection issues. At the time of the reorganization, the
Arbitration Department was placed within NASD Regulation. The name of
the Arbitration Department was subsequently changed to the Office of
Dispute Resolution (``ODR'') to reflect the broader range of dispute
resolution services provided.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In September 1994, the NASD established the Ruder Task Force
to study NASD arbitration and recommend improvements. The Ruder Task
Force issued a report recommending, among other things, that the
dispute resolution program be housed either in the NASD parent or in
NASD Regulation. See The Arbitration Policy Task Force Report--A
Report Card at 26, available on FINRA's Web site at: http://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/Industry/p036466.pdf.
Subsequently, [sic] the Rudman Committee recommended that the
Arbitration Department be placed in NASD Regulation. See Report of
the NASD Select Committee on Structure and Governance to the NASD
Board of Governors (``Rudman Report'') at R-8. See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 41971 (September 30, 1999), 64 FR 55793,
55794 (October 14, 1999) (Order Approving File No. SR-NASD-99-21).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41971 (September 30,
1999), 64 FR 55793, 55794 (October 14, 1999) (Order Approving File
No. SR-NASD-99-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1999, NASD decided to move ODR into a separate subsidiary, NASD
Dispute Resolution, Inc., that would focus solely on administering its
dispute resolution program, which it believed would further strengthen
the independence and credibility of the arbitration and mediation
functions. NASD believed that the new dispute resolution subsidiary
would benefit from the perception that it was separate and distinct
from other corporate entities.\6\ In 2000, the NASD began a
restructuring process to separate Nasdaq from NASD. The separation of
Nasdaq from NASD was completed in 2006.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 5.
    \7\ On November 21, 2006, the SEC approved the separation of
Nasdaq from NASD upon the operation of the Nasdaq Exchange as a
national securities exchange for non-Nasdaq exchange-listed
securities. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54798 (November
21, 2006), 71 FR 69156 (November 29, 2006) (Order Approving File No.
SR-NASD-2006-104).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA \8\ believes there is no longer a need to maintain separate
subsidiaries to execute its regulatory and dispute resolution
functions. The proposed merger would align the corporate legal
structure with current public perception and organizational practice.
It would also reduce unnecessary administrative burdens required to
maintain separate legal entities. Finally, while the proposed rule
change would change FINRA Dispute Resolution's corporate status, it
would not affect the services and benefits provided by or costs to use
the dispute resolution forum, its corporate governance \9\ or
oversight.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ On July 30, 2007, NASD and NYSE consolidated their member
firm regulation, enforcement and dispute resolution operations into
a combined organization, FINRA. See Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 56145 (July 26, 2007), 72 FR 42169 (August 1, 2007), as amended
by Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56145A (May 30, 2008), 73 FR
32377 (June 6, 2008) (Order Approving File No. SR-NASD-2007-023).
    \9\ The proposed rule change would amend the FINRA Regulation
corporate governance structure to add two board seats. See
discussion under section II.B., Proposed Rule Change, Amendments to
the FINRA Regulation By-Laws, Article IV Board of Directors, Number
of Directors, infra pages 44-45 [sic].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed merger would align the legal structure with the
public's perception of FINRA as well as its operational realities. From
the public's perspective, FINRA, Inc., FINRA Regulation and FINRA
Dispute Resolution have the appearance of a single organization.
FINRA's Annual Report is a consolidated report that includes all FINRA
operations, and all press releases and communications are issued by
FINRA.
    Operationally, the three corporate entities largely function as a
single organization. The entities share many administrative and support
functions including, for example, Corporate Communications and
Government Relations, Corporate Real Estate and Corporate Security,
Finance and Purchasing, Human Resources, Internal Audit, Legal,
Meetings and Travel, Office of the Corporate Secretary, Office of the
Ombudsman and Technology. These integrated functions promote efficient
operations and conserve financial resources. In addition, the
operational cohesiveness furthers FINRA's mission of protecting
investors. FINRA Dispute Resolution staff, for example, works with the
Department of Enforcement to identify misconduct by individuals or
firms involved in arbitration cases that could justify further action.
    There are also significant shared resources across entities in the
areas of corporate governance and funding. With respect to governance,
members of the FINRA Board's Regulatory Policy Committee currently
serve as the directors of the boards of both FINRA Regulation and FINRA
Dispute Resolution.\10\ Regarding funding, FINRA Dispute Resolution is
not self-supporting and fees received from parties who use the
arbitration and mediation programs are not sufficient to fund the
forum's arbitration and mediation activities. Under the proposed
merger, to supplement the fees collected from forum users, FINRA would
continue to allocate revenues, as

