[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 157 (Friday, August 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 48854]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20084]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9022-4]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-
7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements.
Filed 08/03/2015 Through 08/07/2015.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20150215, Revised Draft, USFS, SC, Francis Marion Forest Plan
Revision, Comment Period Ends: 11/11/2015, Contact: Mary Morrison 803-
561-4058.
EIS No. 20150216, Final, USFS, UT, Monroe Mountain Aspen Ecosystems
Restoration Project, Review Period Ends: 10/05/2015, Contact: Jason
Kling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150217, Draft, RUS, PR, Arecibo Waste-to-Energy and Resource
Recovery Project, Comment Period Ends: 09/28/2015, Contact: Lauren
McGee Rayburn<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150218, Draft, FERC, OR, Oregon Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
and Washington Expansion Projects, Comment Period Ends: 10/06/2015,
Contact: Medha Kochhar<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150219, Final, NRC, NH, NUREG-1437, Generic--License Renewal
of Nuclear Plants Supplement 46 Regarding Seabrook Station, Review
Period Ends: 09/14/2015, Contact: Lois M. James<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150220, Final, FHWA, ID, US-95 Thorncreek Road to Moscow,
Review Period Ends: 09/14/2015, Contact: Kyle P. Holman<PHONE_NUMBER>
ext.127.
EIS No. 20150221, Draft, BLM, NV, Bald Mountain Mine North and South
Operations Area Projects, Comment Period Ends: 09/28/2015, Contact:
Miles Kreidler<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150222, Final, BR, CA, Shasta Lake Water Resources
Investigation, Review Period Ends: 09/14/2015, Contact: Katrina Chow
916-978-5067.
EIS No. 20150223, Final, USFS, OR, Goose Project, Review Period Ends:
10/01/2015, Contact: Elysia Retzlaff<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150224, Final, USFS, CO, Breckenridge Multi-Season Recreation
Projects, Review Period Ends: 09/28/2015, Contact: Roger Poirier 970-
945-3245.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20150109, Draft, STB, MT, Tongue River Railroad, Comment Period
Ends: 09/23/2015, Contact: Ken Blodgett 1-866-622-4355: Revision to FR
Notice Published 07/10/2015; Extending Comment Period from 08/24/2015
to 09/23/2015.

    Dated: August 11, 2015.
Karin Leff,
Acting Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal
Activities.
[FR Doc. 2015-20084 Filed 8-13-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 244)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 72250-72251]
[DOCID:fr20de07-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2007-0149]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Elizabeth River--Eastern
Branch, at Norfolk VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District, has approved a
temporary deviation from the regulations governing the operation of the
Norfolk Southern Railroad (NS V2.8) Bridge, at mile 2.7,
across the Elizabeth River--Eastern Branch at Norfolk, VA. This
deviation allows the drawbridge to remain closed-to-navigation
beginning at 7 a.m. on Monday, December 10, 2007, until and including 6
p.m. on Friday, December 21, 2007, and from 7 a.m. on Monday, January
21, 2008, until and including 6 p.m. on Sunday, February 3, 2008, to
facilitate rehabilitation of the operating machinery of the swing span.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on December 10, 2007 to
6 p.m. on February 3, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Materials referred to in this document are available for
inspection or copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District,
Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704-
5004 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Commander (dpb),
Fifth Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this
temporary deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill H. Brazier, Bridge Management
Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NS V2.8 Bridge, a swing-type
drawbridge, has a vertical clearance in the closed position to vessels
of six feet, above mean high water.
    Norfolk Southern Railways, the bridge owner, has requested a
temporary deviation from the current operating regulations set out in
33 CFR Part 117.1007(a).
    To facilitate the repairs to the operating machinery, the
NS V2.8 Bridge will be maintained in the closed-to-navigation
position beginning at 7 a.m. on Monday, December 10, 2007, until and
including 6 p.m. on Friday, December 21, 2007 and from 7 a.m. on
Monday, January 21, 2008 until and including 6 p.m. on Sunday, February
3, 2008.
    The Coast Guard has informed the known users of the waterway of the
closure periods for the bridge so that these vessels can arrange their
transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: December 7, 2007.
Waverly W. Gregory, Jr.,
Chief, Bridge Administration Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District.
 [FR Doc. E7-24740 Filed 12-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register: July 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 34769-34770]
[DOCID:fr17jy09-84]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1845-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

Arkansas; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1845-DR), dated June 16, 2009, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 23, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-
3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this disaster is closed effective May 23, 2009.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E9-17040 Filed 7-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 855-858]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31845]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2016-N-4487]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Consumer and Healthcare Professional Identification of
and Responses to Deceptive Prescription Drug Promotion

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice solicits comments on research entitled, ``Consumer and
Healthcare Professional Identification of and Responses to Deceptive
Prescription Drug Promotion.''

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by March 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2016-N-4487 for ``Consumer and Healthcare Professional
Identification of and Responses to Deceptive Prescription Drug
Promotion.'' Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except
for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable
at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available,
you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body
of your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North 10A12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information before
submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this
requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Consumer and Healthcare Professional Identification of and Responses to
Deceptive Prescription Drug Promotion--OMB Control Number 0910--NEW

