1 MEMORANDUM 3/ 4/ 05 SUBJECT: Product Chemistry and Environmental Fate Science Chapters of Hexachlorobenzene( HCB) for Pentachlorophenol RED ( PC Code: 063001)

FROM: A. Najm Shamim, Ph. D., Chemist, Team 2 Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch Antimicrobials Division( 7510C)

THRU: Nader Elkassabany, Ph. D., Acting Team Leader, Team 2 Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch Antimicrobials Division( 7510C)

TO: Norm Cook, Chief Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch Antimcirobials Division( 7510C)

DP Barcodes: D272986, D272988 MRID#: N/ A Attached please find the following documents for the completed product chemistry and environmental fate science chapters for Hexachlorobenzene( HCB).

1. Final Science Chapter on Product Chemistry of HCB ( A. Najm Shamim) 2. Final Bibliography of HCB Product Chemistry Science Chapter ( A. Najm Shamim) 3. Final Science Chapter on Environmental Fate Chemistry of HCB ( A. Najm Shamim) 4. Final Bibliogrpahy of HCB Environmental Fate Chemistry Science Chapter of HCB ( A. Najm Shamim) The documents were peer reviewed by Bob Quick, Chemist, Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch This is the final Draft of these documents and concurrence and sign off are requested. 2 SCIENCE CHAPTER ON THE PRODUCT CHEMISTRY OF HEXACHLOROBENZENE ( HCB)

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Hexachlorobenzene is not a naturally occurring compound and there is no evidence that Hexachlorobenzene ( HCB) is commercially manufactured in the United States. In 1982, the import level of HCB into the USA was about 38,000 lbs. It is present in the environment due to numerous emission processes as well as due to the manufacturing processes of some pesticides where it is present as a micro contaminant ( see below). Based on the draft Emission Inventory Data for Section 112( C)( 6) Pollutants, total emission of HCB into the environment due all possible emission processes was estimated to be about 2.3 tons/ year. 1 HCB was widely used as a pesticide until 1984. The total amount stored on site as a by product or impurity ranges from 0.15 to 1.52 million ponds per year .2 From 1987 to 1993, based on EPA's Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI), the HCB releases to the environment ( land and water) were estimated to be approximately 1, 287 lbs. Most of the HCB migrated to aqueous medium. 3 The following table provides the maximum percentages of hexachlorobenzene present as an impurity in the manufacturing of pesticides. It should be noted that all the pesticides listed are agricultural pesticides except for pentachlorophenol which is mainly used as a wood preservative.

Pesticide Maximum Impurity (%) 1 Atrazine 0.0017 Clopyralid 0.0008 Chlorothanil 0.05 Chlorpyrifos methyl a___

Dacthal ( DCPA) 0.30 Endosulfan 0.000075 Pentachloronitrobenzene 0.05 Pentachlorophenol( PCP) 0.0075b Picloram 0.01 Simazine 0.002 Notes: a. No data were available b. The Wood Preservative manufacturers and the Agency made an agreement ( DCI, 1984) that the industry will provide analytical data for PCP manufacture and identify some of the contaminants including HCB in each batch that would be analyzed and reported to the Agency every month as monthly reports. This agreement was made due to the Agency's concern about the microcontaminants polychlorinated dioxins, polychlorinated dibenzofurans and hexachlorobenzene. 3 II. PRODUCT CHEMISTRY:

a. Manufacture:

Since HCB is not manufactured in the United States, no procedure for the synthesis of HCB was submitted.

b. Physical Chemistry Assessment:

Chemical Name: Hexachlorobenzene Common Names/ Trade Names: HCB, Perchlorobenzene, Anticarrie, Buntcure Bunt no more, Granero, Rest Q CAS #: 118 74 1 Molecular Formula: C 6 Cl 6 Molecular Weight: 284.78 m. p. 227 o C 4 b. p. 318 o C 5 Density 1.56 ( 23.6 o C). 6 Water Solubility: 0.006 g/ ml ( 25 o C) 7 Vapor Pressure: 1.1 x 10 5 mm Hg ( 25 o C) 7 Henry Law Constant( Log K P): 5.07 ( Calculated) 8 Bioaccumulation ( Log K OW): 6.18 9 Bioconcentration Factor ( Log BCF): 4.37, 3.89 ( Fathead Minnow) 10 Sorption Partition Coefficient Log K OC: 6.08 ( Calculated) 11 4 REFERENCES FOR PRODUCT CHEMISTRY OF HEXACHLOROBENZENE 1. Schmidt Bleek, F., Haberland, W., Klien, A. W., Caroli, S. 1982 Steps Towards Environmental Hazard Assessment of New Chemicals. Chemosphere 11: 383 416 2. Bysshe S. E., 1982 Bioconcentration Factor In Aquatic Organisms. In: The Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation, Eds: W. J. Lyman, W. J, Reehl, W. F., and Rosenblatt, D. H., Chapter 5, Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

3. Mabey, W., Smith, J. H., Podoll, R. T., Johnson, H. L., Chou, T. W., Gate, J, Waight Patridge, I, Jaber, H., and Vandenber, D. 1982 Aquatic Fate Process for Organic Priority Pollutants US EPA Report No. 440/ 4 81 14.

4. Mackay, D., and Shiu, W. Y. 1981 A Critical Review of Henry's Law Constants for Chemicals of Environmental Interest. J. Phys. Chem Ref. Data. 10: 1175 1199.

5. Mackay D., Bobra, A. M., Chan, D. W., and Shiu, W. Y., 1982 Vapor Pressure Correlation for Low Volatility Environmental Chemicals. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16: 645 649.

6. Neely, W. B., Branson, D. R., and Blau, G. E. 1974 Partition Coefficient to Measure Bioconcentration Potential of Organic Chemicals in Fish. Environ. Sci Technol. 8: 1113 1115 . 7. Toxicological Profile of Hexachlorobenzene 1996. US Department of Human Health.

9. Fact Sheet: August 11, 1999. US EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, http:// www. epa. gov/ OGWDW/ dhw/ t ose/ hcb. html 9. Verschueren K., 1983. Handbook of Environmental Data of Organic Chemicals, Van Nostrands Reinhold Publishers, New York.

10. Weast R. C., Ed. 1972. Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 53 rd. Edition, CRC Press, Cleveland 11. Wolf, J. 1998. DP Barcode D243496. A Memo For Environment Fate and Effects Division, US EPA. 5 SCIENCE CHAPTER ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTRY OF HEXACHLOROBENZENE I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Hexachlorobenzene( HCB) is not registered as a pesticide and as such the Agency does not have a database for the environmental fate chemistry of hexachlorobenzene. The Agency has conducted an open literature search and for this science chapter it has used the fate properties as reported in literature. Some of these properties are measured and some are estimated based on various fate models.

Hexachlorobenzene does not contain any hydrolyzable hydrogen and hence the hydrolytic half life has not ben determined. It is sparingly soluble in water and has a tendency to volatilize from surface water and water columns. From earlier studies on surface waters, the photolytic half life was estimated to be between 156 days and 4.2 years. While in ground water, its photolytic half life was estimated to be between 5.3 and 11.4 years.

Photooxidation half life of HCB has been estimated to range between 2.7 and 5.7 years. It is, therefore, a highly persistent molecule in aqueous systems. The half life HCB in soils was estimated in the range of 156 days to 4.2 years. The biodegradation half life, under aerobic conditions, were estimated in the range of 156 days to 4.2 years and in earlier studies, under anaerobic conditions, it was estimated in the ranges from 10.6 years to 23 years approximately. More recently, however, it has been found that under anaerobic conditions, its degradation half life lies between 13 and 18 days. The biodegradation process has been shown to takes place through dechlorination process.

