[Federal Register: July 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 129)]
[Notices]
[Page 38237]
[DOCID:fr03jy08-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1771-DR]

Illinois; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Illinois (FEMA-1771-DR), dated June 24, 2008,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 24, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated June 24, 2008, the President declared a major disaster under the
authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Illinois resulting from severe storms and flooding beginning on
June 1, 2008, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such a major
disaster exists in the State of Illinois.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide assistance for emergency
protective measures (Category B), limited to direct Federal
assistance, under the Public Assistance program in the designated
areas and any other forms of assistance under the Stafford Act that
you deem appropriate subject to completion of Preliminary Damage
Assessments (PDAs), unless you determine that the incident is of
such unusual severity and magnitude that PDAs are not required to
determine the need for supplemental Federal assistance pursuant to
44 CFR 206.33(d).
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs, except for any particular projects that are eligible
for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage under the FEMA Public
Assistance Pilot Program instituted pursuant to 6 U.S.C. 777. If
Other Needs Assistance and Hazard Mitigation are later requested and
warranted, Federal funding under these programs will also be limited
to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department
of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended,
Elizabeth Turner, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal
Coordinating Officer for this declared disaster.
    I do hereby determine the following areas of the State of Illinois
to have been affected adversely by this declared major disaster:

    Adams, Calhoun, Clark, Coles, Crawford, Cumberland, Hancock,
Henderson, Jasper, Lawrence, Mercer, Pike, and Rock Island Counties
for emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to direct
Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

(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 Program; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034,
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management
Assistance; 97.048, Individual and Household Housing; 97.049,
Individual and Household Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050
Individual and Household Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public
Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8-15126 Filed 7-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 23 (Friday, February 2, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4840-4842]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02094]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Parts 100, 117, 147, and 165

[USCG-2018-0047]

2017 Quarterly Listings; Safety Zones, Security Zones, Special
Local Regulations, Drawbridge Operation Regulations and Regulated
Navigation Areas

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of expired temporary rules issued.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides notification of substantive rules
issued by the Coast Guard that were made temporarily effective but
expired before they could be published in the Federal Register. This
document lists temporary safety zones, security zones, special local
regulations, drawbridge operation regulations and regulated navigation
areas, all of limited duration and for which timely publication in the
Federal Register was not possible.

DATES: This document lists temporary Coast Guard rules that became
effective, primarily between January 2017 to March 2017, unless
otherwise indicated, and were terminated before they could be published
in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Temporary rules listed in this document may be viewed
online, under their respective docket numbers, using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on this document contact
Yeoman First Class David Hager, Office of Regulations and
Administrative Law, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Coast Guard District Commanders and Captains
of the Port (COTP) must be immediately responsive to the safety and
security needs within their jurisdiction; therefore, District
Commanders and COTPs have been delegated the authority to issue certain
local regulations. Safety zones may be established for safety or
environmental purposes. A safety zone may be stationary and described
by fixed limits or it may be described as a zone around a vessel in
motion. Security zones limit access to prevent injury or damage to
vessels, ports, or waterfront facilities. Special local regulations are
issued to enhance the safety of participants and spectators at regattas
and other marine events. Drawbridge operation regulations authorize
changes to drawbridge schedules to accommodate bridge repairs, seasonal
vessel traffic, and local public events. Regulated Navigation Areas are
water areas within a defined boundary for which regulations for vessels
navigating within the area have been established by the regional Coast
Guard District Commander.
    Timely publication of these rules in the Federal Register may be
precluded when a rule responds to an emergency, or when an event occurs
without sufficient advance notice. The affected public is, however,
often informed of these rules through Local Notices to Mariners, press
releases, and other means. Moreover, actual notification is provided by
Coast Guard patrol vessels enforcing the restrictions imposed by the
rule. Because Federal Register publication was not possible before the
end of the effective period, mariners were personally notified of the
contents of these safety zones, security zones, special local
regulations, regulated navigation areas or drawbridge operation
regulations by Coast Guard officials on-scene prior to any enforcement
action. However, the Coast Guard, by law, must publish in the Federal
Register notice of substantive rules adopted. To meet this obligation
without imposing undue expense on the public, the Coast Guard
periodically publishes a list of these temporary safety zones, security
zones, special local regulations, regulated navigation areas and
drawbridge operation regulations. Permanent rules are not included in
this list because they are published in their entirety in the Federal
Register. Temporary rules are also published in their entirety if
sufficient time is available to do so before they are placed in effect
or terminated.
    The following unpublished rules were placed in effect temporarily
during the period between January 2017 to March 2017unless otherwise
indicated. To view copies of these rules, visit www.regulations.gov and
search by the docket number indicated in the following table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Effective
             Docket No.                           Type                        Location                 date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USCG-2016-0491......................  Safety Zones................  Bay Swim, IX................       6/18/2016
USCG-2016-0316......................  Security Zones..............  Tampa, FL...................       6/26/2016
USCG-2016-0569......................  Safety Zones................  Lorain, OH..................       6/26/2016
USCG-2016-0615......................  Safety Zones................  Dunkirk, NY.................        7/2/2016
USCG-2016-0480......................  Safety Zones................  LaPointe, WI................        7/4/2016
USCG-2016-0622......................  Safety Zones................  Port Buffalo Zone...........        7/4/2016
USCG-2016-0566......................  Safety Zones................  Port Buffalo Zone...........        7/4/2016
USCG-2016-0511......................  Safety Zones................  Augusta, GA.................       7/14/2016
USCG-2016-0515......................  Safety Zones................  Lorain, OH..................       7/25/2016
USCG-2016-0827......................  Safety Zones................  Menasha, WI.................       9/10/2016
USCG-2016-0942......................  Security Zones..............  Cleveland, OH...............      10/13/2016
USCG-2016-0919......................  Safety Zones................  Harsens Island, MI..........      10/22/2016
USCG-2016-0271......................  Safety Zones................  Jacksonville Beach, FL......       11/2/2016
USCG-2016-1007......................  Drawbridges.................  Chesapeake, VA..............       12/3/2016
USCG-2016-0741......................  Notices.....................  Charleston, SC..............      12/10/2016
USCG-2016-0923......................  Safety Zones................  Baton Rouge, LA.............      12/31/2016
USCG-2017-0049......................  Drawbridges.................  Isleton, CA.................        1/7/2017
USCG-2017-0014......................  Security Zones..............  Detroit, MI.................        1/9/2017
USCG-2017-0024......................  Security Zones..............  Detroit, MI.................       1/10/2017
USCG-2017-0038......................  Safety Zones................  Virginia Beach, VA..........       1/13/2017
USCG-2017-0046......................  Safety Zones................  Vero Beach, FL..............       1/18/2017
USCG-2017-0052......................  Security Zones..............  New York City, NY...........       1/19/2017
USCG-2016-0905......................  Safety Zones................  Daytona Beach, FL...........       1/19/2017
USCG-2017-0065......................  Safety Zones................  Newburyport, MA.............       1/25/2017
USCG-2016-1055......................  Safety Zones................  New Orleans, LA.............       1/26/2017
USCG-2017-0006......................  Safety Zones................  Manhattan, NY...............       1/26/2017
USCG-2016-0993......................  Special Local Regulations...  Tampa, FL...................       1/28/2017
USCG-2017-0072......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............        2/3/2017
USCG-2017-0036......................  Special Local Regulations...  Bradenton, FL...............        2/4/2017
USCG-2017-0078......................  Security Zones..............  Philadelphia, PA............        2/4/2017
USCG-2017-0088......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............       2/10/2017
USCG-2017-0093......................  Safety Zones................  Canton, KY..................       2/14/2017
USCG-2017-0107......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............       2/17/2017
USCG-2016-0345......................  Safety Zones................  Chicago, IL.................       2/17/2017
USCG-2017-0115......................  Safety Zones................  Harrison, Twp, MI...........       2/25/2017
USCG-2017-0157......................  Security Zones..............  Newport News, VA............        3/2/2017
USCG-2017-0145......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............        3/3/2017
USCG-2017-0160......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............        3/3/2017
USCG-2017-0119......................  Safety Zones................  St. Petersburg, Florida.....        3/9/2017
USCG-2017-0187......................  Safety Zones................  Cameron, LA.................        3/9/2017