necessary, from the overall FINRA enterprise, which would include
revenue derived from member assessments, various fees and charges, and
disciplinary fines with some exceptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61575 (February 23,
2010), 75 FR 9459, 9460 (March 2, 2010) (Notice of Filing File No.
SR-FINRA-2010-007). Both boards consist of a majority of public
directors. See By-Laws of FINRA Dispute Resolution, Inc., Article
IV, Section 4.3(a) and By-Laws of FINRA Regulation, Inc., Article
IV, Section 4.3(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to aligning the corporate structure with operational
realities, the proposed merger would reduce the considerable
administrative duplication associated with maintaining the three
distinct corporate entities. From a regulatory perspective, the three
corporate entities have separate reporting requirements and Federal and
state taxes, and are, therefore, treated as individual entities.\11\ By
merging FINRA Dispute Resolution into FINRA Regulation, FINRA would
eliminate the need to file numerous tax filings each year, including
multiple state tax and information returns, sales tax returns
(including some monthly and quarterly filings), property tax returns,
and many state registrations and annual reports. Moreover, merging the
two subsidiaries would eliminate a separate payroll entity, which would
remove the need for separate compensation and benefit accounting
protocols. Thus, a merger of the subsidiaries would allow FINRA to
lower FINRA's expenses and more efficiently use staff resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For example, by maintaining separate entities, FINRA has
been required to submit separate payroll, tax, and compliance
filings for each corporate entity in many states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although a merger between FINRA Dispute Resolution and FINRA
Regulation would change FINRA Dispute Resolution's corporate status, it
would not affect the services and benefits provided by or the costs to
use the dispute resolution forum, its corporate governance or
oversight. Over the past 15 years, FINRA, as a single organization, has
operated the largest securities dispute resolution forum in the world--
through its arbitration and mediation services--to assist in the
resolution of monetary and business disputes between and among
investors, brokerage firms and individual brokers. FINRA's Dispute
Resolution program provides investors and markets with a fair,
efficient and economical alternative to costly and complex litigation
programs, which are often cost-prohibitive for investors with small
claims.
    The FINRA Dispute Resolution program has several features that
distinguish it from other private arbitration forums and further
promote investor protection and market integrity. For example, the
forum charges significantly lower arbitration fees for investors, gives
investors the choice of an all-public arbitrator panel, uses an
investor-friendly discovery guide, and offers 71 hearing locations,
including at least one in every state, Puerto Rico and London, United
Kingdom. Also, FINRA has the authority to suspend or cancel the
membership of firms and suspend registered representatives who fail to
pay arbitration awards or agreed-upon settlements.\12\ Further, FINRA
Dispute Resolution continuously recruits qualified individuals to
improve its arbitrator and mediator rosters, while closely monitoring
and evaluating the performance of existing arbitrators and mediators.
These benefits and services, among others, would not be disrupted by
the merger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See By-Laws of the Corporation, Article VI, section 3 and
Rule 9554.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the merger would not have a practical impact on
corporate governance involving FINRA Dispute Resolution. Members of the
FINRA Board's Regulatory Policy Committee currently serve as the
directors of both the FINRA Regulation and FINRA Dispute Resolution
