[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 114 (Thursday, June 13, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27687-27688]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12492]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0028]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt nine individuals from
the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers have
``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or
any other condition which is likely to cause loss of consciousness or
any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions enable these
individuals who have had one or more seizures and are taking anti-
seizure medication to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on May 8, 2019. The exemptions
expire on May 8, 2021.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2019-0028, in the keyword box, and
click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

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

II. Background

    On April 1, 2019, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from nine individuals requesting an exemption from the
epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) and
requested comments from the public (84 FR 12317). The public comment
period ended on May 1, 2019, and no comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting exemptions to these individuals would achieve
a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would
be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. [49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A TO PART 391--MEDICAL
ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8), paragraphs
3, 4, and 5.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
for up to five years from the epilepsy and seizure disorder prohibition
in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) if the exemption is likely to achieve an
equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without
the exemption. The exemption allows the applicants to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-
year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical
certification.
    In reaching the decision to grant these exemption requests, FMCSA
considered the 2007 recommendations of the Agency's Medical Expert
Panel (MEP). The January 15, 2013, Federal Register notice (78 FR 3069)
provides the current MEP recommendations which is the criteria the
Agency uses to grant seizure exemptions.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on an individualized assessment of each applicant's medical
information, including the root cause of the respective seizure(s) and
medical information about the applicant's seizure history, the length
of time that has elapsed since the individual's last seizure, the
stability of each individual's treatment regimen and the duration of
time on or off of anti-seizure medication. In addition, the Agency
reviewed the treating clinician's medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV with a history of seizure
and each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS) for commercial driver's license
(CDL) holders, and interstate and intrastate inspections recorded in
the Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS). For non-CDL
holders, the Agency reviewed the driving records from the State
Driver's Licensing Agency (SDLA). A summary of each applicant's seizure
history was discussed in the April 1, 2019, Federal Register notice (84
FR 12317) and will not be repeated in this notice.
    These nine applicants have been seizure-free over a range of 31
years while taking anti-seizure medication and maintained a stable
medication treatment regimen for the last two years. In each case, the
applicant's treating physician verified his or her seizure history and
supports the ability to drive commercially.
    The Agency acknowledges the potential consequences of a driver
experiencing a seizure while operating a CMV. However, the Agency
believes the drivers granted this exemption have demonstrated that they
are unlikely to have a seizure and their medical condition does not
pose a risk to public safety.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the epilepsy and seizure disorder prohibition in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(8) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that
existing without the exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each driver must remain seizure-free and maintain a stable treatment
during the two-year exemption period; (2) each driver must submit
annual reports from their treating physicians attesting to the
stability of treatment and that the driver has remained seizure-free;
(3) each driver must undergo an annual medical examination by a
certified Medical Examiner, as defined by 49 CFR 390.5; and (4) each
driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the
employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a
copy of his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed.
The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when driving, for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official.

VI. Preemption

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

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the nine exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the epilepsy and seizure disorder
prohibition, 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8), subject to the requirements cited
above:

Darcy D. Baker (OH),
Kenneth R. Boglia (NC),
David Consiglio (NY),
Gary Cox (OR),
Jim A. Hughes (WA),
Brent L. Mapes (IL),
Enrico G. Mucci (PA),
Charles R. Skelton (AL)

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

    Issued on: June 7, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-12492 Filed 6-12-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: April 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 65)]
[Notices]
[Page 17087-17088]
[DOCID:fr05ap06-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-94-000]

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Application

March 29, 2006.
    Take notice that on March 22, 2006, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc. (Southern Star), 4700 Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky
42301, filed in Docket No. CP06-94-000, an application pursuant to
sections 7(b) and (c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the
Commission's Regulations, for authorization to abandon and to construct
and operate certain facilities, in order to provide an additional
24,562 Dth per day of incremental firm transportation service to
Missouri Gas Energy (MGE) and Southern Missouri Gas (SMG) at total
estimated cost is approximately $9.4 million, all as more fully set
forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open
to public inspection. This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov
, using the ``eLibrary'' link and is available for review

in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is
an ``eSubscription'' link on the Web site that enables subscribers to
receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Specifically, Southern Star proposes: (1) To extend the existing
Springfield Loop (Line HS) in Christian County, Missouri by installing
and additional 0.9 mile of 20-inch pipeline; (2) to replace
approximately one mile of existing 8-inch Ash Grove-Galloway pipeline
(Line HQ-8) with a 1.1 mile extension of the Springfield 16-inch
pipeline (Line HQ-16) in Greene County, Missouri; (3) to up-rate the
maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) on 13.5 miles of the
Southern Trunk Loop 20-inch pipeline (Line ``FR'') located in
Montgomery and Labette Counties, Kansas; (4) to make auxiliary
installations and modifications at the Grabham and Saginaw Compressor
Stations located in Montgomery County, Kansas and Newton County,
Missouri, respectively; and (5) to replace, install or relocate various
auxiliary facilities on the FR-20'', HS-20'' and HQ-16'' pipelines
including valves, regulators, launchers, and receivers. In addition,
one new delivery meter station is proposed off of Southern Star's
Tartan 10-inch line (Line HQ-32) near Nixa, Missouri to provide
deliveries to MGE. Any questions regarding this application should be
directed to David N. Robert, Manager, Regulatory Affairs, at (270) 852-
4654 or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 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 NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing''
link at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission strongly encourages

intervenors to file electronically. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest
or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 19, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-4882 Filed 4-4-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54605-54606]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22180]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP19-1523-000]

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP; Notice of Technical
Conference

    Take notice that a technical conference will be held on Wednesday,
October 30, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Time), in a room to be
designated, at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission), 888 First Street NE, Washington DC 20426.
    At the technical conference, the Commission Staff and the parties
to the proceeding should be prepared to discuss all issues raised by
the filing and set for technical conference by the Commission in its
September 30, 2019

order.\1\ All interested persons are permitted to attend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co., LP, 168 FERC 61,208, at P
26 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY); or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    For more information about this technical conference please contact
Catherine Liow at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 4, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-22180 Filed 10-9-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 115 (Friday, June 14, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 35747]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 23

[Docket No. CE305; Special Conditions No. 23-245-SC]

Special Conditions: Cirrus Design Corporation, Model SF50; Fire
Extinguishing for Upper Aft Fuselage Mounted Engine; Withdrawal

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is withdrawing a previously published notice granting
special conditions for the Cirrus Design Corporation model SF50
airplane. We are withdrawing Special Condition No. 23-245-SC through
mutual agreement with Cirrus Design Corporation.

