[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 85 (Friday, May 1, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25345-25348]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09140]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0343; Product Identifier 2019-NM-206-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018-17-05, which applies to all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes. AD 2018-17-05 requires a check of the insulation resistance
of the direct drive solenoid valve (DDSOV) of each affected electro-
hydrostatic actuator (EHA) and applicable corrective actions. Since the
FAA issued AD 2018-17-05, it has been determined that certain EHA part
numbers can be modified and re-identified as specified in European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-0301, dated December 12,
2019, which would inadvertently remove certain part numbers from the
applicability in other EHA-related ADs. This proposed AD would require
a check of the insulation resistance of the DDSOV of each affected EHA
and applicable corrective actions, and modifying or replacing certain
EHAs, as specified in two EASA ADs, which will be incorporated by
reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 15,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view
this IBR material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2020-0343.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0343; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Arrigotti, Aerospace
Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-
3218<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0343;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-206-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM based on those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact we receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2018-17-05, Amendment 39-19359 (83 FR 40438,
August 15, 2018) (``AD 2018-17-05''), which applied to all Airbus SAS
Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. AD 2018-17-05 requires a check of
the insulation resistance of the DDSOV of each affected EHA and
applicable corrective actions. The FAA issued AD 2018-17-05 to address
degraded insulation resistance in the DDSOV, due to incorrect sealing
application, which could lead to the DDSOV being unable to command or
maintain the EHA in active mode, possibly resulting in reduced control
of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2018-17-05 Was Issued

    Since AD 2018-17-05 was issued, it has been determined that certain
EHA part numbers can be modified and re-identified as described in EASA
AD 2019-0301, dated December 12, 2019 (``EASA 2019-0301''), which would
inadvertently remove certain part numbers from the applicability in
other EHA-related ADs. Therefore, EASA issued AD 2020-0027R1, dated
February 21, 2020 (``EASA AD 2020-0027R1''), to revise the definition
of an affected EHA.
    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0301 and EASA AD 2020-0027R1
(these ADs are also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041 airplanes. EASA
AD 2020-0027R1 supersedes EASA AD 2018-0141, dated July 3, 2018 (which
corresponds to FAA AD 2018-17-05).
    In addition to the determination that certain EHA part numbers
might have been inadvertently removed from the actions required by AD
2018-17-05, this proposed AD was prompted by reports of EHA units that
were returned to the manufacturer with degraded insulation resistance
in the DDSOV; investigation results revealed that moisture ingress, due
to incorrect sealing application, had caused this degradation. This AD
was also prompted by a report of a technical issue detected on EHAs
installed on inboard ailerons and elevators, causing potential
erroneous monitoring of those actuators. The FAA is proposing this AD
to address degraded insulation resistance, which could lead to the
DDSOV being unable to command or maintain the EHA in active mode, and
possibly result in reduced control of the

airplane. The FAA is also proposing this AD to address the possibility
of an in-flight loss of inboard aileron or elevator control, which, due
to the resulting drag, would lead to increased fuel consumption, and
when combined with one engine inoperative, could result in reduced
control of the airplane. See the MCAI for additional background
information.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0301 describes, among other actions, procedures for
modifying or replacing affected EHAs. In addition, EASA AD 2020-0027R1
describes procedures for a check of the insulation resistance of the
DDSOV of each affected EHA (installed on inboard ailerons, elevators,
and rudder) and applicable corrective actions (replacing or
reidentifying the affected EHA). This material is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to a bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the agency
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing certain actions
specified in EASA AD 2019-0301 and the actions specified in EASA AD
2020-0027R1, described previously, as incorporated by reference, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this AD and except as discussed under ``Differences Between this
Proposed AD and the MCAI.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2019-0301
and EASA AD 2020-0027R1 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2019-0301 and EASA AD 2020-0027R1 in their entirety, through
that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions
in the regulatory text of this proposed AD. Using common terms that are
the same as the heading of a particular section in the EASA AD does not
mean that operators need comply only with that section. For example,
where the AD requirement refers to ``all required actions and
compliance times,'' compliance with this AD requirement is not limited
to the section titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in
the EASA AD. Service information specified in EASA AD 2019-0301 and
EASA AD 2020-0027R1 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2019-
0301 and EASA AD 2020-0027R1 will be available on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2020-0343 after the FAA final rule is published.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    EASA AD 2019-0301 requires the accomplishment of paragraphs (1)
through (6). However, this AD only requires the accomplishment of
paragraphs (5) and (6) of EASA AD 2019-0301. Paragraphs (1) through (4)
of EASA AD 2019-0301 are addressed in FAA AD 2019-16-08, Amendment 39-
19711 (84 FR 51957, October 1, 2019), which requires revising the
airplane flight manual (AFM) to provide the flightcrew with updated
procedures related to inboard aileron fault operations, and also
requires modification of the electronic centralized aircraft monitoring
(ECAM) procedures by installing an Airbus temporary quick change (ATQC)
and activating an ECAM temporary change.