boards.\13\ The FINRA Regulation board would continue to consist of a
majority of public board members.\14\ In addition, FINRA would maintain
the National Arbitration and Mediation Committee (``NAMC''), which is a
Board-appointed advisory committee on arbitration matters.\15\ Non-
industry members would continue to compose at least 50 percent of the
NAMC.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61575 (February 23,
2010), 75 FR 9459, 9460 (March 2, 2010) (Notice of Filing File No.
SR-FINRA-2010-007).
    \14\ See By-Laws of FINRA Dispute Resolution, Inc., Article IV,
section 4.3(a) and By-Laws of FINRA Regulation, Inc., Article IV,
section 4.3(a).
    \15\ See Rules 12102 and 13102. See also section III(C) of the
Delegation Plan. FINRA is proposing to transfer current section
III(C)(1) of the Delegation Plan into section II(C) of the
Delegation Plan.
    \16\ See supra note 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, the dispute resolution forum would continue to be subject
to the same SEC oversight as other departments of FINRA, which would
include the requirement to file all By-Law and rule changes with the
SEC. Thus, the arbitration program and services would continue to be
governed by the Codes of Arbitration Procedure,\17\ and the mediation
program and services by the Code of Mediation Procedure.\18\ Further,
the forum would continue to be subject to inspections by the SEC and by
the Government Accountability Office, which performs audits at the
request of the United States Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Rule 12000 and 13000 Series.
    \18\ See Rule 14000 Series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. [sic] Proposed Rule Change
    FINRA is proposing to merge FINRA Dispute Resolution into FINRA
Regulation. FINRA would make conforming amendments to the Delegation
Plan, amend the FINRA Regulation By-Laws to incorporate substantive and
unique provisions from the FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws and to make
other conforming amendments, delete the FINRA Dispute Resolution By-
Laws, and make conforming amendments to FINRA rules. The proposed rule
change would also amend the FINRA Regulation By-Laws to increase the
total number of directors who could serve on the FINRA Regulation
board.
A. Conforming Amendments to the Delegation Plan
    FINRA is proposing to make conforming amendments throughout the
Delegation Plan to remove references to ``NASD'' and ``Rules of the
Association'' and replace them with references to ``FINRA'' and ``FINRA
rules,'' respectively.\19\ In addition, the proposed rule change would
change the word ``subsidiaries'' or ``subsidiary'' to ``FINRA
Regulation'' to indicate that FINRA Regulation would remain at the
conclusion of the merger. Finally, FINRA is proposing to remove
references to section III, the section of the Delegation Plan that
pertains to FINRA Dispute Resolution, as that section will no longer
exist following the merger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ ``FINRA rules'' means the current FINRA rulebook. See supra
notes 3 and 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section I--FINRA, Inc.
    Section I of the Delegation Plan provides responsibility for the
rules and regulations of the Association and its operation and
administration to FINRA, Inc. Under section I(B), the proposed rule
change would remove subsections 5 and 6 because they refer to actions
taken between FINRA Regulation and FINRA Dispute Resolution. The
remaining subsections would be re-numbered. In re-numbered subsection
5, FINRA is proposing to remove the word ``common,'' as FINRA
Regulation would no longer share overhead and technology with FINRA
Dispute Resolution as a separate subsidiary. In re-numbered subsection
6, FINRA is proposing to change the reference to the Office of Internal
Review to the Office of Internal Audit to reflect a name change.
    In section I(D), the proposed rule change would replace the
reference to ``4000A'' with ``6200,'' to reflect the transfer and re-
numbering of the rule