    Section 1701(a)(4) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300u(a)(4)) authorizes the FDA to

conduct research relating to health information. Section 1003(d)(2)(C)
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C.
393(b)(2)(c)) authorizes FDA to conduct research relating to drugs and
other FDA regulated products in carrying out the provisions of the FD&C
Act.
    Prescription drug promotion sometimes includes false or misleading
(i.e., deceptive \1\) claims, images, or other presentations; for
instance, representations that a drug is more effective or less risky
than is demonstrated by appropriate evidence. A number of empirical
studies have examined the occurrence and influence of deceptive
promotion, both in regard to prescription drugs (Ref. 1 and 2) and
other products (Ref. 3 and 4). No research to our knowledge, however,
has investigated the ability of consumers and healthcare professionals
(HCPs) to independently identify deceptive prescription drug promotion.
The ability to identify such promotion has important public health
implications. If unable to identify deceptive promotion, consumers may
ask their HCPs to prescribe specific drugs that they would not
otherwise request. Likewise, HCPs unable to identify deceptive
promotion may prescribe specific drugs that they would not otherwise
prescribe. In the case that consumers and HCPs are able to identify
deceptive promotion, then they may instead be equipped to incorporate
such information into their medication decisions, and perhaps even
report deceptive promotion to appropriate government regulators who can
take corrective action. The FDA Bad Ad program, for example, encourages
HCPs to report deceptive prescription drug promotion (Ref. 5), a goal
which requires that HCPs successfully identify such promotion when it
appears in the course of their duties. Likewise, similar programs could
be implemented for consumers to report deceptive prescription drug
promotion to FDA. Reports of deceptive promotion are useful to FDA
because they allow investigators to focus their efforts in an era where
the amount of promotion far exceeds the resources available to monitor
everything.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Our use of the term deceptive is not meant to imply
equivalence (or lack thereof) with use of the same term by the U.S.
Federal Trade Commission. As defined in this document, we use this
term to refer to presentations that are considered false or
misleading within the context of prescription drug promotion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed project involves two studies examining participants'
ability to detect and report deceptive (i.e., false or misleading)
presentations in prescription drug promotion. The studies will be
conducted concurrently and will focus on different health conditions.
Each study will be administered to two separate populations (i.e., HCPs
and consumers affected by the condition). HCPs will view mock
pharmaceutical Web sites targeted toward physicians and consumers will
view mock consumer-targeted pharmaceutical Web sites. The goal will be
to keep the HCP and consumer-targeted Web sites as similar as possible,
but to include content that is appropriate for the target audience. For
example, HCP Web sites may contain more statistical information or
medical terminology. A professional firm will create all mock Web sites
such that they are indistinguishable from currently available
prescription drug Web sites.
    Study 1 and 2 Sample. Study 1 will sample consumers diagnosed with
chronic pain that has lasted at least 3 months. Chronic pain has an
incidence rate of roughly 11 percent (Ref. 6). Study 2 will sample
consumers diagnosed with obesity, defined as body mass index greater
than or equal to 30 (35 percent incidence; Ref. 7). The HCP samples for
both studies will include physicians whose primary medical specialty is
either primary care or internal medicine and whose responsibilities
involve direct patient care at least 50 percent of the time. For both
consumers and HCPs, pretest participants will not be eligible for the
main study.
    Pretesting. Pretesting will take place before the main studies to
evaluate the procedures and measures used in the main studies. Each of
the two pretests will have the same design as its respective main study
(pretest 1 for Study 1 and pretest 2 for Study 2). The purpose of both
pretests will be to: (1) Ensure that the mock Web sites are
understandable, viewable, and delivering intended messages; (2)
identify and eliminate any challenges to embedding the mock Web sites
within the online survey; (3) ensure that survey questions are
appropriate and meet the analytical goals of the research; and (4)
pilot test the methods, including examining response rates and timing
of survey. The two pretests will be conducted simultaneously. Based on
pretest findings, we will refine the mock Web sites, survey questions,
and data collection process, as necessary, to optimize the full-scale
study conditions.
    Main Studies. The proposed design for the main studies, including
sample sizes, is summarized below and described next.