USCG-2017-0141......................  Drawbridges.................  Rio Vista, CA...............       3/10/2017
USCG-2017-0080......................  Drawbridges.................  Sacramento, CA..............       3/11/2017
USCG-2017-0051......................  Safety Zones................  Newport News, VA............       3/12/2017
USCG-2017-0165......................  Drawbridges.................  Little Prairie Ridge,              3/13/2017
                                                                     Louisiana.
USCG-2017-0182......................  Safety Zones................  Brooklyn, NY................       3/17/2017
USCG-2017-0190......................  Safety Zones................  San Juan, PR................       3/22/2017
USCG-2016-1019......................  Safety Zones................  Apra Harbor, Guam...........       3/23/2017
USCG-2017-0254......................  Safety Zones................  Virgin Islands..............       3/31/2017
USCG-2016-0491......................  Safety Zones................  Bay Swim, IX................       6/18/2016
USCG-2016-0316......................  Security Zones..............  Tampa, FL...................       6/26/2016
USCG-2016-0569......................  Safety Zones................  Lorain, OH..................       6/26/2016
USCG-2016-0615......................  Safety Zones................  Dunkirk, NY.................        7/2/2016
USCG-2016-0453......................  Safety Zones................  Wolcott, NY.................        7/3/2016
USCG-2016-0480......................  Safety Zones................  LaPointe, WI................        7/4/2016
USCG-2016-0622......................  Safety Zones................  Port Buffalo Zone...........        7/4/2016
USCG-2016-0566......................  Safety Zones................  Port Buffalo Zone...........        7/4/2016
USCG-2016-0511......................  Safety Zones................  Augusta, GA.................       7/14/2016
USCG-2016-0515......................  Safety Zones................  Lorain, OH..................       7/25/2016
USCG-2016-0827......................  Safety Zones................  Menasha, WI.................       9/10/2016
USCG-2016-0942......................  Security Zones..............  Cleveland, OH...............      10/13/2016
USCG-2016-0919......................  Safety Zones................  Harsens Island, MI..........      10/22/2016
USCG-2016-0271......................  Safety Zones................  Jacksonville Beach, FL......       11/2/2016
USCG-2016-1007......................  Drawbridges (Part 117)......  Chesapeake, VA..............       12/3/2016
USCG-2016-0741......................  Notices.....................  Charleston, SC..............      12/10/2016
USCG-2016-0923......................  Safety Zones................  Baton Rouge, LA.............      12/31/2016
USCG-2017-0049......................  Drawbridges.................  Isleton, CA.................        1/7/2017
USCG-2017-0014......................  Security Zones..............  Detroit, MI.................        1/9/2017
USCG-2017-0024......................  Security Zones..............  Detroit, MI.................       1/10/2017
USCG-2017-0038......................  Safety Zones................  Virginia Beach, VA..........       1/13/2017
USCG-2017-0046......................  Safety Zones................  Vero Beach, FL..............       1/18/2017
USCG-2017-0052......................  Security Zones..............  New York City, NY...........       1/19/2017
USCG-2016-0905......................  Safety Zones................  Daytona Beach, FL...........       1/19/2017
USCG-2017-0065......................  Safety Zones................  Newburyport, MA.............       1/25/2017
USCG-2016-1055......................  Safety Zones................  New Orleans, LA.............       1/26/2017
USCG-2017-0006......................  Safety Zones................  Manhattan, NY...............       1/26/2017
USCG-2016-0993......................  Special Local Regulations...  Tampa, FL...................       1/28/2017
USCG-2017-0072......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............        2/3/2017
USCG-2017-0036......................  Special Local Regulations...  Bradenton, FL...............        2/4/2017
USCG-2017-0078......................  Security Zones..............  Philadelphia, PA............        2/4/2017
USCG-2017-0088......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............       2/10/2017
USCG-2017-0093......................  Safety Zones................  Canton, KY..................       2/14/2017
USCG-2017-0107......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............       2/17/2017
USCG-2016-0345......................  Safety Zones................  Chicago, IL.................       2/17/2017
USCG-2017-0115......................  Safety Zones................  Harrison, Twp, MI...........       2/25/2017
USCG-2017-0157......................  Security Zones..............  Newport News, VA............        3/2/2017
USCG-2017-0145......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............        3/3/2017
USCG-2017-0160......................  Security Zones..............  Palm Beach, FL..............        3/3/2017
USCG-2017-0119......................  Safety Zones................  St. Petersburg, Florida.....        3/9/2017
USCG-2017-0187......................  Safety Zones................  Cameron, LA.................        3/9/2017
USCG-2017-0141......................  Drawbridges.................  Rio Vista, CA...............       3/10/2017
USCG-2017-0080......................  Drawbridges.................  Sacramento, CA..............       3/11/2017
USCG-2017-0051......................  Safety Zones................  Newport News, VA............       3/12/2017
USCG-2017-0165......................  Drawbridges.................  Little Prairie Ridge,              3/13/2017
                                                                     Louisiana.
USCG-2017-0182......................  Safety Zones................  Brooklyn, NY................       3/17/2017
USCG-2017-0190......................  Safety Zones................  San Juan, PR................       3/22/2017
USCG-2016-1019......................  Safety Zones................  Apra Harbor, Guam...........       3/23/2017
USCG-2017-0254......................  Safety Zones................  Virgin Islands..............       3/31/2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: January 30, 2018.
Katia Kroutil,
Office Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-02094 Filed 2-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59804-59805]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24169]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD19-19-000]