DATES: This special condition published on April 20, 2010 at 75 FR
20518 is withdrawn, effective June 14, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leslie B. Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone (816)
329-4134; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On April 20, 2010, the FAA published Special Condition No. 23-245-
SC for the Cirrus Design Corporation new model SF50. The model SF50 is
a 7-seat (5 adults and 2 children), pressurized, retractable gear,
carbon composite, airplane with one turbofan engine mounted partially
in the upper aft fuselage.
    The single turbofan engine is mounted on the upper aft fuselage,
not in the pilot's line of site. Upper aft fuselage mounted engine
installations, along with the need to protect such installed engines
from fires, were not envisioned in the development of the part 23
normal category regulations.
    The model SF50 certification project was granted an extension on
September 19, 2011. Amendment 23-62 (76 FR 75736), published December
2, 2011, incorporated Special Condition No. 23-245-SC. On December 11,
2012, Cirrus Design Corporation elected to adjust the model SF50
certification basis to 14 CFR part 23, Amendment 62.

Reason for Withdrawal

    The FAA is withdrawing Special Condition No. 23-245-SC because
Cirrus elected to revise the model SF50 certification basis to
Amendment 23-62.
    The authority citation for this Special Condition withdrawal is 49
U.S.C. 106(g), 40113 and 44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and 21.17; and 14 CFR
11.38 and 11.19.

Conclusion

    Withdrawal of this special condition does not preclude the FAA from
issuing another notice on the subject matter in the future or
committing the agency to any future course of action.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on June 5, 2013.
Earl Lawrence,
Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-14151 Filed 6-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 23911]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11041]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. DI18-3-000]

Notice Denying Late Intervention; Renewable Energy Aggregators
Inc.

    On March 29, 2018, the Commission issued public notice of Merchant
Hydro Developers LLC's \1\ Declaration of Intention concerning the
proposed Vandling Drift Reclamation Pump Storage Project, to be located
near the City of Vandling in Wayne County, Pennsylvania. The notice
established April 30, 2018, as the deadline to file motions to
intervene.\2\ On May 14, 2018, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network
(Delaware Riverkeeper) filed an out-of-time motion to intervene.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On May 10, 2018, Merchant Hydro Developers, LLC notified the
Commission that it had changed its name to Renewable Energy
Aggregators Inc.
    \2\ The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure provide
that, if a filing deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, holiday, or
other day when the Commission is not open for business, the filing
deadline does not end until the close of business on the next
business day. 18 CFR 385.2007(a)(2) (2017). The filing deadline was
30 days from issuance of the notice (i.e., April 28, 2018), which
fell on a Saturday, thus the filing deadline was the close of
business on Monday, April 30, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether to grant a late motion to intervene, the
Commission may consider such factors as whether the movant had good
cause for filing late; whether the movant's interest is adequately
represented by other parties to the proceeding; and whether granting
the intervention might result in disruption to the proceeding or
prejudice to other parties.\3\ Movants for late intervention must,
among other things, demonstrate good cause why the time limit should be
waived.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Id. 385.214(d).
    \4\ Id. 385.214(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here, Delaware Riverkeeper failed to demonstrate that good cause
exists to grant its motion to intervene out of time. In its motion,
Delaware Riverkeeper provides no explanation as to why it was unable to
intervene in a timely manner or why good cause exists to waive the time
limit. Therefore, Delaware Riverkeeper's motion to intervene is denied.
    This notice constitutes final agency action. Requests for rehearing
of this notice must be filed within 30 days of the date of issuance of
this notice, pursuant to section 313(a) of the Federal Power Act, 16
U.S.C. 825l(a) (2012), and Rule 713 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.713 (2017).

    Dated: May 16, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-11041 Filed 5-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9287-9288]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3611]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66371; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2011-101]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Amex LLC.; Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Amending NYSE Amex Equities Rules 504
and 509 To Modify the Quoting Requirements Applicable to Designated
Market Maker Units Registered in Nasdaq Stock Market Securities Traded
on the Exchange Subject to the Unlisted Trading Privileges Pilot
Program

February 10, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On December 15, 2011, NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
modify the quoting requirements applicable to Designated Market Maker
(``DMM'') units registered in Nasdaq Stock Market securities traded on
the Exchange pursuant to a grant of unlisted trading privileges
(``UTP''). The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on December 30, 2011.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66043 (December 23,
2011), 76 FR 82329 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Certain securities listed on Nasdaq may be traded on NYSE Amex
pursuant to a grant of unlisted trading privileges as part of a pilot
program on the Exchange (``UTP Pilot Program'').\4\ NYSE Amex's
proposal seeks to modify the UTP Pilot Program's obligations imposed on
DMM units who quote in such securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The UTP Pilot Program is scheduled to expire on the earlier
of Commission approval to make such pilot permanent or July 31,
2012. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66040 (December 23,
2011), 76 FR 82324 (December 30, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, under NYSE Amex Equities Rule 509(a)(1), DMM units who
are registered in securities subject to the UTP Pilot Program must
maintain continuous two-sided quotes at the National Best Bid or Offer
(``NBBO'') with reasonable size for each such security for at least 10%
of the time during the regular business hours of the Exchange for each
calendar month.\5\ The proposal would amend NYSE Amex Equities Rule
509(a)(1) to lower a DMM unit's quoting obligations for ``more active''
\6\ securities in the UTP Pilot Program from at least 10% of the time
during the regular trading day to at least 5% of the time during the
regular trading day.\7\ The proposed quoting obligations would continue
to apply on a security-by-security basis. The current quoting
obligation for ``less active'' securities, i.e., those with a
consolidated average daily volume of less than one million shares per
calendar month, would remain unchanged at 10% of the time during the
regular trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ These obligations are also included within current NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 504.
    \6\ Under NYSE Amex Equities Rule 103B(II)(C), ``more active''
securities are those with a consolidated average daily volume equal
to or greater than one million shares per calendar month.
    \7\ The Exchange proposed to make conforming changes to NYSE
Amex Equities Rule 504(b)(1)(A), which contains a requirement
similar to NYSE Amex Equities Rule 509(a)(1) requiring DMM Units to
quote at the NBBO on average at least 10% of the trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to delete from NYSE Amex Equities Rule
504(b)(1)(A) the text that references NYSE Amex Equities Rule 103B(II),
which provides for security allocation eligibility. The Exchange
represented that this reference is not necessary within Rule
504(b)(1)(A), and that, despite the proposed deletion, DMM units would
remain subject to NYSE Amex Equities Rule 103B(II) with respect to
security allocation eligibility.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder that are applicable to a national securities
exchange, and, in particular, with the requirements of Section 6(b) of
the Act.\8\ In particular, the proposed change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ because it would promote just and
equitable principles of trade, and, in general, protect investors and
the public interest.\10\ The Commission also finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 12(f) of the Act,\11\ because it
furthers the goals of maintaining fair and orderly markets, and
protecting investors and the public