                      Study 1--Degree of Deception Based on the Number of Deceptive Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Experimental condition
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                   Population                                          Fewer           More
                                                  None (control)    violations      violations         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HCPs............................................             125             125             125             375
Consumers w/chronic pain........................             125             125             125             375
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Study 2--Type of Deception Based on Implicit and Explicit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Experimental condition
                   Population                    ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  None (control)     Implicit        Explicit          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HCPs............................................             125             125             125             375
Obese consumers.................................             125             125             125             375
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of Study 1 is to assess consumer and HCP response to
promotional Web sites with varying levels of false or misleading
presentations. In Study 1, degree of deception will be manipulated over
three levels by altering the number of deceptive claims (none, fewer,
more). It is possible that consumers and HCPs are only able to identify
ads as deceptive when they include a greater number of violations,
whereas ads with few violations may not be identified as deceptive. The
experimental stimuli will be in the form of a Web page for a fictitious
drug targeted toward consumers who have chronic pain or toward HCPs.
The deceptive Web sites will contain various types of violations. The
Web site with fewer violations will contain a subset of the deceptive
claims, imagery, or other presentations included in the Web site with
more violations. For example, if the fewer-violations Web site includes
two violations, then the more-violations Web site will include the same
two violations plus two or three additional violations (in the form of
claims and/or graphics).
    Study 1 will help FDA address several key questions:
     What proportion of consumers and HCPs correctly identify a
promotional piece as deceptive? Does the ability to identify deceptive
promotion vary depending on the number of deceptive claims in a
promotional piece?
     Does the degree of deception affect consumers' and HCPs'
attitudes and behavioral intentions toward the promoted drug, including
intended reporting to regulatory authorities?
     Is the effect of deceptive promotional pieces mediated by
a person's ability to identify a promotional piece as deceptive (that
is, do people who recognize a piece as deceptive discount the
information in the piece, thereby adjusting their attitudes and
intentions toward the product)?
    Whereas Study 1 focused on the level of deception (based solely on
the number of false or misleading claims), Study 2 focuses on the type
of deception (implicit versus explicit). Many deceptive promotional
claims are implicit rather than being explicitly false (Ref. 1 and 4).
An implicit claim suggests or implies an unstated piece of information.
An explicit claim fully and clearly expresses information and leaves
nothing to be implied. Study 2 will compare perceptions and beliefs
that consumers and HCPs hold about a drug following exposure to one of
three versions of a prescription drug Web site: (1) An explicitly false
Web site, (2) a factually true but implicitly misleading Web site, or
(3) a Web site with no deceptive claims (the control group).
    As with Study 1, we envision a pair of one-way factorial
experiments, one conducted with a sample of consumers and the other
with HCPs. Similar to Study 1, Study 2 will investigate how misleading
implicit claims and explicitly false claims in prescription drug
promotional pieces influence a person's ability to detect and respond
appropriately to deception. The experimental stimuli will be in the
form of a mockup of a pharmaceutical Web site targeted toward the
relevant experimental population, obese consumers or HCPs who treat
obese patients. The drug profile, including indication, risks, and logo
branding will be fictitious. For the implicit misleading claim
manipulations, we are interested in whether people infer false beliefs
from the implicit communications.
    Study 2 will help FDA address several key questions:
     What proportion of consumers and HCPs correctly identify a
promotional piece as deceptive? Does the ability to identify deceptive
promotion vary depending on whether deceptive claims in a promotional
piece are explicit versus implicit?
     Does the type of deception affect consumers' and HCPs'
attitudes and behavioral intentions toward the promoted drug, including
intended reporting to regulatory authorities?
     Is the effect of deceptive promotional pieces mediated by
a person's ability to identify a promotional piece as deceptive (that
is, do people who recognize a piece as deceptive discount the
information in the piece, thereby adjusting their attitudes and
intentions toward the product)?
    Measurement. Identifying how to measure consumers' and HCPs'
ability to identify deceptive promotion as well as their reaction to
such promotion is fundamental to achieving the research goals. A
literature review revealed the importance of using a variety of
measures to capture detection of deception. For direct measures, we
will incorporate questions that ask participants to indicate whether
there was any deception in the promotional piece and to rate the
promotional piece in terms of how deceptive, credible, or trustworthy
it was. Additionally, we will include claim-specific direct measures
that allow people to click on any part of the Web site that they deem
deceptive. Using responses to this variable, we can assess whether
participants think there is any deception in a promotional piece; in
instances where they do think there is deception, we can assess what
aspects of the Web site contributed to that belief. We will also
include indirect measures that identify whether participants believed
the Web site expressed particular claims (e.g., claim recognition) as
well as participants' beliefs about the veracity of any deceptive
claims (e.g., claim truth, agreement, or acceptance). Moreover, we will
assess whether participants believe the messages merit reporting to
regulatory authorities (that is, FDA). To examine differences between
experimental conditions, we will conduct inferential statistical tests
such as analysis of variance. A copy of the draft questionnaire is
available upon request.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Number of
             Activity                     Number of respondents         responses per   Total annual      Average burden per response       Total hours
                                                                         respondent       responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot study screener completes....  4,286 (chronic pain).............               1           5,612  0.03 (2 minutes).................             187
                                    714 (obesity)
                                    612 (HCP)
                                   -----------------------------------
                                    5,612 total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Main study screener completes.....  10,714 (chronic pain)............               1          14,031  0.03 (2 minutes).................             468
                                    1,786 (obesity)
                                    1,531 (HCP)
                                   -----------------------------------

                                    14,031 total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilot study completes.............  150 (chronic pain)...............               1             600  0.33 (20 minutes)................             200
                                    150 (obesity)
                                    300 (HCP)
                                   -----------------------------------
                                    600 total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Main study completes..............  375 (chronic pain)...............               1           1,500  0.33 (20 minutes)................             500
                                    375 (obesity)
                                    750 (HCP)
                                   -----------------------------------
                                    1,500 total
                                   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.........................  .................................  ..............  ..............  .................................           1,355
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

References

    The following references are on display in the Division of Dockets
Management (see ADDRESSES) and are available for viewing by interested
persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; they are also
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. FDA has
verified the Web site addresses, as of the date this document publishes
in the Federal Register, but Web sites are subject to change over time.

1. Faerber, A.E. and D.H. Kreling. ``Content Analysis of False and
Misleading Claims in Television Advertising for Prescription and
Nonprescription Drugs.'' Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2014.
29(1): 110-118.
2. Symonds, T., C. Hackford, and L. Abraham. ``A Review of FDA
Warning Letters and Notices of Violation Issued for Patient-Reported
Outcomes Promotional Claims Between 2006 and 2012.'' Value in
Health, 2014. 17: 433-437.
3. Mitra, A., M.A. Raymond, and C.D. Hopkins. ``Can Consumers
Recognize Misleading Advertising Content in a Media Rich Online
Environment?'' Psychology & Marketing, 2008. 25(7): 655-674.
4. Hastak, M., and M.B. Mazis. ``Deception by Implication: A
Typology of Truthful but Misleading Advertising and Labeling
Claims.'' Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 2011. 30(2): 157-
167.
5. O'Donoghue, A.C., V. Boudewyns, K.J. Aikin, E. Geisen, et al.
``Awareness of the FDA's Bad Ad Program and Education Regarding
Pharmaceutical Advertising: A National Survey of Prescribers in
Ambulatory Care Settings.'' Journal of Health Communication, 2015.
20: 1330-1336.
6. Nahin, R.L. ``Estimates of Pain Prevalence and Severity in
Adults: United States, 2012.'' Journal of Pain, 2015. 16(8): 769-
780.
7. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics
(2015). ``Healthy Weight, Overweight, and Obesity Among Adults Aged
20 and Over, By Selected Characteristics: United States, Selected
Years 1988-1994 hrough 2009-2012 [Table].'' In Health, United
States, 2014 with special feature on adults aged 55-64 (pp. 214-220;
DHHS Publication No. 2015-1232). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus14.pdf.