Grid-Enhancing Technologies; Supplemental Notice of Workshop

    As announced in the Notice of Workshop issued on September 9, 2019,
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) will convene a
staff-led workshop in the above-referenced proceeding on Tuesday,
November 5, 2019, from approximately 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., and
Wednesday, November 6, 2019, from approximately 9:00 a.m. to 12:45 p.m.
(Eastern Time). The workshop will be held at Commission headquarters,
888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The Chairman and
Commissioners may attend and participate.
    The purpose of this workshop is to discuss grid-enhancing
technologies that increase the capacity, efficiency, or reliability of
transmission facilities. Panelists and staff will discuss how grid-
enhancing technologies are currently used in transmission planning and
operations, the challenges to their deployment and implementation, and
what the Commission can do regarding those challenges, including
regulatory approaches such as incentives or requirements for the
adoption of grid-enhancing technologies. These technologies include,
but are not limited to: (1) Power flow control and transmission
switching equipment; (2) storage technologies; and (3) advanced line
rating management technologies. There will be an opportunity to submit
written comments after the workshop. A notice setting the date when
comments are due will be issued after the workshop.
    The agenda and list of participants for this workshop is attached,
including changes to panels 2 and 3. The workshop will be open for the
public to attend in person, or to attend remotely via webcast. In-
person attendees are encouraged to register on-line at: http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/11-06-19-form.asp. In-person
attendees should allow time to pass through building security
procedures before start time of the workshop. Although there is no
registration deadline for in-person attendees, we strongly encourage
attendees to register for the workshop as soon as possible, in order to
avoid any delay associated with being processed by FERC security. Those
who plan to attend the conference remotely via webcast must register by
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on October 29, 2019. The webcast may not be
available to those who do not register.
    Information on the workshop (including a link to the webcast) will
be posted on the Calendar of Events on the Commission's website, http://www.ferc.gov. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for
the webcasts and offers the option of listening to the conference via
phone-bridge for a fee. For additional information, visit
www.CapitolConnection.org or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. The workshop will be
transcribed. Transcripts will be available for a fee from Ace Reporting
(202-347-3700).
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free (866) 208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>
with the requested accommodations.
    For more information about this workshop, please contact:

Sarah McKinley (Logistical Information), Office of External Affairs,
(202) 502-8368<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Samin Peirovi (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and
Innovation,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    Dated: October 29, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24169 Filed 11-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 24, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9109]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03895]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0130]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atchafalaya River, Morgan City,
LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Morgan City Railroad Bridge across
the Atchafalaya River (also known as Berwick Bay), mile 17.5 [Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway (Morgan City-Port Allen Alternate Route), mile
0.3] in Morgan City, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana. This deviation is
necessary to perform maintenance needed for the operation of the
bridge. This deviation allows for the bridge to remain closed-to-
navigation for eight-consecutive hours in the morning and five-
consecutive hours in the evening with an opening in the middle to pass
vessels for a five-day period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 11 a.m. on March 2 through 9
p.m. on March 6, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0130] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Donna Gagliano, Bridge
Administration Branch, Coast Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BNSF Railway requested a temporary
deviation from the operating schedule of the Morgan City Railroad
Bridge. These repairs are necessary for the operation of the bridge.
This deviation is to install new Conley joints on the four bases on the
east and west ends of the bridges and transition rails on the east and
west side of the bridge's north and south sides. The draw currently
operates under 33 CFR 117.5.
    For the purposes of this deviation, the bridge will not be required
to open from 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. each day. From 2 p.m. until 4 p.m., the
bridge will be opened for the passage of vessels. The bridge will again
be closed-to-navigation from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. From 9 p.m. until 6 a.m.
the bridge will be maintained in the open position. The closure will
begin at 11 a.m. on Wednesday, March 2, 2016 and continue through 9
p.m. on March 6, 2016.
    The vertical clearance of the bridge is 4 feet above mean high
water, elevation 8.2 feet NGVD in the closed-to-navigation position and
73 feet above mean high water in open-to-navigation position.
Navigation on the waterway consists of tugs with tows, oil industry
related work and crew boats, commercial fishing vessels and some
recreational crafts.
    Vessels able to pass the bridge in the closed position may do so at
any time. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies and the
Morgan City-Port Allen Landside route through Amelia, LA can be used as
an alternate route. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the
waterways through our Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notices to
Mariners of the change in operating schedule for the bridge, so that
vessel operators can arrange their transits to minimize any impact
caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35, the drawbridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: February 19, 2016.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-03895 Filed 2-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 16, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21387-21389]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08452]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-1069; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-197-AD;
Amendment 39-17827; AD 2014-08-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, &
702) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes,
Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, and Model CL-
600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. This AD was prompted by
a determination that for certain slat system failure cases, the
resulting slat skew could lead to failure of the slat system. This AD
requires replacing certain locking plates with certain anti-migration
assemblies on certain left and right wing slats. We are issuing this AD
to prevent failure of the eccentric pins at the slat track attachment,
and slat panels consequently disconnecting from the wing, leading to
the loss of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 21, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of May 21,
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-1069; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier,
Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9,
Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.
Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes,
Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes, Model CL-600-
2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, and Model CL-600-2E25
(Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on January 2, 2014 (79 FR 70).

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the airworthiness
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2013-31, dated October 8, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition. The MCAI states:

    It was discovered that for certain slat system jam-disconnect
failure cases, the resulting slat skew could lead to failure of the
eccentric pin at the slat track 3-3 attachment. If the pin migrates
out of the attachment lugs, this could cause the No. 3 slat panels
to disconnect from the wing and could lead to the loss of the
aeroplane.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the replacement of the locking plate
with an anti-migration assembly on both the left and right No. 3
slats.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-1069-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (79 FR 70, January 2,
2014) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 70, January 2, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 70, January 2, 2014).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 401 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 9 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $780 per
product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on
U.S. operators to be $619,545, or $1,545 per product.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. 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.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-1069; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2014-08-03 Bombardier, Inc. Amendment 39-17827. Docket No. FAA-2013-
1069; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-197-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective May 21, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. airplanes, certificated in
any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of
this AD.
    (1) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10002 through 10335 inclusive.
    (2) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705)
airplanes, and Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet
Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001 through 15293 inclusive.
    (3) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series
1000) airplanes, serial numbers 19002 through 19036 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that for certain slat
system jam-disconnect failure cases, the resulting slat skew could
lead to failure of the eccentric pin at the slat track attachment.
If the pin migrates out of the attachment lugs, this could cause
certain slat panels to disconnect from the wing. We are issuing this
AD to prevent failure of the eccentric pins at the slat track
attachment, and slat panels consequently disconnecting from the
wing, leading to the loss of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Replacement

    Within 6,000 flight hours or 30 months, whichever occurs first,
after the effective date of this AD: Remove and replace the locking
plate having part number (P/N) CC670-12076-1 with an anti-migration
assembly having P/N CC670-12370-1, on both the left and right number
3 slats, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-27-066, dated June 10, 2013.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any
locking plate having P/N CC670-12076-1 on any airplane.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send tour request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the New York ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
516-794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer, use these actions if they
are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if
they were approved by the State of Design Authority (or its
delegated agent, or the Design Approval Holder with a State of
Design Authority's design organization approval, as applicable). You
are required to ensure the product is airworthy before it is
returned to service.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2013-31, dated October 8, 2013,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-
2013-1069-0002.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-27-066, dated June 10,
2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 4, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-08452 Filed 4-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 170)]
[Notices]
[Page 53975]
[DOCID:fr02se10-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001]

Office of Women's Health Update

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice of meeting.

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

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the following
meeting: Office of Women's Health (OWH) Update. The topics to be
discussed are OWH current and future activities in the areas of women's
health research and educational outreach.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 22,
2010, 8:30 a.m. to 10 a.m.
    Location: The meeting will be held at the Cohen Building, rm. 5051,
330 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20201.
    Contact: Deborah L. Kallgren, Office of Women's Health, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 2314,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Registration and Requests for Oral Presentations: There is no
registration fee, but seating is limited to 20. Send registration
information (including name, title, firm name, address, telephone, and
fax number) to the contact person by September 13, 2010.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Deborah L. Kallgren at least 7 days in advance.

    Dated: August 27, 2010.
David Dorsey,
Acting Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning and Budget.
[FR Doc. 2010-21893 Filed 9-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8625-8628]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03142]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94204; File No. SR-CBOE-2021-046]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Amendment No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a
Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Amend Cboe
Rule 5.4 and Make Corresponding Changes to Other Rules

February 9, 2022.