Clarification of a Definition in EASA AD 2020-0027R1

    For EASA AD 2020-0027R1, all serial numbers listed in the
``applicable SB'' are included in the definition of ``affected EHA''
regardless of the associated part numbers that are also listed in the
``applicable SB.''

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 13 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                     Estimated Costs for Required Actions *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New proposed actions.............  Up to 28 work-hours           ** $0  Up to $2,380.......  Up to $30,940.
                                    x $85 per hour =
                                    $2,380.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting.
** The FAA has received no definitive date on the parts cost for the modification or replacement specified in
  this proposed AD.

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the proposed reporting requirement in this proposed AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA
estimates the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S.
operators to be $1,105, or $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Labor cost                 Parts cost       Cost per product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 28 work-hours x $85 per     Up to $518,314....  Up to $520,694.
 hour = $2,380.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this proposed AD
is 2120-0056. The paperwork cost associated with this proposed AD has
been detailed in the Costs of Compliance section of this document and
includes time for reviewing instructions, as well as completing and
reviewing the collection of information. Therefore, all reporting
associated with this proposed AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the
accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should
be directed to Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal
Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-
1524.

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018-17-05, Amendment 39-19359 (83 FR 40438, August 15, 2018), and
adding the following new AD:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2020-0343; Product Identifier 2019-NM-
206-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 15, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2018-17-05, Amendment 39-19359 (83 FR 40438,
August 15, 2018) (``AD 2018-17-05'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and -1041
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of electro-hydrostatic actuator
(EHA) units that were returned to the manufacturer with degraded
insulation resistance in the direct drive solenoid valve (DDSOV);
investigation results revealed that moisture ingress, due to
incorrect sealing application, had caused this degradation. This AD
was also prompted by a report of a technical issue detected on EHAs
installed on inboard ailerons and elevators, causing potential
erroneous monitoring of those actuators. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address degraded insulation resistance, which could lead to the
DDSOV being unable to command or maintain the EHA in active mode,
and possibly result in reduced control of the airplane. The FAA is
also issuing this AD to address the possibility of an in-flight loss
of inboard aileron or elevator control, which, due to the resulting
drag, would lead to increased fuel consumption, and when combined
with one engine inoperative, could result in reduced control of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2020-0027R1, dated February 21, 2020 (``EASA AD 2020-0027R1'') and
EASA AD 2019-0301, dated December 12, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0301'').