    Dated: December 27, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-31845 Filed 1-3-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


                 United States Environmental Protection Agency                                                              Docket Index for Proposed Rulemaking                              EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0059                                         Air Plan Limited Approval and Limited Disapproval; California; Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District                                  February 2023

Note: Copies of the Federal Register (FR) notices listed in Section D are included in the docket only if they are not publicly accessible in an electronic format. Please follow the hyperlink link provided for all other FR notices; or visit: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR.                                         Index No. Document Title Date A State Implementation Plan Submittal Documents A-01 California Air Resources Board, Submittal Letter to U.S. EPA Concerning 2[nd] Quarter 2018 District Rules Package for California State Implementation Plan 8/17/2018 A-02 California Air Resources Board, Rules that were amended by the following Air Quality Management and Air Pollution Control Districts and are submitted as revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, "Enclosure A to Executive Order S-18-010" 8/17/2018 A-03 California Air Resources Board, Submittal of the 2[nd] Quarter 2018 District Rules Package, "Executive Order S-18-010" 8/17/2018 A-04 Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District, Resolution No. 2018-002-03, "ADOPTION OF AMENDED RULE 425.3, PORTLAND CEMENT KILNS (OXIDES OF NITROGEN) OF THE EASTERN KERN AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT" 3/8/2018 A-05 Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District, Eastern Kern SIP Package Rule 425.3 5/2/2018 A-06 Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District, Eastern Kern Rule 425.3, "Portland Cement Kilns (Oxides of Nitrogen)" 3/8/18

B Supporting Material and Other Documents B-01 EPA Region IX, EPA's Technical Support Document for Eastern Kern Rule 425.3 2/2023 B-02 EPA Region IX, Eastern Kern Rule 425.3 Completeness Checklist 11/8/2018 B-03 EPA Region IX, Completeness Letter to CARB 2/11/2019 B-04 Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District, "Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) For The 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)" 5/11/2017 B-05 EPA Region IX, Eastern Kern 2008 ozone NAAQS TSD 07/2021 B-06 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Assessment of NOX Emissions Reduction Strategies For Cement Kilns  -  Ellis County 7/14/2006 B-07 EPA Region IX, Alternative Cement Kiln NOX limits.xlsx (spreadsheet) 2/2023

C EPA Guidance Documents, Policies, and Rulemakings C-01 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations" ("the Bluebook") 5/25/1988 C-02 EPA Region IX, "Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies" ("the Little Bluebook") 8/21/2001 C-03 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Alternative Control Techniques Document - NOX Control Technologies for the Cement Industry: Final Report, EPA-457/R-00-002 9/2000 C-04 EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Alternative Control Techniques Document - NOX Emissions From Cement Manufacturing, EPA-453/R-94-004 3/1994 C-05 Guidance Memorandum dated October 9, 2020, from Andrew R. Wheeler, Administrator, to Regional Administrators 1-10, Subject: "Inclusion of Provisions Governing Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State Implementation Plans" 10/9/2020 C-06 Guidance Memorandum dated September 30, 2021, from Janet McCabe, Deputy Administrator, to Regional Administrators, Subject: "Withdrawal of the October 9, 2020, Memorandum Addressing Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State Implementation Plans and Implementation of the Prior Policy" 9/30/2021


[Federal Register: December 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 250)]
[Notices]
[Page 79877]
[DOCID:fr30de08-82]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL09-19-000]

Southern California Edison Company; Notice of Institution of
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

December 19, 2008.
    On December 19, 2008, the Commission issued an order that
instituted a proceeding in Docket No. EL09-19-000, pursuant to section
206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2005), to consider
the justness and reasonableness of Southern California Edison Company's
proposed rate reduction and whether a further decrease in rates may be
warranted. Southern California Edison Co., 125 FERC ] 61,329 (2008).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL09-19-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-30925 Filed 12-29-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 240 (Monday, December 14, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 80594-80595]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27337]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0735; Airspace Docket No. 19-ANE-8]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment and Revocation of Air Traffic Service (ATS) Routes in
the Vicinity of Lebanon, NH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal
airways V-141, and V-542, and revokes airways V-151 and V-496, due to
the planned decommissioning of the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME navigation aid
which provides navigation guidance for segments of the routes. The
Lebanon VOR/DME is planned for decommissioning as part of the FAA's VOR
Minimum Operational Network (VOR MON) program.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, February 25, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace
System.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2020-0735 in the Federal Register (85 FR 49327; August 13, 2020),
amending VOR Federal airways V-141, and V-542, and removing VOR Federal
airways V-151 and V-496 in the vicinity of Lebanon, NH. The proposed
amendment and revocation actions were due to the planned
decommissioning of the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal. No comments were received.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
7400.11E dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The VOR Federal airways
listed in this document will be subsequently published in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by amending VOR Federal airways V-141 and V-542, and removing
airways V-151 and V-496, due to the planned decommissioning of the
Lebanon, NH VOR/DME. An Area Navigation (RNAV) waypoint (WP) is being
developed to be charted in the vicinity of the Lebanon VOR/DME
location. The changes are described below.
    V-141: V-141 currently consists of two parts: first, extending
between the Nantucket, MA, VOR/DME and the Boston, MA, VOR/DME; and
second, extending between the Manchester, NH, VOR/DME and the Massena,
NY, VORTAC. This action removes the part between Manchester, NH, and
Massena, NY. As amended, V-141 extends between Nantucket, MA, and
Boston, MA.
    V-151: V-151 currently extends between the intersection of the
Nantucket, MA, VOR/DME 334[deg], and the Providence, RI, VOR/DME
079[deg]

radials, and the Burlington, VT, VOR/DME. This action removes the
entire route. A low altitude RNAV route is being developed to replace
V-151.
    V-496: V-496 currently extends between the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME,
and the Kennebunk, ME, VOR/DME. This action removes the entire route.
    V-542: V-542 currently extends between the Elmira, NY, VOR/DME, and
the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME. This action removes the route segments of V-
542 that extend between the Rockdale, NY, VOR/DME, and the Lebanon, NH,
VOR/DME. As amended, V-542 extends between Elmira, NY, and Rockdale,
NY.
    The NAVAID radials in the description of V-141, below, are
unchanged and are stated in True degrees.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of amending VOR Federal
airways V-141, and V-542, and revoking airways V-151 and V-496, due to
the planned decommissioning of the Lebanon, NH, VOR/DME navigation aid,
qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see
14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this action
is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental
impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for
factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded
action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further
analysis. The FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-141 [Amended]