series governing the Alternative Display Facility into the Consolidated
FINRA Rulebook.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58643 (September
25, 2008), 73 FR 57174 (October 1, 2008) (Order Approving File Nos.
SR-FINRA-2008-021; SR-FINRA-2008-022; SR-FINRA-2008-026; SR-FINRA-
2008-028 and SR-FINRA-2008-029).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section II--FINRA Regulation, Inc.
Amendments to Transfer Provisions of Section III into Section II
    Section II of the Delegation Plan delegates responsibilities and
functions to FINRA Regulation. FINRA is proposing to transfer several
provisions from section III, which pertains to FINRA Dispute
Resolution, into section II.
    First, under section II(A)(1), FINRA is proposing to amend
subsection (a) to add ``and dispute resolution programs,'' so that the
function of establishing and interpreting rules and regulations would
also apply to dispute resolution programs.
    Second, the proposed rule change would amend subsection (b) to add
``arbitration, mediation or other resolution of disputes among and
between FINRA members, associated persons and customers,'' so that
FINRA Regulation would have the authority to develop and adopt
appropriate and necessary rule changes related to the dispute
resolution forum.
    Third, FINRA is proposing to amend section II(A)(1) to add the
function that would permit FINRA Regulation to ``conduct arbitrations,
mediations, and other dispute resolution programs.'' The provision
would be labeled as subsection (n). The remaining subsections would be
re-numbered.
    Fourth, the proposed rule change would amend re-numbered subsection
(q), which addresses the function of establishing and assessing fees
and other charges on FINRA members, persons associated with members,
and others using the services or facilities of FINRA or FINRA
Regulation, to add ``which includes the dispute resolution forum.''
    Fifth, the proposed rule change would amend re-numbered subsection
(r) to explicitly add ``dispute resolution'' to the list of areas in
which FINRA Regulation may manage external relations.
    Finally, FINRA is proposing to transfer in its entirety current
section III(C)(1) of the Delegation Plan, which governs the NAMC, into
section II(C) of the Delegation Plan. Currently, section III(C)(1) of
the Delegation Plan delegates authority to the NAMC to advise the FINRA
Dispute Resolution board on issues relating to dispute resolution.\21\
Under the Codes of Arbitration Procedure, the NAMC has the authority to
recommend rules, regulations, procedures and amendments relating to
arbitration, mediation, and other dispute resolution matters to the
FINRA Board.\22\ The NAMC also has the authority and responsibility to
establish and maintain rosters of neutrals composed of persons from
within and outside of the securities industry.\23\ The NAMC's
authority, role and its responsibilities would not change under the
proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See section III(C) of the Plan of Allocation and Delegation
of Functions by NASD to Subsidiaries.
    \22\ See Rules 12102 and 13102.
    \23\ See supra note 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Conforming Amendments to Section II
    Under section II(C)(2)(a)(iii), FINRA is proposing to replace the
reference to ``Rule 11890'' with ``the Rule 11000 Series.'' The Rule
11000 Series refers to the Uniform Practice Code and includes the new
Rule 11890 Series governing clearly erroneous transactions that FINRA
moved into the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61080 (December 1,
2009), 74 FR 64117 (December 7, 2009) (Order Approving File No. SR-
FINRA-2009-068).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section III--NASD Dispute Resolution, Inc.
    FINRA is proposing to delete section III of the Delegation Plan
because, as discussed above, the provisions that apply to dispute
resolution only would be incorporated into amended section II of the
Delegation Plan.
B. Amendments to the FINRA Regulation By-Laws
    FINRA is proposing to amend the FINRA Regulation By-Laws to
incorporate substantive and unique provisions from the FINRA Dispute
Resolution By-Laws. Where differences exist in the FINRA Dispute
Resolution By-Laws that would not be incorporated into the FINRA
Regulation By-Laws under the proposed rule change, such differences are
non-substantive in nature or would not otherwise affect the governance
or operation of the dispute resolution program.\25\ FINRA would also
make other conforming amendments to the FINRA Regulation By-Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ For example, although minor differences exist between
sections 4.13(f) of the FINRA Regulation By-Laws and Dispute
Regulation By-Laws, the proposed rule change would retain the FINRA
Regulation By-Laws' section relating to the composition of an
Executive Committee. See By-Laws of FINRA Regulation, Inc., Article
4, section 4.13(f). This provision of the FINRA Regulation By-Laws
clarifies that Executive Committee members must be directors and is
consistent with FINRA's practice and intent. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 62156 (May 24, 2010), 75 FR 30453, 30456 (June 1,
2010) (Order Approving File No. SR-FINRA-2010-007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article I Definitions
Electronic Transmission
    FINRA is proposing to add the term ``electronic transmission'' to
Article I of the By-Laws of FINRA Regulation in light of the common
usage of electronic transmission as a means of communication and
references to such term in the By-Laws of FINRA Regulation.\26\ The
proposed rule change would relocate the definition of the term, without
change, from current section 8.19(a) of the By-Laws of FINRA
Regulation. Accordingly, the term ``electronic transmission'' would
mean any form of communication, not directly involving the physical
transmission of paper, that creates a record that may be retained,
retrieved and reviewed by a recipient thereof, and that may be directly
reproduced in paper form by such a recipient through an automated
process.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The term ``electronic transmission'' would be added as
proposed Article I(o). Article I(p) through (r) would be re-
numbered. See also sections 4.12, 8.5, 8.19 and 12.3 of the By-Laws
of FINRA Regulation for references to the term ``electronic
transmission.''
    \27\ The FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws contain a slightly
different definition of ``electronic transmission''; however,
because the difference does not have a meaningful impact on the
application of the term for purposes of the FINRA Regulation By-
Laws, FINRA proposes to retain the definition currently used in the
FINRA Regulation By-Laws. See By-Laws of FINRA Dispute Resolution
Inc., Article I(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FINRA Member and Public Member
    FINRA is proposing to expand the term ``FINRA member'' in Article
I(s) of the By-Laws of FINRA Regulation to incorporate a definition
that applies to the dispute resolution forum. Specifically, the added
language would further define a ``FINRA member'' as ``any broker or
dealer admitted to membership in FINRA, whether or not the membership
has been terminated or cancelled; and any broker or dealer admitted to
membership in a self-regulatory organization that, with FINRA consent,
has required its members to arbitrate pursuant to the Code of
Arbitration Procedure for Customer Disputes or the Code of Arbitration
Procedure for Industry Disputes and/or to be treated as members of
FINRA for purposes of the Codes of Arbitration Procedure, whether or
not the membership has been terminated or cancelled.'' The SEC