interest, for securities traded pursuant to UTP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \10\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to reduce DMM units' quoting obligations
applicable to ``more active'' securities traded in the UTP Pilot
Program to quoting at the NBBO for 5% of the trading day. The
Commission notes that this percentage would reflect the quoting
requirement currently applicable to DMM units quoting non-UTP Pilot
Program securities, i.e., those listed on the Exchange.\12\ There would
be one significant difference between the proposed quoting obligation
for the UTP Pilot Program and the current quoting obligation for non-
UTP Pilot Program securities--UTP Pilot Program quoting obligations are
and would continue to be calculated on a security-by-security basis,
rather than averaged across a portfolio of all of a DMM unit's assigned
securities. The Commission believes that this security-by-security
basis calculation is reasonably designed to maintain robust quotes for
all UTP Pilot Program securities. In addition, the Exchange's proposal
would reduce quoting obligations only for ``more active'' securities,
which by definition are more liquid and may, therefore, be less reliant
on quoting obligations for continued liquidity. Finally, based on the
Exchange's experience during the UTP Pilot Program, the proposed
quoting obligation is designed to ensure the continued active
participation by DMM units in such securities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See NYSE Amex Equities Rule 104(a)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also finds that the proposed deletion in NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 504(b)(1)(A) to the reference to NYSE Amex Equities Rule
103B(II) is consistent with the Act. The Exchange represented that this
reference is not necessary within Rule 504(b)(1)(A), and that, despite
the proposed deletion, DMM units would remain subject to NYSE Amex
Equities Rule 103B(II) with respect to security allocation eligibility.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that the proposal
to amend the UTP Pilot Program is consistent with the requirements of
the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEAmex-2011-101) be, and
it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-3611 Filed 2-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 16854]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06693]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Research, Engineering And Development Advisory Committee; Notice
of Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

    Pursuant to section 10(A)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Public Law 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given of a
meeting of the FAA Research, Engineering and Development (R,E&D)
Advisory Committee.
    Name: Research, Engineering & Development Advisory Committee.
    Time and Date: April 17--8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Place: Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW.--Round Room (10th Floor), Washington, DC 20591.
    Purpose: The meeting agenda will include receiving from the
Committee guidance for FAA's research and development investments in
the areas of air traffic services, airports, aircraft safety, human
factors and environment and energy. Attendance is open to the
interested public but seating is limited. Persons wishing to attend the
meeting or obtain information should contact Gloria Dunderman at (202)
267-8937 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Members of the public may present
a written statement to the Committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC on: March 19, 2014.
Gloria Dunderman,
Management & Program Analyst.
[FR Doc. 2014-06693 Filed 3-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23578-23579]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10065]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

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

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2004-000.
    Applicants: Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC submits
tariff filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate 2011-04-14 Aventine NC, TMV
A&R NRA to be effective 4/14/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/14/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110414-5072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 26, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2005-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company,
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits
tariff filing per 154.204: GT&C Section 18 Allocations to be effective
6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/14/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110414-5105.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 26, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2006-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Equitrans, L.P. submits tariff filing per 154.204:
Revised Form of Service Agreement for Rate Schedule FTS Exhibit A to be
effective 5/15/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110415-5211.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 27, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2007-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.204: Shell Energy North America 4-15-2011 Negotiated Rate to be
effective 4/15/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110415-5230.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 27, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2008-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: Creditworthiness to be effective 5/15/2011 Type: 570.
    Filed Date: 04/15/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110415-5287.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 27, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 proceedings 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 docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online
service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866) 208-
3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 18, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-10065 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


done in monitoring-related ICRs). For the period of 2016, 2017, and
2018 (monitoring related expenditures would begin in 2016), the total
approximate average annual monitoring cost, including a calculation for
equipment amortization, is $8,662,110 (total capital, and labor and
non-labor operation and maintenance) with a total burden of 102,869
hours. The annual labor costs associated with these hours is
$7,080,572. Included in the $8,662,110 total are other annual costs of
non-labor operations and maintenance of $706,827 and equipment and
contract costs of $874,711. For reference purposes, an estimate for
initial establishment of a new SO2 monitoring station is
$92,614 (does not include equipment amortization). In addition to the
costs that would be incurred by the state and local air agencies, there
would be an estimated burden to the EPA related to salary cost and
equipment cost, etc., of a total of 52,717 hours and $776,005.
    Potential air quality modeling costs are estimated based on the
assumption that air quality for each of the 412 SO2 sources
exceeding the 2,000 tpy threshold would be characterized through air
quality modeling analyses. Based on market research, stakeholder
feedback and assumptions about the procedures to follow when conducting
modeling for designations purposes,\13\ an estimate of modeling costs
for a single modeling run centered on an identified source would be
approximately $30,000. If air agencies choose to characterize air
quality through modeling analyses around all 412 sources expected to be
identified as exceeding the source threshold, then total national costs
for modeling analyses would be estimated at $12,360,000. If these costs
were incurred over the course of 3 years, then the approximate annual
cost for each year over that period would be $4,120,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Draft SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling
Technical Assistance Document can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/pdfs/SO2ModelingTAD.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves this ICR, the agency
will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a
technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB control number
for the approved information collection activities contained in this
final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if a rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This final rule will not impose any
requirements directly on small entities. Entities potentially affected
directly by this final rule include state, local and tribal governments
and none of these governments are small entities. Other types of small
entities are also not directly subject to the requirements of this
rule.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531, and does not significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The
requirement to characterize air quality to inform the area designation
process for the revised NAAQS is imposed by the CAA. This rule is
intended to interpret those requirements as they apply to the 2010 1
hour SO2 NAAQS.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes. Furthermore, this regulation does not affect
the relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities between
the federal government and Indian tribes. The CAA and the Tribal Air
Rule establish the relationship of the federal government and tribes in
characterizing air quality and developing plans to attain the NAAQS,
and this regulation does nothing to modify that relationship. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
    Consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination
with Indian tribes, the EPA held several meetings with tribal
environmental professionals to discuss issues associated with this
rule, including discussions at the National Tribal Forum on May 1,
2013, and on National Tribal Air Association policy calls. These
meetings discussed the SO2 implementation White Paper. The
EPA provided an opportunity for tribes and stakeholders to provide
written comments on the concepts discussed in the White Paper.
Summaries of these meetings are included in the docket for this rule.
The EPA also provided information on the proposed rule and conducted
consultation with the National Tribal Air Association in the form of a
briefing on April 24, 2014, and a webinar on May 21, 2014.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not directly involve an
environmental health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution or use of energy. The EPA is finalizing this
SO2 DRR to require air agencies to more extensively
characterize ambient SO2 air quality concentrations,
pursuant to sections 110(a)(2)(B), 110(a)(2)(K), 301(a) and 114 of the
CAA. The rule does not prescribe specific control strategies by which
the SO2 NAAQS will be met. Such strategies will be developed
by states on a case-by-case basis only if the information generated by
this rule results in an area being designated nonattainment, thereby
triggering the need for the state to develop an attainment plan for the
area. The EPA cannot predict whether the attainment plan prepared by
the state will include regulations on energy suppliers, distributors,
or users. Thus, the EPA concludes that this rule is not likely to have
any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This action does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on any population,
including any minority, low-income or indigenous populations, because
it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or
the environment. That level of protection is established by the NAAQS
itself. The results of the evaluation of environmental justice
considerations is contained in section V of this preamble titled,
``Environmental Justice Considerations.''