It has high binding capacity with soils and hence is likely to be immobile in soils. However, due to sorption processes that take place in soils, it possibly can migrates into ground water.

Log K OW of HCB has been estimated and also experimentally measured and it is around 6, and hence it is likely to be bioaccumulative. In fact, HCB has been shown to be bioaccumulative in some aquatic organisms, for example, for rainbow trout, the rate of bioaccumulation is 224 days. However, the depuration rate is about 7 days. More recent study on various types of whales similar results were obtained that HCB does bioaccumulate with half lives in hours and depuration rate studies also show that half lives are in hours.

HCB is a stable, persistent molecule in water but breaks down under anaerobic condition via dechlorination transformation processes. It is bioaccumulative in aquatic biota like fish and whales but also depurates quickly. It is not likely to adversely impact the aquatic organisms. It is binds strongly with soils but through sorption processes migrates into ground water and sediments. Based on surface water monitoring data the Agency has recently estimated that HCB 6 concentration in surface water is not likely to exceed 10 parts per trillion ( 0.01 µ g/ L). There are no estimations for ground water concentrations of HCB.

Appendix to Environmental Fate Chemistry In 1979 the EPA issued a document on Water Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants, Volumes I & II 1. Volume II discussed the fate of hexachlorobenzene in the environment. In the absence of experimental/ measured data on most of the fate studies ( hydrolysis, photolysis, soil aquatic metabolism etc.), a full environmental fate assessment could not be carried out. The document recognized a few important characteristics of hexachlorobenzene and some conclusions were drawn. Some of the conclusions drawn were:

" Hexachlorobenzene is a very persistent molecule and has a high affinity for lipophilic materials. Sorption and bioaccumulation are expected to be high. It is bioaccumulative but does not appear to biomagnify through aquatic food chain. Depuration rate is high although log K OW is on the high side. HCB found in the aquatic organisms is from aqueous medium rather than dietary sources. Chemically it is inert at room temperature and in the presence of caustic alkali between 120 and 200 oC it produces pentachlorophenolate. No data for birds and predators of fish were available."

It should be noted that this document was produced when HCB was used as an agricultural pesticide. Subsequent to this document the Office of Pesticide Program has issued a number of documents which discuss the presence of HCB as an impurity in various pesticide manufacturing processes. Some experimentally measured data are available on some environmental fate studies. The following discussion briefly outlines the measured and/ or estimated environmental fate and transport data.

Hexachlorobenzene is sparingly soluble in aqueous medium has a tendency to volatilize from surface water easily and quickly.

1. Abiotic:

a. Hydrolysis:

Hexachlorobenzene is a highly polar compound and contains no hydrogen. Hydrolysis is not likely to take place. Ellington et al. , in 19872 attempted to measured K h ( hydrolysis constant for HCB) but after 13 days of measurements at pHs : 3, 7 and 11 at 85 o C , K h was estimated to be zero. 7 Hexachlorobenzene is a stable and highly persistent molecule in aquatic settings and does not hydrolyze. However, it has a tendency to volatalize from the water and soil surfaces. It is likely to become immobile in soils. However, due to sorption processes on soil surface, it shows a tendency to migrate into ground water and result in ground water contamination. It is stable under aerobic conditions but under anaerobic conditions its half lives are shorter ( 13 18 days) therefore the main route of dissipation would possibly be through sorption to soils in terrestrial settings and to sediments. Because of high binding constants with soils, hexacholorobenzene may possibly accumulate in benthic sediment and bioaccumulate in benthic organisms. Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( EFED) has recently determined that, based on the monitoring data, it is unlikely that HCB concentration in surface water would exceed 10 ppt ( 0.01 µ g/ L). 10 b. Photolysis:

Half life for photoxidation of HCB in air was measured to be between 156 days and 4.2 years days3. A high degree of uncertainty was noted in this measurement. Another photolysis study, however, conducted in water and hexane ( T. Mill and W. Hagg) 12 , the photolytic half life was found to be close to 90 days. In a solvent mixture of water: acetonitrile ( 4: 1) the half life was about 70 days. The same study concluded that if the efficiency of light is assumed to be the same in solvents and air then air photolysis half life would be about 80 days. This value is almost half of the reported in the previous study3 . However, it is stable and persistent in aqueous and nonaqueous systems as well as on soil surfaces.

2. Biotic:

J. Beck and K. E. Hansen's work4 has shown that in surface water, under aerobic conditions, biodegradation half life of hexachlorobenzene varied between 2.7 and 5.7 years. Under aerobic conditions but in ground water, the biodegradation half life ranges between 5.3 and 11.4 years. A soil grab sample study, under aerobic conditions showed that hexachlorobenzene metabolizes in the range of 2.7 and 5.7 years.

Recent experiments on fathead minnows ( Pimephales promelas) and worm ( Lumbriculus variegatus) showed that hexachlorobenzene partitioned more efficiently into sediment than into these biota and other biota. 5 It has been shown that polychlorinated chemicals have a tendency to dechlorinate ( biotransform) under anaerobic conditions. Hexachlorobenzene partially dechlorinates in the presence of biota. 6 A study conducted on the dechlorination of hexachlorobenzene and other chlorinated benzenes, carried out on a contaminated estuarine sediment which contained an enriched culture, showed that hexachlorobenzene undergoes reductive dechlorination. Using a pseudo first order model, it was observed that under these reductive conditions, the half life of hexachlorobenzene is 2.5 days and all of hexachlorobenzene is converted into pentachlorobenzene ( Pavlosthathis, S. G., and Prytula, M. T.) 13 8 Under anaerobic microbial conditions, using an anaerobic sewage sludge, in the concentration range of 2 50 mg/ L, hexachlorobenzene dechlorinated. When HCB concentrations were between 2.5 and 10 mg/ L, complete dechlorination process occurs in six days. This phenomenon was observed in the presence of 1, 2, 3 trichlorobenzene adapted anaerobic consortium . The dechlorination was fastest at pH 7, while at pHs 6, 8, and 9, and dechlorination occurs between 13 18 days. The reducing conditions ( anaerobic) used for this study were: sulfate reducing, denitrifying and methanogenic conditions. The rates of dechlorination were the same under these three conditions. ( Yuan, S. Y., Su, C. J, and Chang, B. V.). 14 Under anaerobic conditions, it does not appear stable.

Because of the high K OC, hexachlorobenzene can be sorbed with soils and sediments very tightly so that soils/ sediments can act as a sink for molecules like hexachlorobenzene. A recent report has identified PCDDs, PCDFs, PCBs and HCB in the sediment samples from sites located in Queensland in Northern Australia. This report is interesting as there are no industrial activities in this area. No direct link can be established for anthropogenic origin of these substances. ( Muller, J. F, Haynes, D., McLachlan, M., Bohme, F., Will, S., Shaw, G. R, Mortimer, M., Sadler, R., and Connell, D. W.) 15 Bioaccumulation:

A few values are reported here from open literature for some aquatic species:

Rainbow trout: > 224 days7 Subadult rainbow trout: 210 days at 4 o C 80 days at 12 o C 70 days at 18 o C 8 Worm 27 days at 8o C Depuration Rate from fish ~ 7 days9 Recently, analysis of marine mammal tissues, specifically seals, pilot whale, harbor porpoise, white sided dolphin, begula whale and bowhead whale. The tissues of these marine mammals have been archived at the U. S. National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank, housed in National Institute of Standards and Technology, showed the presence of ( bioaccumulation) of hexachlorobenzene and also some trace metals. The concentration of hexachlorobenzene ranged from 43 ng/ g wet weight of the mammalian tissue: up to 1070 ng/ g in Pilot Whale of North Atlantic and in Harbor Porpoise, also of North Atlantic. ( Becker, P. R., Mackey, E. A., Demimarlp, R., Schantz, M. M., Koster, B. J., and Wise, S. A.) 16 Another published study conducted in laboratory conditions on the bioaccumulation of hexachlorobenzene ( and Lindane) in tubicificid sludgeworms ( Oligochaeta) indicate the two types of worms: T. tubifex and L. hoffmeistri the uptake rate constant were 0.169 and 0.470 and 0.589/ h and 0.458/ h respectively which when converted to half lives measured at 4.1 hour and 1.4 hours. The depuration rate constants were biphasic and in the first phase the rate constants 9 were 0.037/ h and 0.047/ h which translate into 19 hours to 15 hours while in the second phase, the rate constants were 0.004 and 0.002 which gave half lives as: 173 hours and 347 hours. ( Egeler, P., Rombke, J., Meller, M., Knacker, Th., Franke, C., Studinger, G. And Nagel, R.) 17 10 REFERENCES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL FATE CHEMISTRY SCIENCE CHAPTER 1. Atkinson, R. 1987 A Structure  Activity Relationship For The Estimation of Rate Constants for the Gas Phase Reaction of OH Radicals with Organic Compounds. International Journal of Chemical Kinetics. 19: 799 828.

2. Beck, J., and Hansen K. E. , 1974. The Degradation of Quintozene, Pentachlorobenzene, Hexachlorobenzene and Pentachloroaniline in Soil. Pesticide Science. 5: 41 48 3. Becker, P. R., Mackey, E. A., Demimarlp, R., Schantz, M. M., Koster, B. J., and Wise, S. A. 1997. Concentrations of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons and Trace Elements in Marine Mammal Tissues Archives in the US. National Biomonitoring Specimen Bank. Chemosphere. 34( 9/ 10): 2067 2098 4. Egeler, P., Rombke, J., Meller, M., Th. Frank, C., Studinger, G., and Nagel, R. 1997. Bioaccumulation of Lindane and Hexachlorobenzene by Tubificid Sludgeworms ( Oligochaeta) Under Standardized Laboratory Conditions. Chemosphere. 35( 4): 835 852 5. Ellington, J. J., Stancil, F. E., and Payne, W. D. 1987 Measurement of Hydrolysis Rate Constants for Evaluation of Hazardous Waste Land Disposal. Volume I: Data on 32 Chemicals. US EPA 600/ 3 86 043 6. B. Z. Fathepure et al., 1988. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 54: 2976 2980 7. Mill, T., and Haag, W. 1985. The Environmental Fate of Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobenzene: Proceedings of an International Symposium, International Agency on Cancer Research., Held at Lyon, France, Scientific Publication No. 77, Eds: Morris, C. R., and Cabral, J. R. P.

8. Muller, J. F., Haynes, D., McLachan, M., Bohme, F, Will, S., Shaw, G. R., Sadler, R., and Connell, D. W. 1999. PCDDs, PCDFs, PCBs, and HCB in Marine and Estuarine Sediments From Queensland, Australia. Chemosphere. 39( 10): 1707 1721 9. Neely, W. B., 1980 A Method of Selecting the Most Appropriate Environmental Experiments on a New Chemical. In: Dynamic, Exposure and Hazard Assessment of Toxic Chemicals, Ed: R. Haque. Ann Arbor Sci. Publications, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

10. Niimi, A. J., and Cho C. Y, 1980. Uptake of Hexachlorobenzene( HCB) from Feed by Rainbow Trout ( Salmo Gairdneri) Bull. Environ. Toxicol. 24: 834 837.

11. Niimi, A. J., and Palazo, V. 1985. Temperature Effect on the Elimination of Pentachlorophenol, Hexachlorobenzene and Mirex by Rainbow Trout ( Salmo Gairdenri) Water Research. 19( 2): 205 207 11 12. Pavlosthahis, S. G., and Prytula, M. T., 2000 Kinetics of the Sequential Microbial Reductive Dechlorination of Hexachlorobenzene. Environmental Science and Technology. 34: 4001 4009.

13. G. S. Schuytema et al., 1990. Arch Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 1: 1 9 14. US EPA Document: 1979 Water Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants, Volumes I and II, EPA 440/ 4 79 29a, 029b.

15. Wolfe, J., April 1998. DP Barcode: D243496. A Memo on Drinking Water Assessment of HCB and PCB.

16. Yuan, S. Y., Su, C. J., and Chang, B. V. 1999. Microbial Dechlorination of Hexachlorobenzene in Anaerobic Sewage Sludge. Chemosphere. 38( 5): 1015 1023


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27114-27117]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11314]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64399; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2011-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Amending Its Fee
Schedule To Eliminate Registered Representative Fees for Options
Trading Permit (``OTP'') Holders and To Institute a New Transaction-
Based ``Options Regulatory Fee''

May 4, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on April 28, 2011, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to eliminate
registered representative fees for Options Trading Permit (``OTP'')
Holders and institute a new transaction-based ``Options Regulatory
Fee.'' The text of the proposed rule change is available at the
Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room, on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov, and http://www.nyse.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    This proposed rule change is based on a rule change previously
submitted by NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. on behalf of the Boston Options
Exchange Group, LLC (``BOX'') that was effective upon filing.\3\ The
Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Fee Schedule to institute a
new transaction-based ``Options Regulatory Fee'' and eliminate
registered representative fees. Each OTP Holder or OTP Firm that
registers an options principal and/or representative who is conducting
business on NYSE Arca currently is assessed a registered representative
fee (``RR Fee'') based on the action(s) associated with the
registration. There are annual fees as well as initial, transfer and
termination fees.\4\ RR Fees and other regulatory fees collected by the
Exchange were intended to cover only a portion of the cost of the
Exchange's regulatory programs. Prior to rule changes by other options
exchanges, such as the Chicago Board Options Exchange (``CBOE''), BOX,
NASDAQ OMX PHLX (``PHLX'') and the International Securities Exchange
(``ISE''), all options exchanges, regardless of size, charged
registered representative fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61388 (January 20,
2010), 75 FR 4431 (January 27, 2010) (SR-BX-2010-001) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to the Registered Representative Fee and Options Regulatory Fee).
    \4\ In this regard, the Exchange proposes to eliminate from its
options fee schedule any reference to fees the Exchange no longer
asks FINRA to collect on its behalf relating to the processing of
registered representatives. In particular, the following
``Registration Fees'' will be eliminated from the options fee
schedule: The annual fee for new applications, maintenance, or
transfer of registration status for each Registered Representative
and each Registered Options Principal (collected by the NASD), the
fee for termination of such individuals, the NASD CRD Processing
Fee, the NASD Annual System Processing Fee, and the NYSE Arca
Transfer/Re-license Individual Fee. Fees relating to the processing
of registered representatives that FINRA collects and retains will
remain in the Exchange's options fee schedule. In particular, the
following ``Registration Fees'' will remain in the options fee
schedule: The NASD Disclosure Processing Fee and the NASD Manual
Processing Fee for Fingerprint results submitted by other SROs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the current RR Fee is no longer
equitable. The options industry has evolved to a structure with many
more Internet-based and discount brokerage firms. These firms have few
registered representatives and thus pay very little in RR Fees compared
to full service brokerage firms that have many registered
representatives. Further, due to the manner in which RR Fees are
charged, it is possible for an NYSE Arca OTP Holder or OTP Firm to
restructure its business to avoid paying these fees altogether. For
example, a firm can avoid RR Fees by terminating its OTP status and
sending its business to NYSE Arca through another separate NYSE Arca
OTP Holder or OTP Firm, even an affiliated firm that has many fewer
registered representatives. If firms terminated their OTP status to
avoid RR Fees, the Exchange would suffer the loss of a source of
funding for its regulatory programs. More importantly, the regulatory
effort the Exchange expends to review the transactions of each type of
firm is not commensurate with the number of registered representatives
that each firm employs.
    In order to address the inequity of the current regulatory fee
structure and to offset more fully the cost of the Exchange's
regulatory programs, the Exchange proposes to eliminate the current RR
Fee for NYSE Arca OTP Holders and OTP Firms and adopt an Options
Regulatory Fee (``ORF'') of $0.004 per contract.\5\ As described below,
this fee would be assessed by the Exchange on each OTP Holder or OTP
Firm for all options transactions executed or cleared by the OTP Holder
or OTP Firm that are cleared by OCC in the customer range, regardless
of the marketplace of execution. In particular, the Exchange would
impose the ORF on