approved a similar definition that was added to the By-Laws of FINRA
Dispute Resolution in 2010.\28\ Under the proposed rule change, the
expanded definition of FINRA member would apply only to the Codes of
Arbitration Procedure.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62156 (May 24,
2010), 75 FR 30453, 30454 (June 1, 2010) (Order Approving File No.
SR-FINRA-2010-007).
    \29\ See Rule 12000 and 13000 Series.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change would also amend the definitions of
Industry Member \30\ and Public Member \31\ under the FINRA Regulation
By-Laws to reflect unique provisions in the Dispute Resolution By-Laws.
In 2012, the SEC approved amendments to the FINRA Dispute Resolution
By-Laws to clarify that services provided by mediators, when acting in
such capacity and not representing parties in mediation, should not
cause the individuals to be classified as Industry Members under the
By-Laws.\32\ The purpose of the amendments was to allow mediators, who
are otherwise qualified, to be eligible to become Public Members of the
NAMC. The proposed rule change would incorporate these amendments into
two parts of the definition of Industry Member.\33\ First, Article
I(x)(4) of the FINRA Regulation By-Laws defines an Industry Member as a
National Adjudicatory Council (``NAC'') or committee member who
provides professional services to brokers or dealers, and such services
constitute 20 percent or more of the professional revenues received by
the member or 20 percent or more of the gross revenues received by the
member's firm or partnership. The proposed rule change would amend the
definition to clarify that, for purposes of determining membership on
the NAMC, any services provided in the capacity as a mediator of
disputes involving a broker or dealer and not representing any party in
such mediations would not be considered professional services provided
to brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See By-Laws of FINRA Regulation, Inc., Article I(x).
    \31\ See By-Laws of FINRA Regulation, Inc., Article I(hh).
    \32\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68142 (November 2,
2012), 77 FR 67038 (November 8, 2012) (Order Approving File No. SR-
FINRA-2012-040).
    \33\ The By-Laws define an Industry Member using six criteria.
The proposal would amend two of them, subsections (4) and (5). See
supra note 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, Article I(x)(5) of the By-Laws defines an Industry Member
as a NAC or committee member who provides professional services to a
director, officer, or employee of a broker, dealer, or corporation that
owns 50 percent or more of the voting stock of a broker or dealer, and
such services relate to the director's, officer's, or employee's
professional capacity and constitute 20 percent or more of the
professional revenues received by the member or 20 percent or more of
the gross revenues received by the member's firm or partnership.
Similar to the change in Article I(x)(4) described in the paragraph
above, FINRA proposes to amend the definition to clarify that, for
purposes of determining membership on the NAMC, services provided in
the capacity as a mediator of disputes involving a director, officer,
or employee as described in this definition and not representing any
party in such mediations would not be considered professional services
provided to such individuals.
    The proposed rule change would also amend the definition of Public
Member. The FINRA Regulation By-Laws define a Public Member as a NAC or
committee member who has no material business relationship with a
broker or dealer or a self-regulatory organization registered under the
Act (other than serving as a public director or public member on a
committee of such a self-regulatory organization). The proposed rule
change would amend the definition by adding language to the
parenthetical to clarify that, for the purposes of determining
membership on the NAMC, acting in the capacity as a mediator of
disputes involving a broker or dealer and not representing any party in
such mediations is not considered a material business relationship with
a broker or dealer.
Other Conforming Changes
    The proposed rule change would amend the definitions of Industry
Director and Public Director in Article I(w) and Article I(gg),
respectively, to clarify that a director is a member of the board of
directors of FINRA Regulation. The proposed rule change would also
delete Article I(r) to eliminate the reference to FINRA Dispute
Resolution, Inc.
Article II Offices
    The proposed rule change would amend the FINRA Regulation By-Laws
to reflect a change in the address of FINRA Regulation's registered
office and its registered agent from Corporate Creations Network Inc.,
3411 Silverside Road, Rodney Building #104, Wilmington, Delaware 19810,
to Corporation Service Company, 2711 Centerville Road, Suite 400,
Wilmington, New Castle County, Delaware 19808. The FINRA Board approved
this change at its February 2015 meeting.
Article IV Board of Directors
Number of Directors
    With respect to governance, as noted above, members of the FINRA
Board's Regulatory Policy Committee currently serve as the directors of
the board of FINRA Regulation.\34\ Accordingly, in appointing governors
of the FINRA Board to the Regulatory Policy Committee, FINRA must
adhere to the compositional requirements for the Board of Directors of
FINRA Regulation. In this regard, section 4.3(a) of the FINRA
Regulation By-Laws provides, among other things, that the FINRA
Regulation board must consist of at least two and not less than 20
percent of directors who are Small Firm, Mid-Size Firm or Large Firm
Governors. In addition, public directors must comprise a majority of
the FINRA Regulation board.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See supra note 10.
    \35\ See Article IV, section 4.3(a) of the FINRA Regulation By-
Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the number of FINRA Regulation directors may not exceed
15.\36\ FINRA is proposing to amend section 4.2 of the FINRA Regulation
By-Laws to increase the total number of directors who could serve on
the FINRA Regulation board from 15 to 17. FINRA believes that
increasing the maximum number of FINRA Regulation board seats would
provide it with additional flexibility to manage its board committee
assignments and meet the compositional requirements under the FINRA
Regulation By-Laws. For example, when the FINRA Regulation board is at
its current maximum limit of 15 directors, if FINRA were to add a new
industry director to the FINRA Regulation board, it would need to
remove an existing industry director to maintain a majority of public
directors on the board. In this example, increasing the maximum number
of board seats to 17 would enable FINRA to add a public director to the
FINRA Regulation board rather than remove an existing industry
director, and thus maintain the required composition of FINRA
Regulation board members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Article IV, section 4.2 of the FINRA Regulation By-
Laws.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulation
    FINRA would amend section 4.10 of the FINRA Regulation By-Laws to
insert a reference to the Delegation Plan as another governing document
with which the board must comply when adopting rules, regulations, and
requirements for the conduct of the business and management of FINRA
Regulation. This change would conform the language in this section to
that of