    From Nantucket, MA; INT Nantucket 334[deg] and Boston, MA,
138[deg] radials; to Boston.
* * * * *

V-151 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-496 [Removed]

* * * * *

V-542 [Amended]

    From Elmira, NY; Binghamton, NY; to Rockdale, NY.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 8, 2020.
George Gonzalez,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2020-27337 Filed 12-11-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33460-33461]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11744]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0015]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Grand Canal, Indian Harbour
Beach, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that
governs the Lansing Island Bridge across Grand Canal, mile 0.7 at
Indian Harbour Beach, FL. A request was made to the Coast Guard to
allow the drawbridge to remain closed to navigation and untended during
the overnight hours due to a lack of requested openings. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and relate material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before July 5, 2022.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0015 using Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Ms. Jennifer Zercher, Bridge Management Specialist,
Seventh Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
FL Florida

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The Lansing Island Bridge across Grand Canal, mile 0.7, at Indian
Harbour Beach, FL is a single-leaf bascule bridge with a 16 foot
vertical clearance at mean high water in the closed position. The
normal operating schedule for the bridge is set forth in 33 CFR
117.285(a). Navigation on the waterway consists mainly of recreational
mariners.
    The bridge owner, Lansing Island Homeowners Association, Inc.
requested the Coast Guard consider allowing the drawbridge to remain
closed to navigation and untended during the overnight hours due to a
lack of requested openings. We requested a copy of the bridge logs from
January 1, 2021 through November 30, 2021. After reviewing the logs,
the Coast Guard found the drawbridge provided three openings between
the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Two channels provide alternate access
to Grand Canal. Vessels that can pass beneath the bridge without an
opening may do so at any time.
    On February 1, 2022, the Coast Guard published a Test Deviation
entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Grand Canal, Indian Harbour
Beach, FL in the Federal Register (87 FR 5401). Zero comments received.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule will allow the drawbridge to remain closed to
navigation and untended during the overnight hours seven days a week.
Two channels provide alternate access to Grand Canal.
    This proposed change would still allow vessels that are capable of
transiting under the bridge, without an opening, to do so at any time.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes and Executive Orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels capable of transiting under the bridge, without an opening, may
do so at any time and alternate routes for vessels to transit Grand
Canal are available.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A
above this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact
on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect 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. We have
analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and have determined that
it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and
preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f). The
Coast Guard has determined that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule promulgates the
operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges. Normally such
actions are categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph
L49, of Chapter 3, Table 3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0015 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If your material cannot be submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published of any posting or updates to the docket.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; DHS Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.285 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.285  Grand Canal.

    (a) The draw of the Lansing Island Bridge, mile 0.7, at Indian
Harbour Beach, shall open on signal, except that from 10 p.m. to 6
a.m., daily, the draw need not open for the passage of vessels and will
be untended.
* * * * *

    Dated: May 25, 2022.
Brendan C. McPherson,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander Coast Guard Seventh District.
[FR Doc. 2022-11744 Filed 6-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 13843]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06082]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14649-000]

Mid-Atlantic Hydro, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On December 1, 2014, Mid-Atlantic Hydro, LLC filed an application
for a preliminary permit under section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
proposing to study the feasibility of the proposed Ellis Hydroelectric
Project No. 14649-000, to be located at the existing Ellis Lock and Dam
on the Muskingum River, near the township of Ellis, in Muskingum
County, Ohio. The Ellis Lock and Dam is owned and operated by the state
of Ohio. There are no federal lands associated with the project. The
sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) The existing 340-foot-
long by 15.3-foot-high Ellis Dam spillway and 352-acre reservoir with a
normal elevation of 690 feet mean sea level; (2) five new 500-kilowatt
Very Low Head 4000 submersible turbine-generator units with a combined
capacity of 2.5 megawatts; (3) a new 40-foot-long by 20-foot-wide
switchyard containing a three phase step-up transformer, protective
equipment, and metering equipment; (4) a new 150-foot-long, 12.5 to
34.5 kilovolt, overhead transmission line that would connect to an
existing local utility distribution system; and (5) appurtenant
facilities. The project would have an estimated annual generation of
9,500 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. John Collins, 5425 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite
600, Chevy Chase, MD 20815,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Tyrone A. Williams,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
Please file comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14649-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14649) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 11, 2015.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06082 Filed 3-16-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 56762-56764]
[DOCID:fr28se05-208]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52472; File No. SR-PCX-2005-73]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Pacific Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to
the Establishment of a Portfolio Crossing Service

September 20, 2005.
    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 June 7, 2005, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. (``PCX'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the PCX. On September 14, 2005, the PCX
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The PCX, through its wholly-owned subsidiary PCX Equities, Inc.
(``PCXE''), proposes to amend its rules governing the Archipelago
Exchange (``ArcaEx''), the equities trading facility of PCXE. With this
filing, the Exchange proposes to establish a new transaction and trade
reporting mechanism for Equity Trading Permit Holders (``ETP Holders'')
to allow the execution and reporting of portfolio trades in equity
securities.
    The text of the proposed rule change, as amended, is available on
PCX's Web site (http://www.pacificex.com), at the PCX's principal