I. Introduction

    On August 6, 2021, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to allow all complex orders to be quoted and
executed in $0.01 increments and to allow complex orders with any ratio
equal to or greater than one-to-three and less than or equal to three-
to-one to trade electronically.\3\ The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on August 25, 2021.\4\
The Commission received two comment letters regarding the proposal.\5\
Cboe responded to the comments on September 23, 2021.\6\ On September
28, 2021, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\7\ the Commission
designated a longer period within which to approve the proposed rule
change, disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings
to determine whether to approve or disapprove the proposed rule
change.\8\ On November 1, 2021, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposed rule change.\9\ The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comment on Amendment No. 1 and is approving the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ The term ``complex order'' means an order involving the
concurrent execution of two or more different series in the same
underlying security or index (the ``legs'' or ``components'' of the
complex order), for the same account, occurring at or near the same
time and for the purpose of executing a particular investment
strategy with no more than the applicable number of legs (which
number the Exchange determines on a class-by-class basis). The
Exchange determines in which classes complex orders are eligible for
processing. Unless the context otherwise requires, the term complex
order includes stock-option orders and security future-option
orders. For purposes of Exchange Rules 5.33 and 5.85(b)(1), the term
``complex order'' means a complex order with any ratio equal to or
greater than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-
one (3.00), an Index Combo order, a stock-option order, or a
security future-option order. For the purpose of applying these
ratios to complex orders comprised of legs for both mini-options and
standard options, ten mini-option contracts represent one standard
option contract. For the purpose of applying these ratios to complex
orders comprised of legs for both micro-options and standard
options, 100 micro-option contracts represent one standard option
contract. See Exchange Rule 1.1.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92709 (August 19,
2021), 86 FR 47529 (``Notice'').
    \5\ See letter to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission,
from Alanna Barton, General Counsel, BOX Exchange LLC, dated
September 14, 2021 (``BOX Letter''); and letter from Mary Smith,
dated August 19, 2021 (``Smith Letter''). Comments received
regarding the proposal are available on the Commission's website at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm.
    \6\ See letter to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission,
from Laura G. Dickman, Vice President and Associate General Counsel,
Cboe Options, dated September 23, 2021 (``Exchange Response''). The
Exchange Response is available on the Commission's website at:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 93159 (September 28,
2021), 86 FR 54780 (October 4, 2021). The Commission designated
November 23, 2021, as the date by which the Commission shall approve
or disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to
approve or disapprove, the proposed rule change.
    \9\ Amendment No. 1 revises the proposal to provide rationale
for allowing complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than
one-to-three and less than or equal to three-to-one to trade
electronically; provide data indicating that in August 2021, fewer
than one third of the complex orders executed on the Exchange's
trading floor had ratios of greater than three-to-one, so the
significant majority of the approximately 25% of total executed non-
SPX contracts (approximately 27% of total executed contracts) traded
during that time would have been eligible to execute in $0.01
increments; and express the view that the rules of another options
exchange do not clearly specify the minimum trading increment
applicable to complex orders traded on that exchange's trading
floor. Amendment No. 1 is available on the Commission's website at
https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-cboe-2021-046/srcboe2021046.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1

    Currently, Exchange Rule 5.4 provides that, except as provided in
Exchange Rule 5.33, the minimum increment for bids and offers on
complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than one-to-three and
less than or equal to three-to-one for equity and index options, and
Index Combo orders, is $0.01 or greater, which the Exchange may
determine on a class-by-class basis, and the legs may be executed in
$0.01 increments. The rule further provides that the minimum increment
for bids and offers on complex orders with any ratio less than one-to-
three or greater than three-to-one for equity and index options (except
for Index Combo orders) is the standard increment for the class
pursuant to Exchange Rule 5.4(a), and the legs may be executed in the
minimum increment applicable to the class pursuant to Exchange Rule
5.4(a).\10\ The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 5.4(a) to
allow complex orders with any ratio to be quoted in increments of $0.01
or greater, as determined by the Exchange on a class-by-class basis,
and executed in $0.01 increments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The minimum increment for bids and offers on complex orders
in options on the S&P 500 Index (SPX) or on the S&P 100 Index (OEX
and XEO), except for box/roll spreads, is $0.05 or greater, or any
increment, which the Exchange may be determine on a class-by-class
basis. See Exchange Rule 5.4(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange states that if complex orders cannot be expressed in
increments smaller than the increment for the class (such as $0.05), it
may be difficult for brokers to obtain the desired prices for their
customers' complex orders because the parties to a trade must perform
complicated and time-consuming calculations to break down the orders
into the required contract quantities and prices to fit within the
constraint of executing the orders at a minimum increment other than
$0.01.\11\ In addition, the Exchange notes that the calculation process
for larger-ratio complex orders is time-consuming because these orders
generally are entered in large quantities with a large number of
legs.\12\ As a result, brokers executing larger-ratio complex orders on
active trading days cannot be as efficient in representing other
customer orders they are holding.\13\ The Exchange states that the
proposal to allow larger-ratio complex orders to be quoted and executed
in $0.01 increments will provide market participants with flexibility
in pricing their investment strategies and allow Trading Permit Holders
(``TPHs'') to execute these orders more efficiently and at better
prices for their customers.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530.
    \12\ See Exchange Response at 4.
    \13\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530.
    \14\ See id. at 47530-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal does not extend the complex order priority provisions
applicable to complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than
one-to-three and less than or equal to three-to-one to complex orders
with any ratio less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one.\15\
To apply to electronic