section 4.10 of the FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws.
Conflicts of Interest; Contracts and Transactions Involving Directors
    Under the proposed rule change, FINRA would amend section 4.14(b)
to remove a reference to FINRA Dispute Resolution.
Article XI Capital Stock
    FINRA is proposing to amend section 11.3(b) to insert the word
``stock'' in the sentence to clarify the type of certificate to which
the section refers. This change would conform the language in this
section of the FINRA Regulation By-Laws to that of section 8.3(b) of
the FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws.
C. Deletion of FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws
    As discussed under section II(B), amendments to the FINRA
Regulation By-Laws, above, FINRA would incorporate substantive and
unique provisions of the FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws into the
FINRA Regulation By-Laws. As discussed above, where differences exist
in the FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws that would not be incorporated
into the FINRA Regulation By-Laws under the proposed rule change, such
differences are non-substantive in nature or would not otherwise affect
the governance or operation of the dispute resolution program.\37\ The
FINRA Dispute Resolution By-Laws would be deleted in their entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See supra note 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Conforming Amendments to the FINRA Rules
    FINRA is also proposing to amend several FINRA rules to reflect the
proposed merger. The proposed rule change would amend Rules 0160
(Definitions) and 0170 (Delegation, Authority and Access) to delete
references to FINRA Dispute Resolution. In addition, the proposed rule
change would amend Rule 0160 to add paragraphs (b)(7) and (b)(11) to
define ``FINRA Regulation'' and ``Office of Dispute Resolution,''
respectively, and re-number subparagraphs accordingly. The term
``Office of Dispute Resolution'' would mean the office within FINRA
Regulation that assumes the responsibilities and functions relating to
dispute resolution programs including, but not limited to, the
arbitration, mediation, or other resolution of disputes among and
between members, associated persons and customers. Thus, if the
proposed rule change is approved, FINRA's existing dispute resolution
programs would continue to operate as a separate department within
FINRA Regulation, under the name of the Office of Dispute Resolution.
    The proposed rule change would also amend Rules 0170 (Delegation,
Authority and Access), 6250 (Quote and Order Access Requirements), 6740
(Termination of TRACE Service), 7180 (Termination of Access), 7280A
(Termination of Access), 7280B (Termination of Access), 7380
(Termination of Access), 7530 (Other Services), 9710 (Purpose), 11892
(Clearly Erroneous Transactions in Exchange-Listed Securities) and
11893 (Clearly Erroneous Transactions in OTC Equity Securities) to
change references to ``subsidiaries'' or ``subsidiary'' to ``FINRA
Regulation.''
    In addition, the proposed rule change would amend Rules 12102
(National Arbitration and Mediation Committee), 13102 (National
Arbitration and Mediation Committee) and 14102 (National Arbitration
and Mediation Committee) to remove references to the section of the
Delegation Plan that pertains to FINRA Dispute Resolution and to change
the language to reference FINRA Regulation.
    Because the position of President of FINRA Dispute Resolution would
no longer exist upon completion of the merger, FINRA is proposing to
delete references to the President of FINRA Dispute Resolution in Rules
10312 (Disclosures Required of Arbitrators and Director's Authority to
Disqualify), 12103 (Director of Dispute Resolution), 12104 (Effect of
Arbitration on FINRA Regulatory Activities; Arbitrator Referral During
or at Conclusion of Case), 12203 (Denial of FINRA Forum), 12407
(Removal of Arbitrator by Director), 13103 (Director of Dispute
Resolution), 13104 (Effect of Arbitration on FINRA Regulatory
Activities; Arbitrator Referral During or at Conclusion of Case), 13203
(Denial of FINRA Forum) and 13410 (Removal of Arbitrator by Director).
Any authority formerly granted by those rules to the President of FINRA
Dispute Resolution would be granted to the Director of the Office of
Dispute Resolution in light of that position's responsibility for
overseeing the dispute resolution programs, except that in amended
Rules 12103 (Director of Dispute Resolution) and 13103 (Director of
Dispute Resolution), as proposed, the authority to appoint an interim
Director if the Director is unable to perform his or her duties would
be granted to the President of FINRA Regulation.
    Similarly, FINRA is proposing to amend Rule 10103 (Director of
Arbitration) to provide that the President of FINRA Regulation would
have the authority to appoint an interim Director of Arbitration if the
Director becomes incapacitated, resigned, is removed, or if the
Director becomes permanently or indefinitely incapable of performing
the duties and responsibilities of the Director. References to the
President or Executive Vice President of FINRA Dispute Resolution would
be removed from the Rule.
    FINRA is proposing to rename FINRA Dispute Resolution as the Office
of Dispute Resolution. The Office of Dispute Resolution would become a
separate department within FINRA Regulation that would continue to
administer independently FINRA's existing dispute resolution programs.
Accordingly, the proposed rule change would amend Rules 10314
(Initiation of Proceedings), 12100(k) (Definitions), 12103 (Director of
Dispute Resolution), 12701 (Settlement), 13100(k) (Definitions), 13103
(Director of Dispute Resolution), 13701 (Settlement) and 14100(c)
(Definitions) to replace any remaining references to ``Dispute
Resolution'' with ``Office of Dispute Resolution.''
    Finally, FINRA is proposing to amend Rules 10102 (National
Arbitration and Mediation Committee), 12100(c) (Definitions), 13100(c)
(Definitions), 14100(a) and (f) (Definitions) to replace references to
``Dispute Resolution'' with ``Regulation.''
    As noted in Item 2 of this filing, if the Commission approves the
proposed rule change, FINRA anticipates the effective date will be
December 20, 2015. FINRA will announce the effective date of the
proposed rule change in a Regulatory Notice to be published no later
than 30 days following Commission approval.
2. Statutory Basis
    FINRA believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\38\ which requires, among
other things, that FINRA rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest; and section 15A(b)(4) of the Act,\39\ which requires
that FINRA rules be designed to assure a fair representation of FINRA's
members in the selection of its directors and administration of its
affairs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA believes that the proposed reorganization would align FINRA's
corporate organizational structure with its current organizational
practice, and,