office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    As part of its continuing efforts to enhance participation on the
ArcaEx facility, the PCX is proposing to implement a new Portfolio
Crossing Service (``PCS'') which would allow ETP Holders \4\ to execute
and report portfolio trading activity conducted as principal in equity
securities. The proposed rule change would provide a new forum for
trade execution and reporting within ArcaEx. In order to use PCS, ETP
Holders would input a basket of individual cross orders each with a
basket number identifier tying it to the other orders in the basket.
These baskets of individual cross orders would not interact with orders
residing in the ArcaEx facility. Further, each side of an individual
coupled order in a basket entered into PCS would execute without regard
to the priority of other orders entered into PCS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See PCXE Rule 1.1(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A. Submitting Orders into PCS. 1. Timing of Submission. ETP Holders
would be able to submit eligible cross orders in equity securities into
PCS at any time trading occurs on the Exchange (currently, 1 a.m.
Pacific Time to 5 p.m. Pacific Time). However, as described more fully
below, these orders would be held by ArcaEx and would not execute until
at least one minute after the close of trading on the Exchange, i.e.,
5:01 p.m. Pacific Time. If an ETP Holder attempted to submit orders
into PCS outside of the time period described above, the submission
would be rejected. ETP Holders would be able to cancel any basket of
orders entered into PCS at any time before 5 p.m. Pacific Time.
    2. Orders Eligible for Submission. Orders would be eligible for
submission to PCS only if they are part of a qualifying portfolio
basket trade. To be eligible for PCS, orders must be part of a basket
of individual cross orders \5\ comprised of at least 15 securities and
with a total market value of at least $1,000,000. All symbols eligible
for trading on ArcaEx would be eligible for trading on PCS. A basket of
orders which meets the standards above, as described in proposed in
Rule 7.65, is referred to as a ``PCS Order.'' Each individual component
of a PCS Order must be appended with a basket number identifier tying
it to the other order components of the PCS Order. This identifier
would be used to distinguish the individual components of any PCS Order
from a Rule 7.31(s) Cross Order destined for ArcaEx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ PCXE Rule 7.31(s) defines the Cross Order type with respect
to trading on ArcaEx. Proposed rule 7.31(ii) establishes the new
``PCS Order.'' Each individual component of a PCS Order would
closely resemble the Cross Order type used for trading in ArcaEx
with respect to the mechanics for order entry. However, the
individual coupled orders which are part of a PCS Order basket would
also possess a unique basket number identifying the component as
part of a PCS Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    B. Execution of Orders in PCS. As discussed above, ETP Holders may
enter PCS Orders at any time during the Exchange's trading day.\6\ When
the Exchange receives a PCS Order, it would hold such order until the
end of trading, currently 5 p.m. Pacific Time. All PCS Orders received
during any particular trading day would be executed simultaneously in
PCS at least one minute after the close of trading on the Exchange but
in no event later than 8:59 p.m. Pacific Time. Each individual order
component of a PCS Order would not interact with other PCS Orders or
other orders residing in the Arca book \7\ in any way. As set forth in
the proposed rules, PCS would not be subject to many trading rules
applicable to normal trading on ArcaEx.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The New York Stock Exchange's (``NYSE'') Crossing Session II
is another after hours session which allows member firms the ability
to cross program trades. NYSE's Crossing Session II, however, does
not accept orders until after the close of regular trading.
    \7\ See PCXE Rule 1.1(a).
    \8\ For example, because executions in PCS would occur after 8
p.m. ET but before 8 a.m. ET, PCS trades would not be subject to
short sale price tests under the SEC's pilot program. See Securities
Exchange Act Release Nos. 50104 (July 28, 2004), 69 FR 48032 (August
6, 2004); and 50747 (November 29, 2004), 69 FR 70480 (December 6,
2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Trading halts occurring during the normal market hours in one or
more individual stocks would not affect the execution of PCS Orders.
However, if there is a market-wide halt in a symbol (e.g., a halt
initiated pursuant to PCXE circuit breaker rules) that is still in
effect at 1 p.m. Pacific Time, the Exchange would halt trading in such
symbol through its PCS.
    C. Trade Reporting in PCS. The Exchange would handle trade
reporting for PCS executions in one of two different ways, depending on
whether a particular PCS component execution involved exchange-listed
or Nasdaq securities. With respect to exchange listed securities, the
Exchange would not disseminate last sale reports in the individual
exchange-listed stocks that comprise the component order executions in
PCS. Instead, PCS executions in exchange-listed securities would be
transmitted to SIAC for publication on the ``tape'' on an aggregate
basis.\9\ The system would calculate the total shares and total dollar
amounts of all exchange-listed symbols executed in PCS in any
particular trading day. The Exchange would then transmit this total as
an administrative message over the high speed line to SIAC. The
Exchange would not consolidate the exchange-listed volume attributable
to PCS with the volume in those securities occurring in the non-PCS
trading session occurring on ArcaEx. With respect to Nasdaq-listed
securities, the Exchange would report symbols individually to Nasdaq as
regular transactions as of the following morning.\10\ This reporting
procedure mirrors the current ArcaEx trade reporting practice for
Nasdaq trades occurring after 3:30 p.m. Pacific Time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Securities Industry Automation Corporation (``SIAC'') is
the information processor for exchange-listed securities. ArcaEx
would coordinate with SIAC to ensure it would be able to receive
messages from ArcaEx reflecting aggregate PCS executions.
    \10\ Nasdaq is the securities information processor for Nasdaq-
listed securities. Section 11 of the Nasdaq Unlisted Trading
Privileges Plan deals with trade reporting for Nasdaq securities
after 6:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All PCS executions, whether exchange-listed or Nasdaq securities,
will be ``covered sales'' occurring on the Exchange for the purposes of
Section 31 of the Act. The Exchange will report PCS activity to the
Commission in Part II of Form R31.
    D. Commission Approval of Similar SRO Trading Sessions. In the
past, the Commission has approved the creation of crossing sessions
operated by other self-regulatory organizations which provide for
alternative execution and reporting services for exchange member
portfolio trades.\11\ For example, the