all options transactions executed in the customer range by an OTP
Holder or OTP Firm,\6\ even if the transactions do not take place on
NYSE Arca. The ORF would also be charged for transactions that are not
executed by an OTP Holder or OTP Firm but are ultimately cleared by an
OTP Holder. In the case where an OTP Holder or OTP Firm executes a
transaction and a different OTP Holder or OTP Firm clears the
transaction, the ORF would be assessed to the OTP Holder or OTP Firm
who executes the transaction. In the case where a non-OTP Holder
executes a transaction and an OTP Holder or OTP Firm clears the
transaction, the ORF would be assessed to the OTP Holder or OTP Firm
who clears the transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Because the annual component of the RR Fee has already been
assessed for 2011, the Exchange will make a pro rata refund for the
remaining portion of the year following elimination of the RR Fee.
In addition, the Exchange notes that permit holders who conduct only
equities business will no longer be subject to the RR Fee as a
result of the elimination of this fee. Consequently, the Exchange
proposes to eliminate from its NYSE Arca Equities fee schedule any
reference to fees the Exchange no longer asks FINRA to collect on
its behalf relating to the processing of Registered Representatives.
In particular, the following ``Registration Fees'' will be
eliminated from the equities fee schedule: The annual fee for new
applications, maintenance, or transfer of registration status for
each Registered Representative and each Registered Principal
(collected by the NASD), the two NASD CRD Processing Fees, the NASD
Annual System Processing Fee, and the NYSE Arca Transfer/Re-license
Individual Fee. Fees relating to the processing of registered
representatives that FINRA collects and retains will remain in the
Exchange's equities fee schedule. In particular, the following
``Registration Fees'' will remain in the equities fee schedule: The
NASD Disclosure Processing Fee and the NASD Manual Processing Fee
for Fingerprint Results submitted by Other SROs. The Exchange will
separately submit a rule filing to address funding for equities
regulation.
    \6\ Such transactions must be cleared by an OTP Holder or OTP
Firm in the customer range for the ORF to apply. Subject to the
foregoing, the ORF would apply to all customer orders executed by an
OTP Holder or OTP Firm on NYSE Arca. Exchange rules require each OTP
Holder or OTP Firm to submit trade information in order to allow the
Exchange to properly prioritize and match orders and quotations and
report resulting transactions to the OCC. See NYSE Arca Rule 6.68.
The Exchange represents that it has surveillances in place to verify
that OTP Holders comply with the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted, the ORF would replace RR Fees, which relate to an OTP
Holder or OTP Firm's options customer business. Further, RR Fees
constituted the single-largest fee assessed that is related to
regulation of customer trading activity, and the Exchange believes it
is appropriate to charge the ORF only to transactions that clear as
customer at the OCC. The Exchange believes that its broad regulatory
responsibilities with respect to an OTP Holder or OTP Firms' activities
supports applying the ORF to transactions cleared but not executed by
an OTP Holder or OTP Firm. The Exchange's regulatory responsibilities
are the same regardless of whether an OTP Holder or OTP Firm executes a
transaction or clears a transaction executed on its behalf. The
Exchange regularly reviews all such activities, including performing
surveillance for position limit violations, manipulation, front-
running, contrary exercise advice violations and insider trading.\7\
These activities span across multiple exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange also participates in The Options Regulatory
Surveillance Authority (``ORSA'') national market system plan and in
doing so shares information and coordinates with other exchanges
designed to detect the unlawful use of undisclosed material
information in the trading of securities options. ORSA is a national
market system comprised of several self-regulatory organizations
whose functions and objectives include the joint development,
administration, operation and maintenance of systems and facilities
utilized in the regulation, surveillance, investigation and
detection of the unlawful use of undisclosed material information in
the trading of securities options. The Exchange compensates ORSA for
the Exchange's portion of the cost to perform insider trading
surveillance on behalf of the Exchange. The ORF will cover the costs
associated with the Exchange's arrangement with ORSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the initial level of the fee is reasonable
because it relates to the recovery of the costs of supervising and
regulating an OTP Holder or OTP Firm's customer options business. The
Exchange believes the amount of the ORF is fair and reasonably
allocated because it is a closer approximation to the Exchange's actual
costs in administering its regulatory program with respect to customer
options activity.
    The ORF would be collected indirectly from OTP Holder or OTP Firms
through their clearing firms by OCC on behalf of the Exchange. The
Exchange expects that OTP Holders and OTP Firms will pass-through the
ORF to their customers in the same manner that firms pass-through to
their customers the fees charged by Self Regulatory Organizations
(``SROs'') to help the SROs meet their obligations under Section 31 of
the Exchange Act.
    The ORF is designed to recover a material portion of the costs to
the Exchange of the supervision and regulation of OTP Holders and OTP
Firms, including performing routine surveillances, investigations, as
well as policy, rulemaking, interpretive and enforcement activities.\8\
The Exchange believes that revenue generated from the ORF will cover
the substantial majority of the Exchange's regulatory costs related to
the NYSE Arca options market. At present, RR Fees make up the largest
part of the Exchange's total options regulatory fee revenue, however,
the total amount of NYSE Arca specific regulatory fees collected by the
Exchange is significantly less than the regulatory costs incurred by
NYSE Arca on an annual basis. The Exchange notes that its regulatory
responsibilities with respect to an OTP Holder or OTP Firm's compliance
with options sales practice rules have been allocated to FINRA under a
17d-2 agreement. The ORF is not designed to cover the cost of options
sales practice regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As stated above, the RR Fees collected by the Exchange were
originally intended to cover only a portion of the cost of the
Exchange's regulatory programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange would monitor the amount of revenue collected from the
ORF to ensure that it, in combination with its other NYSE Arca
regulatory fees and fines, does not exceed the Exchange's total
regulatory costs. The Exchange expects to monitor NYSE Arca regulatory
costs and revenues at a minimum on an annual basis. If the Exchange
determines NYSE Arca regulatory revenues exceed regulatory costs, the
Exchange would adjust the ORF by submitting a fee change filing to the
Commission. The Exchange would notify OTP Holders and OTP Firms of
adjustments to the ORF via a Regulatory Bulletin.
    The Exchange believes the proposed ORF is equitably allocated
because it would be charged to all OTP Holders and OTP Firms on all
their customer options business. The Exchange believes the proposed ORF
is reasonable because it will raise revenue related to the amount of
customer options business conducted by an OTP Holder or OTP Firm, and
thus the amount of Exchange regulatory services those OTP Holders or
OTP Firms will require with respect to that activity, instead of how
many registered representatives a particular OTP Holder or OTP Firm
employs.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Exchange expects that implementation of the proposed ORF
will result generally in many traditional brokerage firms paying
less regulatory fees while Internet and discount brokerage firms
will pay more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With almost all transactions on the Exchange conducted
electronically, the amount of resources required by the Exchange to
surveil non-customer trading activity is significantly less than the
amount of resources the Exchange must dedicate to surveil customer
trading activity. This is because surveilling customer trading activity
is much more labor-intensive and requires greater expenditure of human
and technical resources than surveilling non-customer trading activity,
which tends to be more automated and less labor-intensive. As a result,
the costs associated with administering the customer component of the
Exchange's overall regulatory program are materially higher than the
costs associated with administering the non-customer component (e.g.,
market maker) of its regulatory program.
    The Exchange believes it is reasonable and appropriate for the
Exchange to charge the ORF for options transactions regardless of the
exchange on which the transactions occur. The Exchange has a statutory
obligation to enforce compliance by OTP Holders and OTP Firms and their
associated persons under the Exchange Act and the rules of the Exchange
and to surveil for other manipulative conduct by market participants
(including non-OTP Holders) trading on the Exchange. The Exchange
cannot effectively surveil for such conduct without looking at and
evaluating activity across all options markets. Many of the Exchange's
market surveillance programs require the Exchange to look at and
evaluate activity across all options markets, such