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this final action must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by October 20, 2015.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this
final action does not affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review must be filed, and shall not postpone the
effectiveness of this action.

Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this action is provided by 42 U.S.C.
7401 et seq., and particularly sections 7403, 7407, 7410, 7414 and
7601.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: August 10, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
51 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

0
2. Subpart BB is added to read as follows:
Subpart BB--Data Requirements for Characterizing Air Quality for the
Primary SO2 NAAQS
Sec.
51.1200 Definitions.
51.1201 Purpose.
51.1202 Applicability.
51.1203 Air agency requirements.
51.1204 Enforceable emission limits providing for attainment.
51.1205 Ongoing data requirements.

Subpart BB--Data Requirements for Characterizing Air Quality for
the Primary SO2 NAAQS

Sec.  51.1200  Definitions.

    The following definitions apply for the purposes of this subpart.
All terms not defined herein will have the meaning given them in Sec.
51.100 or in the Clean Air Act (CAA). Air agency means the agency or
organization responsible for air quality management within a state,
local governmental jurisdiction, territory or area subject to tribal
government. Annual SO2 emissions data means the quality-
assured annual SO2 emissions data for a stationary source.
Such data may have been required to be reported to the EPA in
accordance with an existing regulatory requirement (such as the Air
Emissions Reporting Rule or the Acid Rain Program); however, annual
SO2 emissions data may be obtained or determined through
other reliable means as well.
    Applicable source means a stationary source that is:
    (1) Not located in a designated nonattainment area, and
    (2) Has actual annual SO2 emissions data of 2,000 tons
or more, or has been identified by an air agency or by the EPA Regional
Administrator as requiring further air quality characterization. 2010
SO2 NAAQS means the primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standard for sulfur oxides (sulfur dioxide) as codified at 40 CFR
50.17, as effective August 23, 2010.

Sec.  51.1201  Purpose.

    The purpose of this subpart is to require air agencies to develop
and submit air quality data characterizing maximum 1-hour ambient
concentrations of SO2 across the United States through
either ambient air quality monitoring or air quality modeling analysis
at the air agency's election. These monitoring and modeling data may be
used in future determinations by the EPA regarding areas'
SO2 NAAQS attainment status, or for other actions designed
to ensure attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and provide
protection to the public from the short-term health effects associated
with exposure to SO2 concentrations that exceed the NAAQS.

Sec.  51.1202  Applicability.

    This subpart applies to any air agency in whose jurisdiction is
located one or more applicable sources of SO2 emissions that
have annual actual SO2 emissions of 2,000 tons or more; or
in whose jurisdiction is located one or more sources of SO2
emissions that have been identified by the air agency or by the EPA
Regional Administrator as requiring further air quality
characterization. For the purposes of this subpart, the subject air
agency shall identify applicable sources of SO2 based on the
most recently available annual SO2 emissions data for such
sources.

Sec.  51.1203  Air agency requirements.

    (a) The air agency shall submit a list of applicable SO2
sources identified pursuant to Sec.  51.1202 located in its
jurisdiction to the EPA by January 15, 2016. This list may be revised
by the Regional Administrator after review based on available
SO2 emissions data.
    (b) For each source area subject to requirements for air quality
characterization, the air agency shall notify the EPA by July 1, 2016,
whether it has chosen to characterize peak 1-hour SO2
concentrations in such area through ambient air quality monitoring;
characterize peak 1-hour SO2 concentrations in such area
through air quality modeling techniques; or provide federally
enforceable emission limitations by January 13, 2017 that limit
emissions of applicable sources to less than 2,000 tpy, in accordance
with paragraph (e) of this section, or provide documentation that the
applicable source has permanently shut down. Emission limits in
accordance with paragraph (e) of this section may be established in
lieu of conducting monitoring or modeling unless, in the judgment of
the air agency or the EPA Regional Administrator, the area warrants
further air quality characterization even with the establishment of any
new emission limit(s). If the air agency has chosen to establish
requirements to limit emissions for applicable sources in an area, the
notification from the air agency shall describe the requirements and
emission limits the air agency intends to apply. For any area with
multiple applicable sources, the air agency (or air agencies if a
multi-state area) shall use the same technique (monitoring, modeling,
or emissions limitation) for all applicable sources in the area. If
multiple air agencies have applicable sources in an area, the air
agencies must consult with each other to employ a common technique for
the area.
    (c) Monitoring. For each area identified in the notification
submitted pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section as an area for
which SO2 concentrations will be characterized through
ambient monitoring, the required monitors shall be sited and operated
either as SLAMS or in a manner equivalent to SLAMS. In either case,
monitors shall meet applicable criteria in 40 CFR part 58, appendices
A, C, and E and their data shall be subject to data certification and
reporting requirements as prescribed in 40 CFR 58.15 and 58.16. These
requirements include quarterly reporting of monitoring data to the Air
Quality System, and the annual certification of data by May 1 of the
following year.
    (1) The air agency shall include relevant information about
monitors used to meet the requirements of this paragraph (c) in the air
agency's Annual Monitoring Network Plan required by 40 CFR 58.10 due
July 1, 2016. The air agency shall consult with the appropriate EPA
Regional Office in the development of plans to install, supplement, or
maintain an appropriate ambient SO2 monitoring network
pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR part 58 and of this subpart.
    (2) All existing, new, or relocated ambient monitors intended to
meet the requirements of this paragraph (c) must be operational by
January 1, 2017 and must be operated continually until approved for
shut down by EPA.
    (3) Any SO2 monitor identified by an air agency in its
approved Annual Monitoring Network Plan as having the purpose of
meeting the requirements of this paragraph (c) that: Is not located in