in the process, would make the organization and its departments more
efficient. The efficient use of resources enables FINRA to focus on its
mission of investor protection.
    FINRA emphasizes that the proposed rule change would not affect the
benefits and services provided to public investors by the dispute
resolution forum or the costs of any party to use the dispute
resolution forum. FINRA believes that the proposed rule change reflects
its continued commitment to providing an effective forum for the
resolution of disputes, claims, and controversies arising out of or in
connection with the business of FINRA members, or arising out of the
employment or termination of employment of associated persons with any
member. In addition, FINRA believes that increasing the maximum number
of FINRA Regulation board seats from 15 to 17 would provide it with
additional flexibility to manage its board committee assignments and
meet the compositional requirements under the FINRA Regulation By-Laws,
continuing to assure fair representation of FINRA's members and
maintaining the numerical dominance of public directors. Thus, FINRA
believes that the reorganization and its continued commitment to
dispute resolution would ensure that FINRA continues to protect
investors and the public interest in an efficient manner.

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

    FINRA 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. FINRA believes that the
proposed merger of its two subsidiaries would align FINRA's corporate
organizational structure with its current organizational practice. The
proposed rule change would allow FINRA to eliminate duplicative tax and
regulatory filings, which, in turn, would reduce its administrative
costs and the resources spent generating and submitting these filings.
Moreover, the proposed rule change would allow FINRA to streamline its
procedures and re-allocate staff and financial resources to other
areas, thereby enhancing the efficient operation of the corporation.
    While the proposed rule change would alter FINRA Dispute
Resolution's corporate status, it would not affect the dispute
resolution program in any substantive way. As discussed above, it would
not affect the services and benefits provided by or the costs to use
the dispute resolution forum. FINRA believes that the proposed rule
change demonstrates its commitment to providing a dispute resolution
forum that remains accessible to investors, because the benefits and
services provided by the dispute resolution forum would continue
unabated.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-FINRA-2015-034 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-FINRA-2015-034. 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 FINRA. 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-FINRA-2015-034, and should
be submitted on or before November 3, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-25861 Filed 10-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									     OFFICE OF

									AIR AND RADIATION

10/15/15

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Test Procedure Review with Cummins, Volvo, Navistar, Paccar,
Eaton and Allison

FROM: James Sanchez

TO:  Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards
for Medium- and

Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles - Phase 2 - Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0827

This memo documents communication on October 15, 2015 between
representatives of Cummins, Volvo, Navistar, Paccar, Eaton, Allison, and
EPA to discuss heavy-duty test procedures proposed in the Phase 2
greenhouse gas and fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty vehicles
notice of proposed rulemaking.  The draft presentations are enclosed.