as surveillance for position limit violations, manipulation, front-
running and contrary exercise advice violations/expiring exercise
declarations.\10\ Also, the Exchange and the other options exchanges
are required to populate a consolidated options audit trail (``COATS'')
system in order to surveil an OTP Holder or OTP Firm's activities
across markets.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange and other options SROs are parties to a 17d-2
agreement allocating among the SROs regulatory responsibilities
relating to compliance by the common members with rules for expiring
exercise declarations, position limits, OCC trade adjustments, and
Large Option Position Report reviews. See, e.g. Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 61588 (February 25, 2010).
    \11\ COATS effectively enhances intermarket options surveillance
by enabling the options exchanges to reconstruct the market promptly
to effectively surveil certain rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to its own surveillance programs, the Exchange works
with other SROs and exchanges on intermarket surveillance related
issues. Through its participation in the Intermarket Surveillance Group
(``ISG''),\12\ the Exchange shares information and coordinates
inquiries and investigations with other exchanges designed to address
potential intermarket manipulation and trading abuses. The Exchange's
participation in ISG helps it to satisfy the Exchange Act requirement
that it have coordinated surveillance with markets on which security
futures are traded and markets on which any security underlying
security futures are traded to detect manipulation and insider
trading.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ISG is an industry organization formed in 1983 to
coordinate intermarket surveillance among the SROs by cooperatively
sharing regulatory information pursuant to a written agreement
between the parties. The goal of the ISG's information sharing is to
coordinate regulatory efforts to address potential intermarket
trading abuses and manipulations.
    \13\ See Exchange Act Section 6(h)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that charging the ORF across markets will
avoid having OTP Holders and OTP Firms direct their trades to other
markets in order to avoid the fee and to thereby avoid paying for their
fair share of regulation. If the ORF did not apply to activity across
markets then an OTP Holder or OTP Firm would send their orders to the
least cost, least regulated exchange. Other exchanges do impose a
similar fee on their member's activity, including the activity of those
members on NYSE Arca.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Exchange notes that CBOE currently assesses an options
regulatory fee similar to the one proposed herein, which fee is also
assessed on the trading activity of a CBOE member on NYSE Arca. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58817 (October 20, 2008), 73 FR
63744 (October 27, 2008). Similar regulatory fees have also been
instituted by PHLX (See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61133
(December 9, 2009), 74 FR 66715 (December 16, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-
100)); and ISE (See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61154
(December 11, 2009), 74 FR 67278 (December 18, 2009) (SR-ISE-2009-
105)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that there is established precedent for an SRO
charging a fee across markets, namely, FINRA's Trading Activity Fee
\15\ and the CBOE's, PHLX's, ISE's and BOX's ORF. While the Exchange
does not have all the same regulatory responsibilities as FINRA, the
Exchange believes that, like other exchanges that have adopted an ORF,
its broad regulatory responsibilities with respect to an OTP Holder or
OTP Firms' activities, irrespective of where their transactions take
place, supports a regulatory fee applicable to transactions on other
markets. Unlike FINRA's Trading Activity Fee, the ORF would apply only
to an OTP Holder or OTP Firm's customer options transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 47946 (May 30,
2003), 68 FR 3402 (June 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has designated this proposal to be operative on May 1,
2011.
2. Statutory Basis
    Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b) of the Act \16\ in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(4) \17\ of the Act in particular, in that it is designed
to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its OTP Holders and OTP Firms and other persons
using its facilities. The Exchange believes that the ORF is objectively
allocated because it would be charged to all OTP Holders and OTP Firms
for all their transactions that clear as customer at the OCC through an
OTP Holder or OTP Firm. Moreover, the Exchange believes the ORF ensures
fairness by assessing higher fees to those participants that require
more Exchange regulatory services based on the amount of customer
options business they conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the Commission has addressed the funding of
an SRO's regulatory operations in the Concept Release Concerning Self-
Regulation \18\ and the release on the Fair Administration and
Governance of Self-Regulatory Organizations.\19\ In the Concept
Release, the Commission states that: ``Given the inherent tension
between an SRO's role as a business and as a regulator, there
undoubtedly is a temptation for an SRO to fund the business side of its
operations at the expense of regulation.'' \20\ In order to address
this potential conflict, the Commission proposed in the Governance
Release rules that would require an SRO to direct monies collected from
regulatory fees, fines, or penalties exclusively to fund the regulatory
operations and other programs of the SRO related to its regulatory
responsibilities.\21\ The Exchange has designed the ORF to generate
revenues that, when combined with all of the Exchange's other
regulatory fees, will be less than or equal to the Exchange's
regulatory costs, which is consistent with the Commission's view that
regulatory fees be used for regulatory purposes and not to support the
Exchange's business side. In this regard, the Exchange believes that
the initial level of the fee is reasonable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50700 (November 18,
2004), 69 FR 71256 (December 8, 2004) (``Concept Release'').
    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50699 (November 18,
2004), 69 FR 71126 (December 8, 2004) (``Governance Release'').
    \20\ Concept Release at 71268.
    \21\ Governance Release at 71142.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \22\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule
19b-4 \23\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other
charge imposed by the NYSE Arca.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \23\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,

including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2011-20 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2011-20. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for 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 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NYSEArca-2011-20 and should be submitted on or before May 31, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-11314 Filed 5-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 27, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6430-6433]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03368]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2019-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to
calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new
buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