an area designated as nonattainment as the 2010 SO2 NAAQS is
not also being used to satisfy other ambient SO2 minimum
monitoring requirements listed in 40 CFR part 58, appendix D, section
4.4; and is not otherwise required as part of a SIP, permit, attainment
plan or maintenance plan, may be eligible for shut down upon EPA
approval if it produces a design value no greater than 50 percent of
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS from data collected in either its first
or second 3-year period of operation. The air agency must receive EPA
Regional Administrator approval of a request to cease operation of the
monitor as part of the EPA's action on the Annual Monitoring Network
Plan under 40 CFR 58.10 prior to shutting down any qualifying monitor
under this paragraph (c).
    (d) Modeling. For each area identified in the notification
submitted pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section as an area for
which SO2 concentrations will be characterized through air
quality modeling, the air agency shall submit by July 1, 2016, a
technical protocol for conducting such modeling to the Regional
Administrator for review. The air agency shall consult with the
appropriate EPA Regional Office in developing these modeling protocols.
    (1) The modeling protocol shall include information about the
modeling approach to be followed, including but not limited to the
model to be used, modeling domain, receptor grid, emissions dataset,
meteorological dataset and how the air agency will account for
background SO2 concentrations.
    (2) Modeling analyses shall characterize air quality based on
either actual SO2 emissions from the most recent 3 years, or
on any federally enforceable allowable emission limit or limits
established by the air agency or the EPA and that are effective and
require compliance by January 13, 2017.
    (3) Except as provided by Sec.  51.1204, the air agency shall
conduct the modeling analysis for any applicable source identified by
the air agency pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, and for its
associated area and any nearby area, as applicable, and submit the
modeling analysis to the EPA Regional Office by January 13, 2017.
    (e) Federally enforceable requirement to limit SO2
emissions to under 2,000 tons per year. For each area identified in the
notification submitted pursuant to paragraph (b) of this sectionas an
area for which the air agency will adopt federally enforceable
requirements in lieu of characterizing air quality through monitoring
or modeling, the air agency shall submit documentation to the EPA by
January 13, 2017, showing that such requirements have been adopted, are
in effect, and been made federally enforceable by January 13, 2017,
through an appropriate legal mechanism, and the provisions either:
    (1) Require the applicable sources in the area to emit less than
2,000 tons of SO2 per year for calendar year 2017 and
thereafter; or
    (2) Document that the applicable sources in the area have
permanently shut down by January 13, 2017.

Sec.  51.1204  Enforceable emission limits providing for attainment.

    At any time prior to January 13, 2017, the air agency may submit to
the EPA federally enforceable SO2 emissions limits
(effective no later than January 13, 2017) for one or more applicable
sources that provide for attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in
the area affected by such emissions. The submittal shall include
associated air quality modeling and other analyses that demonstrate
that all modeling receptors in the area will not violate the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, taking into account the updated allowable
emission limits on applicable sources as well as emissions limits that
may apply to any other sources in the area. The air agency shall not be
subject to the ongoing data requirements of Sec.  51.1205 for such area
if the air quality modeling and other analyses demonstrate that the
area will not violate the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.

Sec.  51.1205  Ongoing data requirements.

    (a) Monitored areas. For any area where SO2 monitoring
was conducted to characterize air quality pursuant to Sec.  51.1203,
the air agency shall continue to operate the monitor(s) used to meet
those requirements and shall continue to report ambient data pursuant
to existing ambient monitoring regulations, unless the monitor(s) have
been approved for shut down by the EPA Regional Administrator pursuant
to Sec.  51.1203(c)(3) or pursuant to 40 CFR 58.14.
    (b) Modeled areas. For any area where modeling of actual
SO2 emissions serve as the basis for designating such area
as attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, the air agency shall
submit an annual report to the EPA Regional Administrator by July 1 of
each year, either as a stand-alone document made available for public
inspection, or as an appendix to its Annual Monitoring Network Plan
(also due on July 1 each year under 40 CFR 58.10), that documents the
annual SO2 emissions of each applicable source in each such
area and provides an assessment of the cause of any emissions increase
from the previous year. The first report for each such area is due by
July 1 of the calendar year after the effective date of the area's
initial designation.
    (1) The air agency shall include in such report a recommendation
regarding whether additional modeling is needed to characterize air
quality in any area to determine whether the area meets or does not
meet the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. The EPA Regional Administrator will
consider the emissions report and air agency recommendation, and may
require that the air agency conduct updated air quality modeling for
the area and submit it to the EPA within 12 months.
    (2) An air agency will no longer be subject to the requirements of
this paragraph (b) for a particular area if it provides air quality
modeling demonstrating that air quality values at all receptors in the
analysis are no greater than 50 percent of the 1-hour SO2
NAAQS, and such demonstration is approved by the EPA Regional
Administrator.
    (c) Any air agency that demonstrates that an area would meet the
2010 SO2 NAAQS with allowable emissions is not required
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section to submit future annual
reports for the area.
    (d) If modeling or monitoring information required to be submitted
by the air agency to the EPA pursuant to this subpart indicates that an
area is not attaining the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, the EPA may take
appropriate action, including but not limited to requiring adoption of
enforceable emission limits to ensure continued attainment of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, designation or redesignation of the area to
nonattainment, or issuance of a SIP Call.

[FR Doc. 2015-20367 Filed 8-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39986-39990]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14499]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. SIPA-177; File No. SIPC-2016-01]

Securities Investor Protection Corporation; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Bylaw Amendments Relating to Assessment of SIPC Members

June 15, 2016.
    Pursuant to section 3(e)(1) of the Securities Investor Protection
Act of 1970 (``SIPA''),\1\ on May 2, 2016 the Securities Investor
Protection Corporation (``SIPC'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed bylaw amendments relating
to assessments on SIPC member broker-dealers. On May 27, 2016, SIPC
consented to a 60-day extension of time before the proposed bylaw
amendments take effect pursuant to section 3(e)(1) of SIPA.\2\ Pursuant
to section 3(e)(1)(B) of SIPA, the Commission finds that this proposed
bylaw change involves a matter of such significant public interest that
public comment should be obtained.\3\ Therefore, pursuant to section
3(e)(2)(A) of SIPA,\4\ the Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed bylaw change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1)(B).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its filing with the Commission, SIPC included statements
concerning the purpose of and statutory basis for the proposed bylaw
amendments as described below, which description has been substantially
prepared by SIPC.