(h) Exceptions and Clarifications to EASA AD 2019-0301 and EASA AD
2020-0027R1

    (1) Where EASA AD 2019-0301 and EASA AD 2020-0027R1 refer to
their effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of
this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0301 and EASA AD
2020-0027R1 do not apply to this AD.
    (3) Where EASA AD 2019-0301 requires the accomplishment of
paragraphs (1) through (6), this AD only requires the accomplishment
of paragraphs (5) and (6).
    (4) Paragraph (6) of EASA AD 2020-0027R1 specifies to report
insulation check results (e.g., results of the detailed inspection
of the insulation resistance) to Airbus within a certain compliance
time. For this AD, report inspection results at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h)(4)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the insulation check was done on or after the effective
date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the
insulation check.
    (ii) If the insulation check was done before the effective date
of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective
date of this AD.
    (5) EASA AD 2020-0027R1 includes a definition for ``affected
EHA'' that specifies ``as listed by serial number in the applicable
SB.'' All serial numbers listed in the ``applicable SB'' are
included in the definition of ``affected EHA'' regardless of the
associated part numbers that are also listed in the ``applicable
SB.''
    (6) For any service information referenced in EASA AD EASA AD
2019-0301 that specifies to return parts to the manufacturer, that
action is not required by this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, 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 your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person

identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (i) 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.
    (ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2018-17-05, Amendment 39-
19359 (83 FR 40438, August 15, 2018), are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2020-0027 R1 that are required
by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2020-0027R1 and paragraphs (5) and (6) of EASA
AD 2019-0301 that contains RC procedures and tests: Except as
required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC procedures and tests
must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that
are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests
that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the
procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane
can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or
changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of
an AMOC.
    (4) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: A federal agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
All responses to this collection of information are mandatory as
required by this AD; the nature and extent of confidentiality to be
provided, if any. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or
any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2020-0027R1 and EASA AD 2019-
0301, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne,
Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA AD on the EASA
website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at
the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This
material may be found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2020-0343.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen
Arrigotti, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on April 23, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-09140 Filed 4-30-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing to you as a concerned individual who is requesting an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. I am requesting that the comment period be granted an additional 105 days, allowing for a 180 day period versus its present 75 day timeline.
These proposed regulations have several issues that I find to be conflicting and ill-informed. I would love to divulge any information that I can share, if you so require. The FDA took several years to create this Proposed Rule, so I don't feel as if asking for an extended comment period is out of the question. It is a way for the consumers to voice our opinion.
My life has been changed by the use of electronic cigarettes. I can't even begin to describe the incredible changes I've noticed to my mental and physical health. Also, it has become my career, as I have become heavily involved in this industry. I work for a small business, as that is what exactly has changed countless lives across the world: small businesses. I feel that one of my biggest problems with these regulations is that it will cripple and destroy all of the jobs and innovations that have been created. I would love the opportunity to share my experience and how electronic cigarettes saved my life, as well as answering any scientific questions to the best of my ability.
 I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. This is why I urge you to take my request into consideration and grant this comment period the additional 105 days.
Thank you very much for the your time, as well as the chance to submit this request. I hope that you will take what I have said into consideration and I am willing to answer any questions you may have.

Ryan Ruple
May 12, 2014


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26124-26127]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10505]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-74854; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-041]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule

April 30, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 20, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