trading the priority provisions that currently apply to floor-traded
complex orders with any ratio less than one-to-three or greater than
three-to-one,\16\ the proposal amends Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v) to
provide that a complex order that has any ratio less than one-to-three
or greater than three-to-one will not execute at a net price that would
cause any component of the complex strategy to be executed at a price
ahead of a Priority Customer order on the Simple Book \17\ without
improving the BBO \18\ of each component of the complex strategy with a
Priority Customer order at the BBO.\19\ As a result, the proposal will
allow a complex order with any ratio less than one-to-three or greater
than three-to-one to be executed at a net debit or credit price only if
each leg of the order betters the corresponding bid (offer) of a
Priority Customer order(s) in the Simple Book.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530. Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v)
currently provides that the Exchange's system does not execute a
complex order (i.e., a complex order with any ratio equal to or
greater than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-
one (3.00)) pursuant to Exchange Rule 5.33 at a net price that would
cause any component of the complex strategy to be executed at a
price ahead of a Priority Customer Order resting in the Simple Book
without improving the BBO of at least one component of the complex
strategy by at least one minimum increment. Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(1)
states that a complex order (A) with any ratio equal to or greater
than one-to-three (.333) and less than or equal to three-to-one
(3.00) or (B) that is an Index Combo order may be executed at a net
debit or credit price without giving priority to equivalent bids
(offers) in the individual series legs that are represented in the
trading crowd or in the Book if the price of at least one leg of the
order improves the corresponding bid (offer) of a Priority Customer
order(s) in the Book by at least one minimum trading increment as
set forth in Rule 5.4(b). Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(2).
    \16\ See Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(2) (stating that a complex order
with any ratio less than one-to-three (.333) and greater than three-
to-one (3.00) (except for an Index Combo order) may be executed in
open outcry on the trading floor at a net debit or credit price
without giving priority to equivalent bids (offers) in the
individual series legs that are represented in the trading crowd or
in the Book if each leg of the order betters the corresponding bid
(offer) of a Priority Customer order(s) in the Book on each leg by
at least one minimum trading increment as set forth in Rule 5.4(b)).
    \17\ The Simple Book is the electronic book of simple orders and
quotes maintained by the System, which single book is used during
both the Regular Trading Hours and Global Trading Hours trading
sessions. See Exchange Rule 1.1.
    \18\ The BBO is the best bid or offer disseminated on the
Exchange.
    \19\ Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v) will continue to provide
that a complex order that has any ratio equal to or greater than
one-to-three and less than or equal to three-to-one, or an Index
Combo order, will not execute at a net price that would cause any
component of the complex strategy to be executed at a price ahead of
a Priority Customer Order on the Simple Book without improving the
BBO of at least one component of the complex strategy.
    \20\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange asserts that it is unlikely that market participants
would submit orders with any ratio equal to or greater than one-to-
three and less than or equal to three-to-one that is not a bona fide
trading strategy solely for the purpose of trading in $0.01
increments.\21\ First, the Exchange states that adding an extra leg to
a large order to be able to improve the book by $0.01 would be
unnecessary because the order could be executed in an AIM Auction in
$0.01 increments.\22\ Second, the Exchange states that it is unlikely
that other market participants would be willing to execute against an
order that is not a bona fide trading strategy, thereby reducing the
likelihood that a market participant would be able to execute such a
strategy.\23\ Third, the Exchange notes that these orders would be
subject to review by the Exchange's regulatory division, which could
determine that the submission of such orders was in violation of the
Exchange's rules, including Exchange Rule 8.1, which prohibits TPHs
from engaging in acts or practices inconsistent with just and equitable
principles of trade.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47531.
    \22\ See id.
    \23\ See id.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange permits complex orders with any ratio less
than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to trade only on the
Exchange's trading floor.\25\ The Exchange proposes to allow these
orders to be traded electronically, as well as in open outcry.\26\ The
Exchange states that electronic trading of these larger-ratio complex
orders will provide investors with additional flexibility in executing
these orders and will increase the investment strategies available to
investors who prefer to or solely trade electronically.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Notice, 86 FR at 47529.
    \26\ See id. at n. 6.
    \27\ See Amendment No. 1 at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Comments and Exchange's Response

    The Commission received two comment letters regarding the
proposal.\28\ One commenter stated that the proposal would solely
benefit high-speed traders and result in worse prices for retail
traders due to decreased quotes.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See supra note 5.
    \29\ See Smith Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange stated that the proposal is designed to increase the
efficiency of trading larger-ratio, highly complex orders and is not
intended to benefit high-speed traders.\30\ The Exchange further stated
that the proposal has minimal relevance to high-speed traders, who
generally participate in listed options trading as market makers rather
than as brokers conducting agency businesses.\31\ The Exchange
concluded that the proposal ``will have minimal impact on either high-
speed traders or retail traders (or on the simple market), as it is
intended to increase the efficiency and precision available to brokers
attempting to execute highly complicated yet bona-fide multi-leg option
strategies on the Exchange, which strategies are not common among high-
speed traders or retail traders.'' \32\ In addition, the Exchange noted
that the proposal is unrelated to quoting and that the increased number
of complex orders that would be eligible for more flexible pricing
under the proposal could increase the number of complex orders entered
on the Exchange that may leg into the Simple Book, thereby increasing
execution opportunities for resting customer orders.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Exchange Response at 1-2.
    \31\ See id. at 2.
    \32\ Id. at 3-4.
    \33\ See id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another commenter stated that, contrary to statements made in the
proposal, each component leg of s of a multi-leg Qualified Open Outcry
Order (``QOO'') on the BOX Exchange LLC's (``BOX'') trading floor
respects the minimum trading increment for the series (e.g., $0.01,
$0.05, $0.10).\34\ The commenter further stated that multi-leg QOO
Orders do not meet the definition of Complex QOO Order and are treated
like single-leg QOO Orders for purposes of execution and priority.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See BOX Letter at 1.
    \35\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its response, the Exchange stated that multiple TPHs who are
also members of BOX informed the Exchange that multi-legged orders with
ratios greater than three-to-one or less than one-to-three are executed
regularly on BOX's trading floor in penny increments.\36\ The Exchange
also expressed the view that BOX's rules lack clarity regarding the
increments applicable to QOO Orders that do not satisfy the definition
of a complex order in BOX Rule 7240(a)(7).\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Exchange Response at 4.
    \37\ See id. at 4-5. See also Amendment No. 1 at 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\38\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\39\ which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a