I. SIPC's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for,
Proposed SIPC Bylaw Amendments Relating to Assessment of SIPC Members

Overview

    Pursuant to Section 3(e)(1) of SIPA, SIPC submits this statement of
the purpose of, and statutory basis for, proposed amendments to the
SIPC Assessments Bylaw.\5\ Among other things, the Assessments Bylaw,
at Article 6 of the SIPC Bylaws (``Article

6''), currently provides for an assessment rate of \1/4\ of one percent
of each member's net operating revenues from the securities business
until the SIPC Fund reaches $2.5 billion and SIPC determines that the
Fund will remain at or above $2.5 billion for at least six months. Once
that determination is made, the assessment rate falls to a ``minimum
assessment'' of 0.02 percent of the member's net operating revenues
from the securities business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notwithstanding the foregoing, Article 6 also provides that the
assessment rate is \1/4\ of one percent of annual net operating
revenues if it is reasonably likely that the balance of the Fund will
fall below $2.5 billion and remain at less than $2.5 billion for six
months or more. Under the Bylaws, then, it is possible for the rate to
change, in relatively short order, from \1/4\ of one percent to a
minimum assessment, and back to \1/4\ of one percent.
    SIPC continues to examine whether the Fund ``target balance'' of
$2.5 billion is adequate for SIPC to carry out its mission of customer
protection. Whether or not $2.5 billion is sufficient, in furtherance
of its mission, SIPC wishes to ensure that at a minimum and to the
extent possible, the Fund does not fall below $2.5 billion.
Accordingly, in setting the assessment rate, SIPC deems it prudent to
consider not only the size of the Fund over a six-month period, but
SIPC's actual expenditures and its projected expenditures from the Fund
over a longer term. In addition, the size of the Fund is more likely to
stay at or above the target balance if there is a more gradual
progression in rates, before the minimum assessment rate is imposed.
Finally, such measures would make less likely sudden changes in the
assessment rate while giving SIPC members some relief in the amount of
the assessment that they owe.
    With these considerations in mind, SIPC proposes to modify the
Assessments Bylaw in two respects: One, to impose an intermediary
assessment rate that would apply when the balance of the SIPC Fund is
expected to be $2.5 billion for at least six months but SIPC's
unrestricted net assets, as reflected in its most recent audited
Statement of Financial Position, are less than $2.5 billion; and two,
to amend the date on which any change in assessments becomes effective.

Statement of Purpose and Statutory Basis

Background
    Section 4(a)(1) of SIPA authorizes SIPC to establish a ``SIPC
Fund'' (``the SIPC Fund'' or ``Fund'') from which all expenditures by
SIPC are to be made.\6\ Examples of SIPC expenditures include advances
to trustees to satisfy customer claims, and to pay administrative
expenses in SIPA proceedings where the general estate is insufficient.
The SIPC Fund also supports the day-to-day operations of SIPC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78ddd(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All SIPC members pay an assessment into the SIPC Fund.\7\ After
consultation by SIPC with self-regulatory organizations, the assessment
is in the amount that SIPC deems ``necessary and appropriate,'' to
establish and maintain the SIPC Fund and to repay any borrowings by
SIPC. Currently, the rate stands at \1/4\ of one percent per year of
SIPC members' net operating revenues derived from the securities
business.\8\ The rate is to remain at \1/4\ of one percent until the
balance of the SIPC Fund, as defined in section 4(a)(2) of SIPA,\9\
excluding SIPC confirmed lines of credit, reaches a target balance of
$2.5 billion, and SIPC determines that the Fund will remain at $2.5
billion for at least six months.\10\ If that determination is made, the
rate falls to a ``minimum assessment'' which is 0.02 percent of each
member's annual net operating revenues from the securities
business.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78ddd(c)(2).
    \8\ Article 6, Sec.  1(a)(1)(A).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78ddd(a)(2)
    \10\ Article 6, Sec.  1(a)(1)(B)
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Article 6, however, also provides that if SIPC determines that the
SIPC Fund is, or is reasonably likely to be, less than $2.5 billion and
will likely remain at less than $2.5 billion for six months or more,
exclusive of confirmed lines of credit, then the assessment rate is to
be \1/4\ of one percent of the member's annual net operating
revenue.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Article 6, Sec.  1(a)(1)(C)(i). If the amount is less than
$150 million, the assessment is in an amount to be determined by
SIPC, but cannot be less than \1/4\ of one percent of the member's
annual gross revenues from the securities business. Article 6, Sec.
1(a)(1)(C)(ii). If the Fund is less than $100 million, then the
amount of the assessment also is determined by SIPC but, each year,
it cannot be less than \1/2\ of one percent of each member's annual
gross revenues from the securities business. Article 6, Sec.
1(a)(1)(C)(iii); 15 U.S.C. 78ddd(d)(1)(A) and (B). In no event may
the assessment rate be more than \1/2\ of one percent annually of
the member's gross revenues from the securities business, unless
SIPC determines that a higher rate, but not one that is higher than
one (1) percent of gross revenues, will not have a material adverse
effect on the financial condition of SIPC members or their
customers. Article 6, Sec.  1(a)(1)(C)(iv); 15 U.S.C.
78ddd(c)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Proposed Amendments

A. Imposition of an Intermediary Assessment Rate
    Where large SIPA liquidation proceedings are pending that require
sizeable advances by SIPC, the SIPC Fund may be at $2.5 billion for six
months, but then fall significantly below that amount as additional
advances are made. Under Article 6, Section 1(a)(1)(A), once the Fund
reaches $2.5 billion and is projected to remain at or above that amount
for six months or more, SIPC could change the assessment rate from \1/
4\ of one percent, to 0.02 percent, of net operating revenues from the
securities business. On the other hand, because projected expenditures
in pending proceedings could reasonably cause the balance of the SIPC
Fund to be less than $2.5 billion, but more than $150 million, for six
months or more, SIPC alternatively could require that the assessment
rate remain at \1/4\ of one percent.\13\ This situation is problematic
not only for SIPC, but for its members. SIPC members might reasonably
expect to pay a minimum assessment once the Fund reaches $2.5 billion,
but even if they do, they could be subject to a sudden increase in the
assessment as the rate returns to \1/4\ of one percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Article 6, Sec.  1(a)(1)(C)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To provide clarity in this situation and to maintain the SIPC Fund
at or above the target balance, and to offer some relief in the
assessment that members must pay while reducing the likelihood of
sudden changes in the rates, SIPC proposes to amend Article 6 as
follows.
    First, when the SIPC Fund reaches $2.5 billion and is projected to
be at $2.5 billion for six months or more, SIPC will consider the
balance of its unrestricted net assets, as reflected in its most recent
audited Statement of Financial Position. Among other items, included
within the calculation of unrestricted net assets is provision for
trustees' estimated costs to complete ongoing customer protection
proceedings.\14\ Thus, in setting the assessment rate, SIPC will
consider not only the balance of the SIPC Fund, but projected long-term
liabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., 2015 SIPC Annual Report at 20 (http://www.sipc.org/Content/media/annual-reports/2015-annual-report.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, SIPC will impose an annual assessment rate of 0.15 percent
of a member's net operating revenues from the securities business \15\
if (A) the amount of the SIPC Fund is at $2.5 billion or more; (B) SIPC
has determined that the Fund will remain at or above $2.5 billion for
at least six months; but