the most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    On, April 8 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') approved a proposed rule change that would amend CBOE
rules to permit the listing and trading of options that overlie the
MSCI EAFE Index (``MXEA options'') and the MSCI Emerging Markets Index
(``MXEF options'').\3\ As such, the Exchange proposes to establish fees
for MXEA and MXEF, effective April 21, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 74681 (April 8,
2015), 80 FR 71 [sic] (April 14, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to establish transaction fees for MXEA
and MXEF. Under the proposed fees structure, Customers (``C'' origin
code) will be assessed no transaction fee for MXEA and MXEF
transactions. The absence of a Customer transaction fee for MXEA and
MXEF options will provide greater incentives for Customers to trade
MXEA and MXEF. The Exchange notes that currently another proprietary
index option, XSP, is also not assessed a fee for Customer
transactions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Next, the Exchange proposes to assess Clearing Trading Permit
Holder proprietary (``F'' origin code) and Non-Trading Permit Holder
Affiliate (``L'' origin code) MXEA and MXEF transactions $0.20 per
contract for manual and Automated Improvement Mechanism (``AIM'')
Agency/Primary transactions, $0.35 per contract for electronic
transactions, $0.05 per contract for AIM Contra transactions and $0.25
per contract for Flex Hybrid Trading Systems (``CFLEX'') AIM Response
transactions. The Exchange also proposes to count MXEA and MXEF volume
towards the Clearing Trading Permit Holder Fee Cap (``Fee Cap''). This
will help these market participants to reach this cap on their fees.
Additionally, the Exchange recognizes that Clearing Trading Permit
Holders can be an important source of liquidity when they facilitate
their own customers' trading activity and, as such, the Exchange
proposes to apply the waiver of Clearing Trading Permit Holder
Proprietary transaction fees for facilitation orders executed via
CFLEX, in open outcry or electronically via AIM. The Exchange notes
that the proposed transaction fee amounts for Clearing Trading Permit
Holder proprietary and Non-Trading Permit Holder Affiliate transactions
are the same for Clearing Trading Permit Holder proprietary and Non-
Trading Permit Holder Affiliate transactions in all other index
products except for Underlying Symbol List A.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A. As of April 1, 2015,
the following products are included in Underlying Symbol List A:
OEX, XEO, RUT, SPX (including SPXw), SPXpm, SRO, VIX, VXST,
VOLATILITY INDEXES and binary options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Market-Maker transactions in all products except for
those listed in Underlying Symbol List A are subject to the Liquidity
Provider Sliding Scale, which provides for reduced transaction fees for
Market-Makers that reach certain volume thresholds in all underlying
symbols excluding Underlying Symbol List A and mini-options. Similarly,
the Exchange proposes to subject all Market-Maker MXEA and MXEF
transactions to the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale.
    The Exchange next proposes to establish transaction fees for
Broker-Dealers (``B''), Non-Trading Permit Holder Market-Makers
(``N''), Professionals/Voluntary Professionals (``W'') and Joint Back-
Offices (``JBOs'') (``J''). Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
assess these market participants $0.25 per contract for manual
transactions, $0.65 per contract for non-AIM electronic transactions,
$0.20 per contract for AIM Agency/Primary transactions, and $0.05 per
contract for AIM Contra transactions. Additionally for MXEA and MXEF
transactions, the Exchange is proposing to assess Broker-Dealers and
Non-Trading Permit Holder Market Makers $0.25 per contract for CFLEX
AIM Response transactions and Professional/Voluntary Professionals and
JBOs $0.30 per contract for CFLEX AIM Response transactions. The
Exchange notes that the proposed MXEA and MXEF transaction fees for
these market participants are also the same amounts assessed for the
same market participants for other index options other than those in
Underlying Symbol List A.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to assess an Index License Surcharge
(``Surcharge'') for MXEA and MXEF of $0.10 per contract for all non-
customer orders. The Exchange proposes to adopt the Index License
Surcharge for these products in order to recoup some of the costs
associated with the license for MXEA and MXEF options. Additionally,
the Exchange proposes to adopt a CFLEX Surcharge Fee of $0.10 per
contract for all MXEA and MXEF orders executed electronically on CFLEX,
capped at $250 per trade (i.e., first 2,500 contracts per trade). The
CFLEX Surcharge Fee assists the Exchange in recouping the cost of
developing and maintaining the CFLEX system. The Exchange notes that
the CFLEX Surcharge Fee (and $250 cap) also applies to other
proprietary index options, including products in Underlying Symbol List
A, as well as DJX and XSP.\7\ The Exchange also notes that the Complex
Order Book (``COB'') Taker Surcharge will also apply to MXEA and MXEF,
as it does for all products other than those in Underlying Symbol list
A and mini-options.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee
[sic] and Specified Proprietary Index Options Rate Table--Underlying
Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee.
    \8\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, COB Taker Surcharge, Footnote 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange next proposes to count MXEA and MXEF options towards
the average daily volume thresholds for the CBOE Proprietary Product
Sliding Scale. The CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding Scale provides
that Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary transaction fees and
transaction fees for Non-Clearing Trading Permit Holder Affiliates in
Underlying Symbol List A \9\ are reduced provided a Clearing Trading
Permit Holder (``Clearing TPH'') reaches certain average daily volume
(``ADV'') thresholds in all underlying symbols excluding Underlying
Symbol List A and mini-options on the Exchange in a month. The Exchange
notes that other proprietary index products such as DJX and XSP are
also included towards the qualification thresholds of the CBOE
Proprietary Products Sliding Scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ SROs are currently excluded from the CBOE Proprietary
Products Sliding Scale. See Exchange Fees Schedule, CBOE Proprietary
Products Sliding Scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, like other proprietary index products, the Exchange
proposes to except MXEA and MXEF from the Volume Incentive Program,
\10\ the Marketing Fee, \11\ and eligibility for payments under the
Order Router Subsidy (ORS) and Complex Order Router Subsidy (CORS)
Programs \12\. Additionally, it will be excluded from the calculation
of qualifying volume for