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

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Location and case                                                                                Community
  State and county           No.          Chief executive officer of community    Community map repository         Date of modification          No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado:
    Denver (FEMA     City and County of   The Honorable Michael Hancock,        Department of Public Works,   Jan. 11, 2019................       080046
     Docket No.: B-   Denver (18-08-       Mayor, City and County of Denver,     201 West Colfax Avenue,
     1863).           1060P).              1437 Bannock Street, Room 350,        Denver, CO 80202.
                                           Denver, CO 80202.
    Denver (FEMA     City of Fountain     The Honorable Gabriel Ortega, Mayor,  Pikes Peak Regional           Jan. 15, 2019................       080061
     Docket No.: B-   (17-08-0467P).       City of Fountain, 116 South Main      Development Center, 2880
     1863).                                Street, Fountain, CO 80817.           International Circle,
                                                                                Colorado Springs, CO 80910.
    El Paso (FEMA    City of Manitou      The Honorable Ken A. Jaray, Mayor,    City Hall, 606 Manitou        Dec. 20, 2018................       080063
     Docket No.: B-   Springs (18-08-      City of Manitou Springs, 606          Avenue, Manitou Springs, CO
     1855).           0141P).              Manitou Avenue, Manitou Springs, CO   80829.
                                           80829.
    El Paso (FEMA    Unincorporated       The Honorable Darryl Glenn,           Pikes Peak Regional           Jan. 15, 2019................       080059
     Docket No.: B-   areas of El Paso     President, El Paso County, Board of   Development Center, 2880
     1863).           County (17-08-       Commissioners, 200 South Cascade      International Circle,
                      0467P).              Avenue, Suite 100, Colorado           Colorado Springs, CO 80910.
                                           Springs, CO 80903.
Connecticut:
    New Haven (FEMA  City of New Haven    The Honorable Toni N. Harp, Mayor,    Planning Department, 165      Jan. 18, 2019................       090084
    Docket No.:       (18-01-1588P).       City of New Haven, 165 Church         Church Street, 5th Floor,
    B-1863).                               Street, New Haven, CT 06510.          New Haven, CT 06510.
    Tolland (FEMA    Town of Mansfield    Mr. Derrik M. Kennedy, Manager, Town  Town Hall, 4 South            Jan. 11, 2019................       090128
     Docket No.: B-   (18-01-0807P).       of Mansfield, 4 South Eagleville      Eagleville Road, Mansfield,
     1863).                                Road, Mansfield, CT 06268.            CT 06268.
Delaware:
    Kent (FEMA       Town of Camden (18-  The Honorable Justin T. King, Mayor,  Land Use Department, 1783     Jan. 9, 2019.................       100003
     Docket No.: B-   03-0719P).           Town of Camden, 1783 Friends Way,     Friends Way, Camden, DE
     1863).                                Camden, DE 19934.                     19934.
    Kent (FEMA       Unincorporated       The Honorable P. Brooks Banta,        Kent County Inspections and   Jan. 9, 2019.................       100001
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Kent        President and First District          Enforcement Department, 555
     1863).           County (18-03-       Commissioner, Kent County Levy        Bay Road, Dover, DE 19901.
                      0719P).              Court, 555 Bay Road, Dover, DE
                                           19901.
Florida:
    Collier (FEMA    City of Marco        The Honorable Jared Grifoni,          Building Services             Dec. 19, 2018................       120426
     Docket No.: B-   Island (18-04-       Chairman, City of Marco Island        Department, 50 Bald Eagle
     1855).           5420P).              Council, 50 Bald Eagle Drive, Marco   Drive, Marco Island, FL
                                           Island, FL 34145.                     34145.
    Lee (FEMA        City of Sanibel (18- The Honorable Kevin Ruane, Mayor,     Planning Department, 800      Dec. 19, 2018................       120402
     Docket No.: B-   04-4629P).           City of Sanibel, 800 Dunlop Road,     Dunlop Road, Sanibel, FL
     1855).                                Sanibel, FL 33957.                    33957.
    Lee (FEMA        Unincorporated       Mr. Roger Desjarlais, Manager, Lee    Lee County Building           Jan. 17, 2019................       125124
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Lee         County, 2120 Main Street, Fort        Department, 1500 Main
     1863).           County (18-04-       Myers, FL 33901.                      Street, Fort Myers, FL
                      5442P).                                                    33901.
    Monroe (FEMA     City of Marathon     The Honorable Michelle Coldiron,      Planning Department, 9805     Jan. 23, 2019................       120681
     Docket No.: B-   (18-04-5518P).       Mayor, City of Marathon, 9805         Overseas Highway, Marathon,
     1863).                                Overseas Highway, Marathon, FL        FL 33050.
                                           33050.
    Monroe (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable David Rice, Mayor,      Monroe County Building        Dec. 26, 2018................       125129
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Monroe      Monroe County Board of                Department, 2798 Overseas
     1855).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 9400 Overseas          Highway, Suite 300,
                      4989P).              Highway, Suite 210, Marathon, FL      Marathon, FL 33050.
                                           33050.
    Monroe (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable David Rice, Mayor,      Monroe County Building        Dec. 27, 2018................       125129
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Monroe      Monroe County Board of                Department, 2798 Overseas
     1855).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 9400 Overseas          Highway, Suite 300,
                      4990P).              Highway, Suite 210, Marathon, FL      Marathon, FL 33050.
                                           33050.
    Monroe (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable David Rice, Mayor,      Monroe County Building        Dec. 26, 2018................       125129
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Monroe      Monroe County Board of                Department, 2798 Overseas
     1855).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 9400 Overseas          Highway, Suite 300,
                      4991P).              Highway, Suite 210, Marathon, FL      Marathon, FL 33050.
                                           33050.
    Monroe (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable David Rice, Mayor,      Monroe County Building        Jan. 16, 2019................       125129
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Monroe      Monroe County Board of                Department, 2798 Overseas
     1863).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 9400 Overseas          Highway, Suite 300,
                      5414P).              Highway, Suite 210, Marathon, FL      Marathon, FL 33050.
                                           33050.
    Monroe (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable David Rice, Mayor,      Monroe County Building        Jan. 16, 2019................       125129
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Monroe      Monroe County Board of                Department, 2798 Overseas
     1863).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 9400 Overseas          Highway, Suite 300,
                      5417P).              Highway, Suite 210, Marathon, FL      Marathon, FL 33050.
                                           33050.