national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest, and not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers or dealers. The proposal to allow complex orders with a with
any ratio less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to be
quoted and executed in $0.01 increments could provide market
participants with flexibility in pricing these orders and allow TPHs to
execute their customers' orders in these larger-ratio strategies at
better prices. The proposal to allow complex orders with any ratio less
than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to trade electronically
could provide market participants with flexibility in executing these
orders by providing an additional means for trading them. The proposal
will protect the priority of Priority Customer orders resting on the
Simple Book by requiring each component of a complex order with a ratio
less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to execute at a
price that improves the BBO of each component of the order with a
Priority Customer order at the BBO.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). In approving this proposed rule change,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \39\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \40\ See proposed Exchange Rule 5.33(f)(2)(A)(v). This
requirement is consistent with Exchange Rule 5.85(b)(2), which
provides that a complex order with any ratio less than one-to-three
(.333) and greater than three-to-one (3.00) (except for an Index
Combo order) may be executed in open outcry on the trading floor at
a net debit or credit price without giving priority to equivalent
bids (offers) in the individual series legs that are represented in
the trading crowd or in the Book if each leg of the order betters
the corresponding bid (offer) of a Priority Customer order(s) in the
Book on each leg by at least one minimum trading increment as set
forth in Exchange Rule 5.4(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission does not believe that the proposal will solely
benefit high-speed traders and result in worse prices for retail
traders due to decreased quotes. As noted above, the proposal will
provide all market participants, including retail customers, with
greater flexibility both in pricing complex orders with any ratio less
than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one, and in executing these
orders, which will be allowed to trade electronically as well as on the
Exchange's floor. With respect to the second comment letter, the
Commission notes that in approving this proposal it is not relying on
statements made in the proposal or in any comment letters regarding
BOX's trading floor.
    Finally, unlike the trading systems of some options exchanges,
Cboe's trading system does not generate legging orders on behalf of
complex orders. A legging order (sometimes called a derived order) is
an exchange-generated single-leg limit order on the exchange's limit
order book that represents either the bid or the offer of one component
of a complex order resting on the exchange's complex order book. In
general, a legging order is generated at a price: (i) That matches or
improves upon the best displayed bid or offer on the exchange's single-
leg limit order book; and (ii) at which the net price of the complex
order can be achieved when the other leg is executed against the best
displayed bid or offer on the exchange's single-leg limit order
book.\41\ If an exchange generated legging orders in $0.01 increments
on behalf of complex orders with any ratio less than one-to-three or
greater than three-to-one in a class with a standard trading increment
of $0.05, a complex order priced in a $0.01 increment could generate a
legging order at a price that would not be available to market
participants trading single-leg orders.\42\ If an options market that
generates legging orders in $0.01 increments regardless of the trading
increment for the class wished to allow complex orders with a ratio
less than one-to-three or greater than three-to-one to trade in $0.01
increments, the inability of single-leg orders to compete on a level
playing field with the legging orders generated on behalf of these
complex orders could raise regulatory concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See e.g., BOX Rule 7240(c); ISE Rule Options 3, Section
7(k); and MIAX Rule 518(a)(9).
    \42\ For example, if such an exchange received a complex order
to buy series A and Series B at a net price of $2.13, and there was
an order on the exchange's single-leg book to sell series B for
$1.05, the exchange's system could generate a legging order to sell
series A for $1.08. If the quoting and trading increment for the
class is $0.05, then a market participant that entered a single-leg
order to sell series A would be required to enter its order in a
pricing increment of $0.05 and would not be able to match, or
better, the legging order's price by entering its order in a $0.01
increment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Solicitation of Comments on Amendment No. 1 to the Proposed Rule
Change

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning whether Amendment No. 1 is consistent with the
Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2021-046 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2021-046. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2021-046, and should be submitted
on or before March 8, 2022.

VI. Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, prior to the thirtieth day
after the date of publication of notice of the filing of Amendment No.
1 in the Federal Register. Amendment No. 1 provides rationale for
allowing complex orders with any ratio equal to or greater than one-to-
three and less than or equal to three-to-one to trade electronically.
In addition, Amendment No. 1 provides data indicating that in August
2021, fewer than one third of the complex orders executed on the
Exchange's trading floor had ratios of greater than three-to-one, so
the significant majority of the approximately 25% of total

executed non-SPX contracts (approximately 27% of total executed
contracts) traded during that time would have been eligible to execute
in $0.01 increments. Amendment No. 1 raises no novel regulatory issues
and provides additional analysis that assists the Commission in
evaluating the Exchange's proposal and determining that it is
consistent with the Act. Accordingly, the Commission finds good cause,
pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\43\ to approve the proposed
rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\44\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2021-046), as modified
by Amendment No. 1, is approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03142 Filed 2-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 187)]
[Notices]
[Page 55505-55507]
[DOCID:fr25se08-37]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0377; FRL-8721-3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Glass Manufacturing
Plants, (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1131.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0054

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 27,
2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2008-0377, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental

Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information
Center, mail code 2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20460, and (2) OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA,
725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sounjay Gairola, Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-4003; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 30, 2008 (73 FR 31088), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2008-0377, which is available for public viewing
either online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at
the Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202)
566-1927.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NSPS for Glass Manufacturing Plants (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1131.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0054.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2008.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Glass
Manufacturing Plants (40 CFR part 60, subpart CC) was promulgated on
October 7, 1980 and amended on October 17, 2000. The provisions of this
subpart apply to each glass manufacturing plant that either commenced
construction or modification after June 15, 1979.
    Owners or operators of subpart CC facilities are required to comply
with reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and maintain records of
specific information needed by EPA to determine if compliance has been
achieved. Sources are required to submit semiannual reports of excess
emissions. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in
determining compliance; and are required, in general, of all sources
subject to NSPS.
    Notifications are to inform the Agency or delegated authority when
a source becomes subject to the standard. The reviewing authority may
then inspect the source to ensure that the pollution control devices
are properly installed and operating and that the standards are being
met. Performance test reports are required as these are the Agency's
records of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission
standards and to serve as a record of the operating conditions under
which compliance is to be achieved. The information generated by
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements described in this
ICR are used by the Agency to ensure that facilities that are affected
by the standard continue to operate the control equipment and achieve
continuous compliance with the regulation.
    All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In
the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are
sent directly to the EPA regional office. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart CC, as
authorized in sections 112 and 114(a) of the Clean Air Act. The
required information consists of emissions data and other information
that have been determined to be private.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Glass manufacturing plants.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 41.
    Frequency of Response: Occasionally, semiannually and annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 803.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $302,600, which is comprised of
$237,800 in Operations & Maintenance (O&M) costs, $64,800 in labor
costs, and no annualized capital/startup costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours to
the respondents in this ICR compared to the previous ICR. This is due
to two considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the
past three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three
years; and (2) the growth rate for respondents is very low, negative,
or non-existent. Therefore, the labor hours in the previous ICR reflect
the current burden to the respondents and are reiterated in this ICR.
There is a minor change to the cost figures, since the previous ICR
rounded to the nearest $1,000; this ICR presents a cost figure

$200 less than the previous ICR due to using the exact figure.