rebates for Floor Broker Trading Permit Holder Trading Permit Fees.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program.
    \11\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Marketing Fee, Footnote 6.
    \12\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Order Router Subsidy Program and
Complex Order Subsidy Program, Footnotes 29 and 30.
    \13\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Footnote 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\14\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \15\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\16\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Particularly, the Exchange believes it is reasonable to charge
different fee amounts to different user types in the manner proposed
because the proposed fees are consistent with the price differentiation
that exists today for other index products. The Exchange also believes
that the proposed fee amounts for MXEA and MXEF orders are reasonable
because the proposed fee amounts are within the range of amounts
assessed for the Exchange's other index products, excluding Underlying
Symbol List A.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options
Rate Table--All Index Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess lower fees to Customers as compared to other
market participants because Customer order flow enhances liquidity on
the Exchange for the benefit of all market participants. Specifically,
customer liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more
trading opportunities, which attracts Market-Makers. An increase in the
activity of these market participants in turn facilitates tighter
spreads, which may cause an additional corresponding increase in order
flow from other market participants. The fees offered to customers are
intended to attract more customer trading volume to the Exchange.
Moreover, the options industry has a long history of providing
preferential pricing to Customers, and the Exchange's current Fees
Schedule currently does so in many places, as do the fees structures of
many other exchanges. Finally, all fee amounts listed as applying to
Customers will be applied equally to all Customers (meaning that all
Customers will be assessed the same amount).
    The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to offer the Liquidity Provider Sliding Scale to Market-
Makers only because Market-Makers take on obligations, such as quoting
obligations, which other market participants do not have. Further, the
lower fees offered to Market-Makers are intended to incent Market-
Makers to quote and trade more on the Exchange, thereby providing more
trading opportunities for all market participants.
    Similarly, it is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to
assess lower fees to Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary orders
than those of other market participants (except Customers and Market-
Makers) because Clearing Trading Permit Holders also have a number of
obligations (such as membership with the Options Clearing Corporation),
significant regulatory burdens, and financial obligations, that other
market participants do not need to take on. It should also be noted
that all fee amounts described herein are intended to attract greater
order flow to the Exchange in MXEA and MXEF, which should therefore
serve to benefit all Exchange market participants. The Exchange also
notes that the MXEA and MXEF fee amounts for each separate type of
market participant will be assessed equally to all such market
participants (i.e. all Broker-Dealer orders will be assessed the same
amount, all Joint Back-Office orders will be assessed the same amount,
etc.).
    The Exchange believes that assessing an Index License Surcharge Fee
of $0.10 per contract to MXEA and MXEF transactions is reasonable
because the Surcharge helps recoup some of the costs associated with
the license for MXEA and MXEF options. Additionally, the Exchange notes
that the Surcharge amount is the same as, and in some cases lower than,
the amount assessed as an Index License Surcharge to other index
products.\18\ The proposed Surcharge is also equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because the amount will be assessed to all market
participants to whom the Surcharge applies. Not applying the MXEA and
MXEF Index License Surcharge Fee to Customer orders is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because this is designed to attract
Customer MXEA and MXEF orders, which increases liquidity and provides
greater trading opportunities to all market participants. Similarly,
the Exchange believes assessing a CFLEX Surcharge Fee of $0.10 per
contract for all MXEA and MXEF orders executed electronically on CFLEX
and capping it at $250 (i.e., first 2,500 contracts per trade) is
reasonable because it is the same amount currently charged to other
proprietary index products for the same transactions.\19\ The proposed
Surcharge is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
amount will be assessed to all market participants to whom the CFLEX
Surcharge applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options
Rate Table--All Index Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A,
Surcharge Fee Index License.
    \19\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Index Options Rate Table--All Index
Products Excluding Underlying Symbol List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee and
Specified Proprietary Index Options Rate Table--Underlying Symbol
List A, CFLEX Surcharge Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange believes that the proposal to count MXEA
and MXEF fees towards the Fee Cap is reasonable because it will help
Clearing Trading Permit Holders to reach this cap on their fees. The
Exchange believes this is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
MXEA and MXEF fees will count towards the Fee Cap in the same manner
that transaction fees for all other products excluding Underlying
Symbol List A (except for binary options) count towards the Fee Cap.
    The Exchange believes it's reasonable to apply the waiver of
Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary transaction fees for
facilitation orders executed via CFLEX, in open outcry or
electronically via AIM for MXEA and MXEF because it will exempt such
orders from being assessed fees. The Exchange believes that this is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the waiver also
applies to other products, including other proprietary index products
(e.g., DJX and XSP). Further, the Exchange recognizes that Clearing
Trading Permit Holders can be an important source of liquidity when
they facilitate their own customers' trading activity. Such trades add
transparency and promote price discovery to the benefit of all market
participants. Moreover, the exemption