(C) SIPC's unrestricted net assets, as reflected in its most recent
audited Statement of Financial Condition, are less than $2.5 billion.
This measure establishes an intermediary assessment rate of 0.15
percent between the \1/4\ of one percent assessment imposed on SIPC
members and the minimum assessment, and provides for a more gradual
progression toward the imposition of a minimum assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Net operating revenues from the securities business are
gross revenues from the securities business, as defined in Section
16(9) of SIPA, 15 U.S.C. 78lll(9), less total interest and dividend
expense, but not exceeding total interest and dividend income. See
Article 6, Sec.  1(g). See also http://www.sipc.org/Content/media/filing-forms/SIPC-6-20130830.PDF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Amendment of the Effective Date of a Change in the Assessment
    In addition to the foregoing, SIPC proposes to amend Article 6 with
respect to when a change in assessments becomes effective. Currently,
Article 6, Section 1(a)(1), provides that a change in assessments is to
occur on the first day of the month following the date on which SIPC
announces a change in the assessment and continue until SIPC provides
otherwise (``Notice Provision''). In the ordinary course and to give as
much notice to members as possible, the SIPC Board of Directors
determines the rate of assessment at its September Meeting. The Board's
determination is announced shortly thereafter but is not made effective
until the first day of the following year. See, e.g., http://www.sipc.org/for-members/assessment-rate. SIPC last announced an
assessment rate change (from a minimum assessment to the current \1/4\
of one percent) on March 2, 2009, to take effect on April 1, 2009. The
assessment rate has continued unchanged since then.
    In order to give its members as much notice as possible of the
assessment rate for the following year, SIPC has determined to amend
the Notice Provision. An assessment rate will be effective on the first
day of the year following the date on which SIPC announces its
determination, consistent with SIPC's practice that the determination
of the rate normally will occur in September. There may be emergency
situations, however, when the need for an assessment rate to become
effective is more immediate. In that case, the assessment rate will be
effective on the date announced by SIPC provided that the exigency of
the circumstances so warrants.

II. Need for Public Comment

    Section 3(e)(1) of SIPA provides that the Board of Directors of
SIPC must file a copy of any proposed bylaw change with the Commission,
accompanied by a concise general statement of the basis and purpose of
the proposed bylaw change.\16\ The proposed bylaw change will become
effective thirty days after the date of filing with the Commission or
upon such later date as SIPC may designate or such earlier date as the
Commission may determine unless: (A) The Commission, by notice to SIPC
setting forth the reasons for such action, disapproves the proposed
bylaw change as being contrary to the public interest or contrary to
the purposes of SIPA; or (B) the Commission finds that the proposed
bylaw change involves a matter of such significant public interest that
public comment should be obtained, in which case it may, after
notifying SIPC in writing of such finding, require that the procedures
for proposed SIPC rule changes in section 3(e)(2) of SIPA be followed
with respect to the proposed bylaw change.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SIPC Fund, which is built from assessments on its members and
the interest earned on the Fund, is used for the protection of
customers of members liquidated under SIPA to maintain investor
confidence in the securities markets. In light of this fact and that
the bylaw change provides for a new assessment methodology, the
Commission finds, pursuant to section 3(e)(1)(B) of SIPA,\18\ that the
proposed bylaw change involves a matter of such significant public
interest that public comment should be obtained and that the procedures
applicable to proposed SIPC proposed rule changes in section 3(e)(2) of
SIPA \19\ should be followed. As required by section 3(e)(1)(B) of
SIPA, the Commission has notified SIPC of this finding in writing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(1)(B).
    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register, or within such longer period (A) as the Commission
may designate of not more than ninety days after such date if it finds
such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so
finding or (B) as to which SIPC consents, the Commission shall: (i) By
order approve such proposed rule change; or (ii) Institute proceedings
to determine whether such proposed rule change should be
disapproved.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78ccc(e)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Text of Proposed Bylaw Change

    The text of the proposed bylaw change is provided below. Proposed
new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in brackets.
ARTICLE 6
ASSESSMENTS
Section 1. General
    (a) Amount of Assessment.
    (1) The amount of each member's assessment for the member's fiscal
year shall [either be (a) the minimum amount or (b)] be the product of
the assessment rate established by SIPC for that fiscal year and either
the member's gross or net revenues from the securities business, as
follows:
    (A) The assessment rate shall be one-fourth (\1/4\) of one (1)
percent per annum of net operating revenues from the member's
securities business [until] for each calendar year or part thereof
unless SIPC determines that the balance of the SIPC Fund, as defined in
Section 4(a)(2) of the Act, exclusive of confirmed lines of credit, (i)
has aggregated a [target] balance of $2.5 billion, and (ii) will remain
at or above $2.5 billion for six months or more.
    (B) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 1(a)(1)(A) herein, if
SIPC determines that the balance of the SIPC Fund, as defined in
Section 4(a)(2) of the Act, exclusive of confirmed lines of credit, (i)
has aggregated $2.5 billion, and (ii) will remain at or above $2.5
billion for six months or more, but SIPC's unrestricted net assets, as
reflected in SIPC's most recent audited Statement of Financial
Position, are less than $2.5 billion, the assessment rate shall be 0.15
percent per annum of net operating revenues from the member's
securities business for each calendar year or part thereof.
    (C) If SIPC determines that the balance of the SIPC Fund, as
defined in Section 4(a)(2) of the Act, exclusive of confirmed lines of
credit, has aggregated $2.5 billion or more, and will remain at or
above $2.5 billion for six months or more, and SIPC's unrestricted net
assets, as reflected in SIPC's most recent audited Statement of
Financial Position, are at or above $2.5 billion, members shall pay a
minimum assessment, which shall be 0.02 percent of the net operating
revenues from the securities business for each calendar year or part
thereof.
    [C](D) Anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, if at any
time SIPC determines that the balance of the SIPC Fund, as defined in
Section 4(a)(2) of the Act, exclusive of confirmed lines of credit,
aggregates or is reasonably likely to aggregate:
    (i) less than [the target balance of] $2.5 billion and will likely
remain less than $2.5 billion for a period of six (6) months or more--
the amount of each member's assessment shall be at an