    Monroe (FEMA     Village of           The Honorable Chris Sante, Mayor,     Planning and Development      Jan. 2, 2019.................       120424
     Docket No.: B-   Islamorada (18-04-   Village of Islamorada, 86800          Department, 86800 Overseas
     1863).           5481P).              Overseas Highway, Islamorada, FL      Highway, Islamorada, FL
                                           33036.                                33036.
    Pinellas (FEMA   Unincorporated       The Honorable Kenneth T. Welch,       Pinellas County Building      Dec. 20, 2018................       125139
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Pinellas    Chairman, Pinellas County Board of    Services Department, 440
     1855).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 315 Court Street,      Court Street, Clearwater,
                      2032P).              Clearwater, FL 33756.                 FL 33756.
    Polk (FEMA       Unincorporated       The Honorable R. Todd Dantzler,       Polk County Floodplain        Jan. 24, 2019................       120261
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Polk        Chairman, Polk County Board of        Department, 330 West Church
     1863).           County (18-04-       Commissioners, 330 West Church        Street, Bartow, FL 33831.
                      1818P).              Street, Bartow, FL 33831.
Georgia: Walton      Unincorporated       The Honorable Kevin Little,           Walton County Planning and    Dec. 20, 2018................       130185
 (FEMA Docket No.:    areas of Walton      Chairman, Walton County Board of      Development Department, 303
 B-1855).             County (18-04-       Commissioners, 111 South Broad        South Hammond Drive, Suite
                      3815P).              Street, Monroe, GA 30655.             98, Monroe, GA 30655.
Louisiana:
    Iberia (FEMA     City of New Iberia   The Honorable Freddie DeCourt,        Permits and Inspections       Dec. 19, 2018................       220082
     Docket No.: B-   (18-06-0845P).       Mayor, City of New Iberia, 457 East   Department, 457 East Main
     1855).                                Main Street, Suite 300, New Iberia,   Street, Suite 412, New
                                           LA 70560.                             Iberia, LA 70560.
    Iberia (FEMA     Unincorporated       The Honorable Scott Saunier, Chief    Iberia Parish Permits,        Dec. 19, 2018................       220078
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Iberia      Administrative Officer, Iberia        Planning, Zoning and
     1855).           Parish (18-06-       Parish, 300 Iberia Street, Suite      Building Department, 715-A
                      0845P).              400, New Iberia, LA 70560.            Weldon Street, New Iberia,
                                                                                LA 70560.
Maine: Knox (FEMA    Town of Owls Head    The Honorable Thomas Von Malder,      Building Department, 224 Ash  Jan. 11, 2019................       230075
 Docket No.: B-       (18-01-1542P).       Chairman, Town of Owls Head Board     Point Drive, Owls Head, ME
 1863).                                    of Selectmen, 224 Ash Point Drive,    04854.
                                           Owls Head, ME 04854.
Massachusetts:       Town of Rockport     The Honorable Sarah J. Wilkinson,     Department of Inspection      Jan. 9, 2019.................       250100
 Essex (FEMA Docket   (18-01-1042P).       Chair, Town of Rockport Board of      Services, 34 Broadway,
 No.: B-1863).                             Selectmen, 34 Broadway, Rockport,     Rockport, MA 01966.
                                           MA 01966.
Mississippi: Warren  City of Vicksburg    The Honorable George E. Flaggs, Jr.,  Inspections Department, 819   Jan. 2, 2019.................       280176
 (FEMA Docket No.:    (18-04-5020P).       Mayor, City of Vicksburg, 1401        South Street, Vicksburg, MS
 B-1863).                                  Walnut Street, Vicksburg, MS 39180.   39180.
Nevada: Clark (FEMA  Unincorporated       The Honorable Steve Sisolak,          Clark County Public Works     Jan. 25, 2019................       320003
 Docket No.: B-       areas of Clark       Chairman, Clark County Board of       Department, 500 South Grand
 1863).               County (18-09-       Commissioners, 500 South Grand        Central Parkway, Las Vegas,
                      0813P).              Central Parkway, Las Vegas, NV        NV 89155.
                                           89155.
New Mexico:          Unincorporated       The Honorable Steven Michael          Bernalillo County Public      Jan. 14, 2019................       350001
 Bernalillo (FEMA     areas of             Quezada, Chairman, Bernalillo         Works Division, 2400
 Docket No.: B-       Bernalillo County    County Board of Commissioners, 1      Broadway Boulevard
 1863).               (18-06-2313P).       Civic Plaza Northwest, Albuquerque,   Southeast, Albuquerque, NM
                                           NM 87102.                             87102.
Pennsylvania:
    Columbia (FEMA   Town of Bloomsburg   The Honorable William Kreisher,       Town Hall, 301 East 2nd       Dec. 28, 2018................       420339
     Docket No.: B-   (18-03-0068P).       Mayor, Town of Bloomsburg, 301 East   Street, Bloomsburg, PA
     1855).                                2nd Street, Bloomsburg, PA 17815.     17815.
    Columbia (FEMA   Township of          The Honorable Roger W. Nuss,          Township Hall, 153 Old        Dec. 28, 2018................       420342
     Docket No.: B-   Catawissa (18-03-    Chairman, Township of Catawissa       Reading Road, Catawissa, PA
     1855).           0068P).              Board of Supervisors, 153 Old         17820.
                                           Reading Road, Catawissa, PA 17820.
South Carolina:
    Charleston       Town of Sullivan's   The Honorable Patrick O'Neil, Mayor,  Town Hall, 2056 Middle        Jan. 2, 2019.................       455418
     (FEMA Docket     Island (18-04-       Town of Sullivan's Island, P.O. Box   Street, Sullivan's Island,
     No.: B-1855).    5145P).              427, Sullivan's Island, SC 29482.     SC 29482.
    Charleston       Town of Sullivan's   The Honorable Patrick O'Neil, Mayor,  Town Hall, 2056 Middle        Jan. 2, 2019.................       455418
     (FEMA Docket     Island (18-04-       Town of Sullivan's Island, P.O. Box   Street, Sullivan's Island,
     No.: B-1855).    5277P).              427, Sullivan's Island, SC 29482.     SC 29482.
South Dakota:
    Minnehaha (FEMA  City of Sioux Falls  The Honorable Paul Ten Haken, Mayor,  Planning and Development      Dec. 20, 2018................       460060
     Docket No.: B-   (18-08-0836P).       City of Sioux Falls, 224 West 9th     Services Department, 231
     1855).                                Street, Sioux Falls, SD 57104.        North Dakota Avenue, Sioux
                                                                                Falls, SD 57104.
    Stanley (FEMA    City of Fort Pierre  The Honorable Gloria Hanson, Mayor,   Department of Public Works,   Jan. 25, 2019................       465419
     Docket No.: B-   (18-08-0148P).       City of Fort Pierre, P.O. Box 700,    08 East 2nd Avenue, Fort
     1863).                                Fort Pierre, SD 57532.                Pierre, SD 57532.
    Stanley (FEMA    Unincorporated       The Honorable Dana Iversen, Chair,    Stanley County Department of  Jan. 25, 2019................       460287
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Stanley     Stanley County Commission, P.O. Box   Public Works, 08 East 2nd
     1863).           County (18-08-       595, Fort Pierre, SD 57532.           Avenue, Fort Pierre, SD
                      0148P).                                                    57532.
Tennessee:           City of Johnson      The Honorable David Tomita, Mayor,    Public Works Department, 601  Jan. 2, 2019.................       475432
 Washington (FEMA     City (18-04-         City of Johnson City, P.O. Box        East Main Street, Johnson
 Docket No.: B-       4923P).              2150, Johnson City, TN 37605.         City, TN 37605.
 1855).
Texas:

    Bell (FEMA       City of Temple (18-  The Honorable Tim Davis, Mayor, City  Department of Public Works,   Jan. 9, 2019.................       480034
     Docket No.: B-   06-1765P).           of Temple, 2 North Main Street,       Engineering Division, 3210
     1863).                                Suite 103, Temple, TX 76501.          East Avenue H, Building A,
                                                                                Suite 107, Temple, TX
                                                                                76501.
    Bell (FEMA       Unincorporated       The Honorable Jon H. Burrows, Bell    Bell County Engineering       Jan. 9, 2019.................       480706
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Bell        County Judge, P.O. Box 768, Belton,   Department, 206 North Main
     1863).           County (18-06-       TX 76513.                             Street, Belton, TX 76513.
                      1765P).
    Bexar (FEMA      City of Universal    The Honorable John Williams, Mayor,   Stormwater Department, 2150   Jan. 14, 2019................       480049
     Docket No.: B-   City (18-06-         City of Universal City, 2150          Universal City Boulevard,
     1863).           1420P).              Universal City Boulevard, Universal   Universal City, TX 78148.
                                           City, TX 78148.
    Bexar (FEMA      Unincorporated       The Honorable Nelson W. Wolff, Bexar  Bexar County Public Works     Dec. 24, 2018................       480035
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Bexar       County Judge, 101 West Nueva          Department, 233 North Pecos-
     1863).           County (18-06-       Street, 10th Floor, San Antonio, TX   La Trinidad Street, Suite
                      1812P).              78205.                                420, San Antonio, TX 78207.
    Collin (FEMA     City of Allen (18-   Mr. Peter H. Vargas, Manager, City    Engineering and Traffic       Jan. 7, 2019.................       480131
     Docket No.: B-   06-1943P).           of Allen, 305 Century Parkway,        Department, 305 Century
     1863).                                Allen, TX 75013.                      Parkway, Allen, TX 75013.
    Collin (FEMA     City of Plano (18-   The Honorable Harry LaRosiliere,      Engineering Department, 1520  Jan. 18, 2019................       480140
     Docket No.: B-   06-1563P).           Mayor, City of Plano, 1520 K          K Avenue, Plano, TX 75074.
     1863).                                Avenue, Plano, TX 75074.
    Collin (FEMA     City of Plano (18-   The Honorable Harry LaRosiliere,      Engineering Department, 1520  Jan. 7, 2019.................       480140
     Docket No.: B-   06-1943P).           Mayor, City of Plano, 1520 K          K Avenue, Plano, TX 75074.
     1863).                                Avenue, Plano, TX 75074.
    Tarrant (FEMA    City of Fort Worth   The Honorable Betsy Price, Mayor,     Transportation and Public     Dec. 28, 2018................       480596
     Docket No.: B-   (18-06-1064P).       City of Fort Worth, 200 Texas         Works Department, 200 Texas
     1863).                                Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102.         Street, Fort Worth, TX
                                                                                76102.
    Tarrant (FEMA    City of Kennedale    The Honorable Brian Johnson, Mayor,   Planning and Development      Jan. 3, 2019.................       480603
     Docket No.: B-   (18-06-3137X).       City of Kennedale, 405 Municipal      Department, 405 Municipal
     1863).                                Drive, Kennedale, TX 76060.           Drive, Kennedale, TX 76060.
    Webb (FEMA       City of Laredo (17-  The Honorable Pete Saenz, Mayor,      Planning and Zoning           Jan. 14, 2019................       480651
     Docket No.: B-   06-3048P).           City of Laredo, 1110 Houston          Department, 1120 San
     1863).                                Street, 3rd Floor, Laredo, TX         Bernardo Avenue, Laredo, TX
                                           78040.                                78040.
Utah: Salt Lake      City of Draper (18-  The Honorable Troy K. Walker, Mayor,  Community Development         Dec. 26, 2018................       490244
 (FEMA Docket No.:    08-0572P).           City of Draper, 1020 East Pioneer     Department, 1020 East
 B-1855).                                  Road, Draper, UT 84020.               Pioneer Road, Draper, UT
                                                                                84020.
Virginia:            City of Roanoke (18- Mr. Robert S. Cowell, Jr., Manager,   Engineering Division, 215     Jan. 4, 2019.................       510130
 Independent City     03-1202P).           City of Roanoke, 215 Church Avenue    Church Avenue Southwest,
 (FEMA Docket No.:                         Southwest, Room 364, Roanoke, VA      Room 350, Roanoke, VA
 B-1855).                                  24011.                                24011.
Wyoming:
    Sheridan (FEMA   Town of Ranchester   The Honorable Peter Clark, Mayor,     Town Hall, 145 Coffeen        Dec. 20, 2018................       560046
     Docket No.: B-   (18-08-0451P).       Town of Ranchester, P.O. Box 695,     Street, Ranchester, WY
     1855).                                Ranchester, WY 82839.                 82839.
    Sheridan (FEMA   Unincorporated       The Honorable Mike Nickel, Chairman,  Sheridan County Public        Dec. 20, 2018................       560047
     Docket No.: B-   areas of Sheridan    Sheridan County Board of              Works, Planning and
     1855).           County (18-08-       Commissioners, 224 South Main         Engineering Department, 224
                      0451P).              Street, Suite B1, Sheridan, WY        South Main Street, Suite
                                           82801.                                B8, Sheridan, WY 82801.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-03368 Filed 2-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19676-19678]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM98-1-000]

Public Notice; Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications

    This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of
the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
    Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission
decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-
the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested
proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of
the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any
oral communication.
    Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional
file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the
proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited
communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the
decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not
be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a
proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or
contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication and may
request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and
responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant
such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any
person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record
communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the
official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with
Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
    Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional
record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a
cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR
385.2201(e) (1) (v).
    The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently
received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed
are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are
available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website 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 protected] or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Docket Nos.               File date      Presenter or requester
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prohibited:
    1. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\1\
    2. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\2\
    3. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\3\
    4. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\4\
    5. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\5\
    6. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\6\
    7. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\7\
    8. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\8\
    9. CP21-57-000...........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\9\
    10. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\10\
    11. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\11\
    12. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\12\
    13. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\13\
    14. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\14\
    15. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\15\
    16. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\16\
    17. CP21-57-000..........          3-21-2022  FERC Staff.\17\
    18. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\18\
    19. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\19\
    20. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\20\
    21. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\21\
    22. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\22\
    23. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\23\
    24. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\24\
    25. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\25\
    26. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\26\
    27. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\27\
    28. CP21-57-000..........          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\28\
    29. CP16-10-000, CP21-57-          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\29\
     000.
    30. CP16-10-000, CP21-57-          3-22-2022  FERC Staff.\30\
     000.
    31. CP15-554-000, CP15-            3-23-2022  FERC Staff.\31\
     554-004, CP15-554-005,
     CP15-554-006, CP15-554-
     007, CP15-554-009, CP15-
     555-000, CP15-555-003,
     CP15-555-004, CP15-555-
     005, CP15-555-007.
    32. CP21-57-000..........          3-23-2022  FERC Staff.\32\
    33. P-14803-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\33\
    34. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\34\
    35. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\35\
    36. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\36\
    37. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\37\
    38. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\38\
    39. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\39\
    40. CP21-57-000..........          3-24-2022  FERC Staff.\40\
    41. CP21-57-000..........          3-25-2022  FERC Staff.\41\
    42. CP21-57-000..........          3-25-2022  FERC Staff.\42\
    43. CP21-57-000..........          3-28-2022  FERC Staff.\43\
    44. CP21-57-000..........          3-28-2022  FERC Staff.\44\
    45. CP21-57-000..........          3-28-2022  FERC Staff.\45\
Exempt:
    None.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Emailed comments dated 3/19/22 from Colleen Wysser-Martin.
\2\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Osh Morethstorm.
\3\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Sandra Couch.
\4\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Virgene Link-New.
\5\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Elizabeth Struthers Malbon.
\6\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Peter Curtis.
\7\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from G Weshinskey.
\8\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Osh Morethstorm.
\9\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Sandra Couch.
\10\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Virgene Link-New.
\11\ Emailed comments dated 3/19/22 from Colleen Wysser-Martin.
\12\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Peter Curtis.
\13\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Linda Greene.
\14\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Sharon Paltin.
\15\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Elizabeth Struthers Malbon.
\16\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Buff Grace.
\17\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Matt Anderson.
\18\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Debby Bolen.
\19\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Sheila Mazar.
\20\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Shelia Mazar.
\21\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Matt Anderson.
\22\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Buff Grace.
\23\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Debby Bolen.
\24\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Linda Greene.
\25\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Matt Anderson.
\26\ Emailed comments dated 3/21/22 from Sharon Patlin.

\27\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Joan Bowers.
\28\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Joan Bowers.
\29\ Emailed comments dated 3/15/22 from Steve Legge.
\30\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Sid and Susan Madison.
\31\ Memorandum regarding ex parte communications from July 17, 2020
  with Marvin Lewis and Ted Glick.
\32\ Emailed comments dated 3/23/22 from Padma Dyvine.
\33\ Emailed comments dated 3/23/22 from David Everist.
\34\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Joan Bowers.
\35\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Sid and Susan Madison.
\36\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Jennifer Valentine.
\37\ Emailed comments dated 3/22/22 from Colleen Wysser-Martin.
\38\ Emailed comments dated 3/23/22 from Padma Dyvine.
\39\ Emailed comments dated 3/24/22 from Colleen Wysser-Martin.
\40\ Emailed comments dated 3/24/22 from Colleen Wysser-Martin.
\41\ Emailed comments dated 3/24/22 from Colleen Wysser-Martin.
\42\ Emailed comments dated 3/25/22 from Vince.
\43\ Emailed comments dated 3/27/22 from Ann Dorsey.
\44\ Emailed comments dated 3/24/22 from an individual.
\45\ Emailed comments dated 3/27/22 from Ann Dorsey.

    Dated: March 30, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-07130 Filed 4-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P