from fees for MXEA and MXEF facilitation orders executed in AIM, open
outcry, or as a CFLEX transaction will apply to all such orders.
    The Exchange believes it's reasonable to count MXEA and MXEF volume
towards the average daily volume thresholds for the CBOE Proprietary
Product Sliding Scale because other proprietary index products such as
DJX and XSP are also included towards the qualification thresholds of
the CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding Scale.\20\ The Exchange believes
the proposed inclusion of MXEA and MXEF in the qualifying volume is
equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it will apply to all
Clearing Trading Permit Holder Proprietary MXEA and MXEF orders
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, CBOE Proprietary Products Sliding
Scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, excepting MXEA and MXEF from the Marketing Fee, VIP, and
the ORS and CORS Programs is reasonable because other proprietary index
products (e.g., DJX and XSP) are also excepted from these fees and
programs.\21\ It seems equitable to except MXEA and MXEF from items on
the Fees Schedule from which other proprietary index products are also
excepted. Similarly, the Exchange believes it's reasonable to exclude
MXEA and MXEF from the calculation of the qualifying volume for the
Floor Broker Trading Permit Fees rebate because other proprietary index
products such as DJX and XSP are also excluded.\22\ The Exchange also
believes the proposed exclusion of MXEA and MXEF from the qualifying
calculation is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
exclusion will apply to all MXEA and MXEF orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program, Marketing
Fee, Footnote 6 and Order Router Subsidy Program and Complex Order
Subsidy Program, Footnotes 29 and 30.
    \22\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Footnote 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition that are not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, while different fees
are assessed to different market participants in some circumstances,
these different market participants have different obligations and
different circumstances as discussed above. For example, Market-Makers
have quoting obligations that other market participants do not have.
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because MXEA and
MXEF will be exclusively listed on CBOE. To the extent that the
proposed changes make CBOE a more attractive marketplace for market
participants at other exchanges, such market participants are welcome
to become CBOE market participants.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \23\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \24\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2015-041 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-2015-041. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; 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-CBOE-2015-041 and should be
submitted on or before May 27, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-10505 Filed 5-5-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35689-35690]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15172]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75179; File No. SR-ICC-2015-012]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Correct Inconsistent Provisions
Regarding the Risk Management Subcommittee

June 16, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 10, 2015, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') 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 primarily by ICC. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend the ICC
Clearing Rules (the ``Rules'') to correct inconsistent provisions
regarding the Risk Management Subcommittee.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, ICC 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. ICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.