assessment rate of one-fourth (\1/4\) of one (1) percent per annum of
net operating revenue.
    (ii) less than $150,000,000--the amount of each member's assessment
shall be at an amount to be determined by SIPC, but in no case shall
the amount of each member's assessment be less than an assessment rate
of one-fourth (\1/4\) of one (1) percent per annum of such member's
gross revenues from the securities business.
    (iii) less than $100,000,000--the amount of each member's
assessment shall be at an amount to be determined by SIPC, but in no
case shall the amount of each member's assessment be less than an
assessment rate of one-half (\1/2\) of one (1) percent per annum of
such member's gross revenues from the securities business.
    (iv) The amount of each member's assessment shall not exceed one-
half (\1/2\) of one (1) percent per annum of such member's gross
revenues from the securities business, unless SIPC determines that a
rate in excess of one-half (\1/2\) of one (1) percent during any twelve
(12) month period will not have a material adverse effect on the
financial condition of its members or their customers. No assessment
made pursuant to this Section 1(a)(1) shall require payments during any
such period that exceed in the aggregate one (1) percent of any
member's gross revenues from the securities business for such period.
    (2) Any change in assessments made in accordance with [the above]
Section 1(a)(1) herein shall commence on the first day of the [month]
year following the date on which SIPC announces its determination, or
on such other date if the exigency of the circumstances so warrants in
SIPC's determination, and continue until such time as SIPC provides
otherwise.
    (3) Commencing on the first day of the month following the date on
which SIPC borrows moneys pursuant to Section 4(f) or Section 4(g) of
the Act, and continuing while any such borrowing is outstanding and
until such further time as SIPC provides otherwise, the amount of each
member's assessment shall be at an assessment rate of not less than
one-half (\1/2\) of one (1) percent per annum of such member's gross
revenues from the securities business.
    (b) Payments. Assessments shall be payable at such times and in
such manner as may be determined by SIPC's Vice President--Finance with
the approval of the Chairman.
    (c) Collection of General Assessments. Each member of the
Corporation who is a member of a self-regulatory organization shall pay
assessments to its collection agent. In the case of members who are not
members of any self-regulatory organization, assessments shall be paid
directly to the Corporation.
    (d) Report by Collection Agents. Within 45 days after each due
date, each self-regulatory organization which is the collection agent
shall submit a written report to the Corporation as to any entity for
whom it acts as collection agent whose filing or assessment payment has
not been received.
    (e) Interest on Assessments. If all or any part of an assessment
payable under Section 4 of the Act has not been received by the
collection agent within 15 days after the due date thereof, the member
shall pay, in addition to the amount of the assessment, interest at the
rate of 20% per annum on the unpaid portion of the assessment for each
day it has been overdue. If any broker or dealer has incorrectly filed
a claim for exclusion from membership in the Corporation, such broker
or dealer shall pay, in addition to assessments due, interest at the
rate of 20% per annum on the unpaid assessment for each day it has not
been paid since the date on which it should have been paid.
    (f) Gross Revenues. The term ``gross revenues from the securities
business'' includes the revenues in the definition of gross revenues
from the securities business set forth in the applicable sections of
the Act.
    (g) Net Operating Revenues. The term ``net operating revenues from
the securities business'' means gross revenues from the securities
business less interest and dividend expenses, and includes those
clarifications as are set forth in the SIPC assessment forms and
instructions.
Section 2. Overpayments
    If the final annual reconciliation filed by a terminated member
reflects an assessment overpayment carried forward that exceeds
$150.00, SIPC may refund such excess to the member upon receipt of the
member's written request therefor and after the member's SIPC
collection agent has confirmed to SIPC that all of the member's SIPC
assessment form filings and payments and reports required by SEC Rule
17a-5 covering periods through the termination date have been reviewed
and accepted.
Section 3. Interpretation of Terms
    For purposes of this Article:
    (a) The term ``securities in trading accounts'' shall mean
securities held for sale in the ordinary course of business and not
identified as having been held for investment.
    (b) The term ``securities in investment accounts'' shall mean
securities that are clearly identified as having been acquired for
investment in accordance with provisions of the Internal Revenue Code
applicable to dealers in securities.
    (c) The term ``fees and other income from such other categories of
the securities business'' shall mean all revenue related either
directly or indirectly to the securities business except revenue
included in Section 16(9)(A)-(K) and revenue specifically excepted in
Section 4(c)(3)(C).

V. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SIPC-2016-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All comments should refer to File Number SIPC-2016-01. 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/other.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed bylaw change that are filed
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
proposed bylaw 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. 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 SIPC-2016-01, and
should be submitted on or before July 11, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(f)(2)(i) & 200.30-3(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-14499 Filed 6-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 43620]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18108]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67471; File No. SR-FINRA-2012-26]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for
Commission Action on Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Handling of
Stop and Stop Limit Orders

July 19, 2012.
    On May 24, 2012, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.
(``FINRA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend FINRA's rules relating to the handling of
stop and stop limit orders. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on June 6, 2012.\3\ The Commission
received four comment letters regarding the proposal.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67085 (May 31,
2012), 77 FR 33537.
    \4\ See Letters to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission,
from Ann L. Vlcek, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel,
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, dated June
26, 2012; Gary J. Sjostedt, Director, Order Routing and Sales, TD
Ameritrade, Inc., dated June 27, 2012; Virgil F. Liptak, dated July
3, 2012; and Christopher Nagy, President, KOR Trading LLC, dated
July 9, 2012. The comment letters received by the Commission are
available at http://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-finra-2012-026/finra2012026.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day from the publication of notice of filing of this proposed rule
change is July 21, 2012. The Commission is extending the 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on this proposed rule change. In
particular, extension of time will ensure the Commission has sufficient
time to consider the Exchange's proposal in light of, among other
things, the comments received on the proposal. The extension of time
also will allow the Commission sufficient time to consider any
responses to the comments.
    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ designates September 4, 2012, as the date by which the
Commission should either approve or disapprove, or institute
proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, this proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-18108 Filed 7-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 24483]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9765]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP12-112-000]

Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on April 5, 2012, Southern Natural Gas Company,
L.L.C. (Southern), 569 Brookwood Village, Suite 501, Birmingham,
Alabama 35209, filed an application, pursuant to Section 7(b) of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA), for authorization to abandon in place 19.57
miles of its 24-inch North Main Loop Line and appurtenant facilities
(Abandoned Segment) located in Calhoun and Cleburne Counties, Alabama.
Also, Southern, pursuant to Section 7(c) of the NGA, requests a
certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing Southern to
construct, install, and operate a 2.25 mile, 3-inch diameter lateral
off of Southern's North Main Line. This filing is available for review
at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Southern states that it experienced a wrinkle bend failure on its
North Main Loop Line. In response to a Corrective Action Order issued
by the Southern Region of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, and Southern's testing and analysis; Southern has
identified for abandonment in-place of 19.57 miles of pipeline and
appurtenant facilities. Southern also states that the 2.25 mile lateral
will be constructed parallel with the Abandoned Segment and provide
sufficient capacity to continue serving its existing firm customer at
the Heflin Gate Meter Station. The cost of the proposed project is
estimated to be $2,203,000.
    Any questions regarding the application are to be directed to
Patricia S. Francis, Associate General Counsel, Southern Natural Gas
Company, L.L.C., 569 Brookwood Village, Suite 501, Birmingham, Alabama
35209; phone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to
the proceedings for this project should, on or before the below listed
comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, 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
NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on
the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will
receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for
court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper, see, 18 CFR 385.2001
(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site under the
``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic
filings.
    Comment Date: May 8, 2012.

    Dated: April 17, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-9765 Filed 4-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P