    Dated: September 22, 2008.
Sara Hisel-McCoy,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E8-22542 Filed 9-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

<META name="generator" content="Document">
<META name="creation-date" content="12/05/2008 12:45:13 ">
<TITLE>Document</TITLE>

2055
Federal Register /Vol. 73, No. 8 /Friday, January 11, 2008 /Notices
referral or services for individuals or
couples where violence is occurring.
Applicants should be able to
demonstrate knowledge of the
information and services provided by
domestic violence coalitions within the
community.
vii. Funding Thresholds. The funding
thresholds for this program will be
revised to reflect ANAís availability of
funds within this special initiative
program area. These thresholds allow
ANA to provide funding to the
maximum number of applicants. (Legal
authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991
band 2991bñ3.)
viii. Project Periods. The project
periods reflect the review and
assessment of projects monitored under
this special initiative program area.
These project periods allow ANA to
provide funding to the maximum
number of applicants. (Legal authority:
Section 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and
2991bñ3.)
In the FY 08 PA, project periods will
be:
•
Priority Area 1óPlanning: 12
months.
•
Priority Area 2óImplementation:
36 months.
(C) ANA SEDS: In the FY 2008 PA for
both priority areas, the program areas of
interest (PAI) for social development
projects changed. The Administration
for Children and Families has expanded
the focus of healthy marriage to include
responsible fatherhood activities. In
order to eliminate redundancy, this
activity was added to the NAHMI PA.
The grandparents PAI was included to
promote inter-generational programs.
(Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d)
and 803C of the Native American
Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 2991b and 2991bñ3.)
The FY 2008 PA will replace the
fatherhood PAI with the following:
•
Projects that address the needs of
grandparents raising grandchildren.
(D) ANA Mitigation: The FY 2008 PA
removes all definitions related to in-
kind contributions, including in-kind
contributions, leveraged resources,
partnerships, and letters of
commitment. Furthermore, the required
number of impact indicators is reduced
to one. These changes are reflective of
Public Law 103ñ335 which does not
require matching funds. (Legal
authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991bñ3 and Public Law
103
–335.)
Dated: January 2, 2008.
Quanah Crossland Stamps,
Commissioner, Administration for Native
Americans.
[FR Doc. 08ñ56 Filed 1ñ10ñ08 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–01–M
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 2007F–0478]
Kemira Oyi; Filing of Food Additive
Petition (Animal Use); Partially
Ammoniated Formic Acid
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing
that Kemira Oyi has filed a petition
proposing that the food additive
regulations be amended to provide for
the safe use of partially ammoniated
formic acid as a pH control agent in
swine feed.
DATES:
Submit written or electronic
comments on the petitionerís
environmental assessment by March 11,
2008.
ADDRESSES:
You may submit written
comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFAñ305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit
electronic comments to: http://
www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Isabel W. Pocurull, Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug
Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240 453ñ6853,
email: <FONT STYLE="font-size<EMAIL_ADDRESS>STYLE="font-size: 9.00pt">.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5))),
notice is given that a food additive
petition (FAP 2258) has been filed by
Kristi O. Smedley, Center for Regulatory
Services, Inc., 5200 Wolf Run Shoals
Rd., Woodbridge, VA 22192ñ5755,
United States agent for Kemira Oyi,
Porkkalantatu 3, PO Box 330, 001000
Helsinki, Finland. The petition proposes
to amend the food additive regulations
in part 573óFood Additives Permitted
in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals
(21 CFR part 573) to provide for the safe
use of partially ammoniated formic acid
as a pH control agent in swine feed
when used at levels up to 1.2 percent of
the feed.
The potential environmental impact
of this action is being reviewed. To
encourage public participation
consistent with regulations issued under
the National Environmental Policy Act
(40 CFR 1501.4(b)), the agency is
placing the environmental assessment
submitted with the petition that is the
subject of this notice on public display
at the Division of Dockets Management
(see
ADDRESSES
) for public review and
comment.
Interested persons may submit to the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES
) written or electronic
comments regarding this document.
Submit a single copy of electronic
comments or two paper copies of any
mailed comments, except that
individuals may submit one paper copy.
Comments are to be identified with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FDA will also place on public display
any amendments to, or comments on,
the petitionerís environmental
assessment without further
announcement in the Federal Register.
If, based on its review, the agency finds
that an environmental impact statement
is not required and this petition results
in a regulation, the notice of availability
of the agencyís finding of no significant
impact and the evidence supporting that
finding will be published with the
regulation in the Federal Register in
accordance with 21 CFR 25.51(b).
Dated: December 31, 2007.
Bernadette Dunham,
Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. E8ñ316 Filed 1ñ10ñ08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
Anti-Infective Drugs Advisory
Committee; Notice of Meeting
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
This notice announces a forthcoming
meeting of a public advisory committee
of the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). The meeting will be open to the
public.
Name of Committee: Anti-Infective
Drugs Advisory Committee.
General Function of the Committee:
To provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on
FDAís regulatory issues.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:33 Jan 10, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1