EPA also presented some preliminary results from testing conducted at
Southwest Research Institute.  The results showed the performance of a
few numerical schemes to interpolate and extrapolate data from the
alternative engine mapping procedure.

Participants:


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28668-28669]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10275]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-17, OMB Control No. 3235-0018]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 15b6-1 and Form BDW

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 15b6-1 (17 CFR 240.15b6-
1), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78a et seq.).
The Commission plans to submit this existing collection of information
to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and
approval.
    Registered broker-dealers use Form BDW (17 CFR 249.501a) to
withdraw from registration with the Commission, the self-regulatory
organizations, and the states. On average, the Commission estimates
that it would take a broker-dealer approximately one hour to complete
and file a Form BDW to withdraw from Commission registration as
required by Rule 15b6-1. The Commission estimates that approximately
317 broker-dealers withdraw from Commission registration annually \1\
and, therefore, file a Form BDW via the internet with the Central
Registration Depository, a computer system operated by the Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. that maintains information
regarding registered broker-dealers and their registered personnel. The
317 broker-dealers that withdraw from registration by filing Form BDW
would incur an aggregate annual reporting burden of approximately 317
hours.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This estimate is based on Form BDW data collected over the
past three years for fully registered broker-dealers. This estimate
is based on the numbers of forms filed; therefore, the number may
include multiple forms per broker-dealer if the broker-dealer's
initial filing was incomplete. In fiscal year (from 10/1 through 9/
30) 2017, 328 broker-dealers withdrew from registration. In fiscal
year 2018, 328 broker-dealers withdrew from registration. In fiscal
year 2019, 296 broker-dealers withdrew from registration. (328 + 328
+ 296)/3 = 317 (rounded down from 317.33).
    \2\ (317 x 1 hour) = 317 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
Commission's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of
information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions
submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: David Bottom, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o
Cynthia Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington DC 20549, or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Dated: May 8, 2020.

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-10275 Filed 5-12-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 175)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 52234-52235]
[DOCID:fr09se08-20]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket No. FEMA-B-7786]

Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On June 20, 2008, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that contained an erroneous table. This notice provides
corrections to that table, to be used in lieu of the information
published at 73 FR 35114. The table provided here represents the
flooding source, location of referenced elevation, effective and
modified elevation, and communities affected for Plymouth County,
Massachusetts (All Jurisdictions). Specifically, it addresses flooding
source ``Atlantic Ocean.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief,
Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646-3151 or (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) publishes proposed determinations of Base (1% annual-chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified BFEs for communities participating
in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established
by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed
elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of
the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made
final, and for the contents in these buildings.

Correction

    In the proposed rule published at 73 FR 35114, in the June 20, 2008
issue of the Federal Register, FEMA published a table under the
authority of 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ``Plymouth County,
Massachusetts and Incorporated Areas'' addressed flooding source
``Atlantic Ocean.'' That table contained inaccurate information as to
the location of referenced elevation, effective and modified elevation
in feet, or communities affected for these flooding sources. In this
notice, FEMA is publishing a table containing the accurate information,
to address these prior errors. The information provided below should be
used in lieu of that previously published.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  * Elevation in feet
                                                                 (NGVD) + Elevation in
                                                                 feet (NAVD)
         Flooding source(s)            Location of referenced     Depth in feet above     Communities  affected
                                             elevation                  ground
                                                              --------------------------
                                                                Effective     Modified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Plymouth County, Massachusetts (All Jurisdictions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic Ocean......................  Approximately 150 feet           +17          +19  Town of Hingham, Town
                                       south of intersection                              of Hull, Town of
                                       of Brant Beach Avenue                              Marion, Town of
                                       and Ocean View Avenue.                             Mattapoisett and Town
                                                                                of Wareham.
                                      Approximately 210 feet            +9          +33
                                       southeast of
                                       intersection of
                                       Highland Avenue and
                                       Mount Pleasant Way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: August 26, 2008.
Michael K. Buckley,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-20823 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-12-P