NYSE has operated its Crossing Session II, which allows for the
execution and reporting of crosses of multiple-stock aggregate-price
buy and sell orders, for over thirteen years.\12\ In the Commission's
NYSE CS II Approval Order, the Commission explained its rationale for
approving the NYSE's proposed rules: ``the Commission believes that CS
II would benefit the investing public by offering members the
opportunity to enter crossing portfolio orders with their customers
after-hours to be executed against each other.'' \13\ In the NYSE CS II
Approval Order, the Commission invited other exchanges to offer similar
services to compete with the Crossing Session II, stating, ``if the
regional exchanges or the NASD desire to compete with the OHT [Off-
Hours Trading] facility, they could provide a similar service.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 29237 (May 24,
1991), 56 FR 24853 (May 31, 1991) (order approving SR-NYSE-90-52 and
SR-NYSE-90-53, the ``NYSE CS II Approval Order''). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38077 (December 23, 1996), 61 FR
69124 (December 31, 1996) (order approving SR-Amex-96-43, a rule
proposal to establish an Amex trading session to execute, after
normal trading hours, certain aggregate-price basket trade orders).
    \12\ See NYSE CS II Approval Order. SR-NYSE-90-53, which was
NYSE's proposing release for its Crossing Session II, can be found
at Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28640 (November 21, 1990), 55
FR 49739 (November 30, 1990) (``NYSE CS II Proposing Release'').
    \13\ See NYSE CS II Approval Order at 13. In the NYSE CS II
Proposing Release, the NYSE offered an additional rationale: ``[T]he
Exchange is trying to respond to the significant increase in
overseas trading of listed stocks due to the export of orders from
the United States resulting from structural and regulatory factors.
In particular, the development of trading strategies involving the
contemporaneous execution of multiple stocks at a single, aggregate
price, often in conjunction with index options and futures, has
resulted in a demand for their execution that will supplement the
single-stock execution facilities traditionally offered by the
NYSE.'' See NYSE CS II Proposing Release at 2. The Commission stated
that the establishment of a portfolio trade facility ``could help to
recapture overseas trades of U.S. stocks by providing a mechanism by
which portfolio trades arranged off the floor can be effected in an
exchange trading system.'' See NYSE CS II Approval Order at 13. The
Commission felt that such a service would help to protect the
investing public and benefit the marketplace overall given that the
services would bring ``institutional trades that currently are being
exported overseas for execution within the purview of U.S.
regulatory bodies.'' See NYSE CS II Approval Order at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange, in this filing, seeks to establish a service to
compete with the NYSE Crossing Session II. The Exchange believes that
its proposed PCS would benefit the investing public by offering ETP
Holders the opportunity to enter crossing portfolio orders to be
executed against each other and would therefore provide investors and
ETP Holders with greater opportunities for executing large portfolio
trades.
    Request for Exemptive Relief. In connection with the Exchange's
request for approval of the proposed PCS, the Exchange is also
requesting exemptive relief in a separate letter from Rule 11Aa3-1
under the Act in connection with trades executed through ArcaEx's PCS.
In summary, the Exchange requests exemptive relief from the requirement
in Rule 11Aa3-1 that the Exchange disseminate on a consolidated basis
trading volume for each of the component securities executed on the
Exchange's PCS. In addition, the Exchange has requested clarification
from the Commission with respect to the application of Rule 10a-1 under
the Exchange Act and Regulation SHO.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change, as amended, is
consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in
that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principals of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were neither solicited
nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule 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 (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, as amended, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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-PCX-2005-73 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-PCX-2005-73. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, Station
Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of the PCX. 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-PCX-
2005-73 and should be submitted on or before October 19, 2005.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-5247 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22547-22548]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2230]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice lists communities where the addition or
modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths,
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or
the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard
determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and
where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical
data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have
been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through
issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Federal
Regulations. The currently effective community number is shown in the
table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

DATES: These flood hazard determinations will be finalized on the dates
listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report in
effect prior to this determination for the listed communities.
    From the date of the second publication of notification of these
changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in
which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate
Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The
flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day
period.

ADDRESSES: The affected communities are listed in the table below.
Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.
    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of
the community as listed in the table below.

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 protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The specific flood hazard determinations are
not described for each community in this notice. However, the online
location and local community map repository address where the flood
hazard determination information is available for inspection is
provided.
    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must
be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed
in the table below.
    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 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.
    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management
measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show
evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified
for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
    These flood hazard determinations, 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. The flood hazard
determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood
hazard determination information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.

(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.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Chief executive                         Online location of
        State and county           Location and case       officer of         Community map        letter of map       Date of modification   Community
                                          No.               community          repository             revision                                   No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona:
    Maricopa....................  City of Surprise     The Honorable Skip  Public Works        https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 8, 2022.........       040053
                                   (21-09-1333P).       Hall, Mayor, City   Department,         portal/advanceSearch.
                                                        of Surprise,        Engineering
                                                        16000 North Civic   Development
                                                        Center Plaza,       Services, 16000
                                                        Surprise, AZ        North Civic
                                                        85374.              Center Plaza,
                                                                            Surprise, AZ
                                                                            85374.
    Maricopa....................  Unincorporated       The Honorable Bill  Flood Control       https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 8, 2022.........       040037
                                   Areas of Maricopa    Gates, Chairman,    District of         portal/advanceSearch.
                                   County (21-09-       Board of            Maricopa County,
                                   1333P).              Surpervisors,       2801 West Durango
                                                        Maricopa County,    Street, Phoenix,
                                                        301 West            AZ 85009.
                                                        Jefferson Street,
                                                        Phoenix, AZ 85003.
California:
    Placer......................  City of Lincoln (21- The Honorable       Community           https://msc.fema.gov/  Jun. 24, 2022........       060241
                                   09-1152P).           Alyssa Silhi,       Development         portal/advanceSearch.
                                                        Mayor, City of      Department, 600
                                                        Lincoln, 600 6th    6th Street,
                                                        Street, Lincoln,    Lincoln, CA 95648.
                                                        CA 95648.

    San Diego...................  City of San Diego    The Honorable Todd  Development         https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 1, 2022.........       060295
                                   (21-09-1601P).       Gloria, Mayor,      Services            portal/advanceSearch.
                                                        City of San         Department, 1222
                                                        Diego, 202 C        1st Avenue, MS
                                                        Street, 11th        301, San Diego,
                                                        Floor, San Diego,   CA 92101.
                                                        CA 92101.
Florida:
    Walton......................  Unincorporated       Mr. Robert          Bay County          https://msc.fema.gov/  Jun. 23, 2022........       120004
                                   Areas of Bay         Carroll, Chair,     Planning and        portal/advanceSearch.
                                   County (21-04-       Commissioner        Zoning, 707 Jenks
                                   1447P).              District 2, Bay     Avenue, Suite B,
                                                        County, 840 West    Panama City, FL
                                                        11th Street,        32401.
                                                        Panama City, FL
                                                        32401.
    Walton......................  Unincorporated       Mr. Trey Nick,      Walton County       https://msc.fema.gov/  Jun. 23, 2022........       120317
                                   Areas of Walton      Chair,              Planning and        portal/advanceSearch.
                                   County (21-04-       Commissioner        Development
                                   1447P).              District 4,         Services
                                                        Walton County,      Department, 31
                                                        263 Chaffin         Coastal Centre
                                                        Avenue, DeFuniak    Boulevard, Santa
                                                        Springs, FL 32433.  Rosa Beach, FL
                                                                            32459.
Michigan:
    Saginaw.....................  City of Frankenmuth  The Honorable Mary  City and Township   https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 7, 2022.........       260188
                                   (21-05-3420P).       Anne Ackerman,      Government          portal/advanceSearch.
                                                        Mayor, City of      Center, 240 West
                                                        Frankenmuth, City   Genesee Street,
                                                        and Township        Frankenmuth, MI
                                                        Government          48734.
                                                        Center, 240 West
                                                        Genesee Street,
                                                        Frankenmuth, MI
                                                        48734.
    Saginaw.....................  Township of          Mr. Tim Hildner,    City and Township   https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 7, 2022.........       260895
                                   Frankenmuth (21-05-  Township            Government          portal/advanceSearch.
                                   3420P).              Supervisor,         Center, 240 West
                                                        Township of         Genesee Street,
                                                        Frankenmuth, P.O.   Frankenmuth, MI
                                                        Box 245,            48734.
                                                        Frankenmuth, MI
                                                        48734.
Missouri: Jackson                 City of Kansas City  The Honorable       Federal Office      https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 6, 2022.........       290173
                                   (21-07-1040P).       Quinton Lucas,      Building, 911       portal/advanceSearch.
                                                        Mayor, City of      Walnut Street,
                                                        Kansas City, City   Kansas City, MO
                                                        Hall, 414 East      64106.
                                                        12th Street,
                                                        Kansas City, MO
                                                        64106.
Ohio:
    Lorain......................  City of Avon (21-05- The Honorable       City Hall,          https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 8, 2022.........       390348
                                   4651P).              Bryan K. Jensen,    Planning            portal/advanceSearch.
                                                        Mayor, City of      Department, 36080
                                                        Avon, 36080         Chester Road,
                                                        Chester Road,       Avon, OH 44011.
                                                        Avon, OH 44011.
    Lorain......................  City of North        The Honorable       City Hall, 7307     https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 8, 2022.........       390352
                                   Ridgeville (21-05-   Kevin Corcoran,     Avon Belden Road,   portal/advanceSearch.
                                   4651P).              Mayor, City of      North Ridgeville,
                                                        North Ridgeville,   OH 44039.
                                                        7307 Avon Belden
                                                        Road, North
                                                        Ridgeville, OH
                                                        44039.
    Summit......................  Unincorporated       Ms. Ilene Shapiro,  Summit County       https://msc.fema.gov/  Jun. 9, 2022.........       390781
                                   Areas of Summit      County Executive,   Building            portal/advanceSearch.
                                   County (21-05-       Summit County,      Standards
                                   3486P).              175 South Main      Department, 1030
                                                        Street, 8th         East Tallmadge
                                                        Floor, Akron, OH    Avenue, Akron, OH
                                                        44308.              44310.
    Summit......................  Village of           The Honorable Sam   Village Hall, 3382  https://msc.fema.gov/  Jun. 9, 2022.........       390855
                                   Reminderville (21-   Alonso, Mayor,      Glenwood            portal/advanceSearch.
                                   05-3486P).           Village of          Boulevard,
                                                        Reminderville,      Reminderville, OH
                                                        3382 Glenwood       44202.
                                                        Boulevard,
                                                        Reminderville, OH
                                                        44202.
Texas: Dallas...................  City of Grand        The Honorable Ron   City Development    https://msc.fema.gov/  Jul. 11, 2022........       485472
                                   Prairie (21-06-      Jensen, Mayor,      Center, 205 West    portal/advanceSearch.
                                   2282P).              City of Grand       Church Street,
                                                        Prairie, 300 West   Grand Prairie, TX
                                                        Main Street,        75050.
                                                        Grand Prairie, TX
                                                        75050.
Wisconsin: Kenosha..............  Village of Salem     Ms. Diann Tesar,    Village Hall, 9814  https://msc.fema.gov/  Jun. 16, 2022........       550505
                                   Lakes (21-05-        Village Board       Antioch Road,       portal/advanceSearch.
                                   3136P).              President,          Salem, WI 53168.
                                                        Village of Salem
                                                        Lakes, P.O. Box
                                                        443, Salem, WI
                                                        53168.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-08143 Filed 4-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P