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

    The proposed revisions are intended to make revisions to correct
inconsistent provisions regarding the Risk Management Subcommittee. ICC
believes such changes will protect investors and the public interest.
The proposed Rule revisions are described in detail as follows.
    In describing the independence requirements for certain Risk
Management Subcommittee members in Rule 511(a)(iii), ICC mistakenly
referred to U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'')
Regulation 1.3(ccc), a proposed regulation that, to date, the CFTC has
not adopted. ICC proposes revising Rule 511(a)(iii) to remove the
improper reference to CFTC Regulation 1.3(ccc) and replacing such rule
cite with a reference to ICC's Independence Requirements, which are
defined in Rule 503. Such independent Risk Management Subcommittee
managers were previously defined as ``Independent Public Directors'' in
Rules 511 and 512. ICC proposes re-defining such independent Risk
Management Subcommittee managers to ``Independent ICE Subcommittee
Managers'' and updating references in Rules 511 and 512 to reflect the
new defined term. ICC also proposes clarifying language to specify that
such Independent ICE Subcommittee Managers are appointed by the ICC
Board. Finally, ICC proposes revising Rule 512 to clarify that for
purposes of Rule 507(a), which sets forth meeting frequency
requirements, the Risk

Management Subcommittee shall meet when deemed necessary or desirable
by the Risk Management Subcommittee or its chairperson.
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \3\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to protect investors
and the public interest and to comply with the provisions of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder. ICC believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to ICC, in particular,
to Section 17(A)(b)(3)(F),\4\ because ICC believes that the proposed
rule change will protect investors and the public interest. The
revisions to correct certain inconsistent provisions regarding the Risk
Management Subcommittee alleviate potential confusion within the ICC
Rules. As such, the proposed rule changes are designed to protect
investors and the public interest within the meaning of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) \5\ of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule changes will also satisfy the requirements of
Rule 17Ad-22.\6\ In particular, the revisions to correct inconsistent
provisions regarding the Risk Management Subcommittee ensure ICC's
governance arrangements remain clear and transparent, consistent with
the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(d)(8).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would have any
impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The revisions to correct
certain inconsistent provisions regarding the Risk Management
Subcommittee apply uniformly across all market participants. Therefore,
ICC does not believe the proposed rule change imposes any burden on
competition that is inappropriate 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 relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by ICC.

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

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICC-2015-012 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-ICC-2015-012. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Credit
and on ICE Clear Credit's Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation.
    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-ICC-2015-012
and should be submitted on or before July 13, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15172 Filed 6-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 125 (Friday, June 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42363-42364]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13950]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-AO-2022-0729; FRL-11124-01-OMS]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the
Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment
Request; Environmental Education Local Grants Progress Report Form
(New)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Environmental Education Local
Grants Progress Report Form (EPA ICR Number 2731.01, OMB Control Number
2090-NEW) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a
request for approval of a new collection. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal Register on November 15, 2022,
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments.

DATES: Comments may be submitted on or before July 31, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to EPA, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-AO-2022-0729, to EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. EPA's policy is that all
comments received will be included in the public docket without change
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public

Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Band, Office of Environmental
Education, (1704A), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a request for approval of a new
collection. 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.
    Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register
on November 15, 2022, during a 60-day comment period (87 FR 68482).
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments.
Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the
EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this
ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in
person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is
202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket,
visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: This notice announces the collection of information
related to the U.S. EPA Environmental Education (EE) Local Grants
Program. EPA proposes to collect information from this program's grant
recipients. Specifically, EPA proposes to have all EE grantees use the
progress report form, detailed in the supporting statement, when
drafting their Quarterly Progress Reports and Final Reports. By
requiring all EE Grantees to use the EE Local Grant Progress Report
Form, EPA's Office of Environmental Education will be equipped to
gather data on this grant program's outputs, outcomes, the total number
of individuals reached, and the total number of underserved communities
reached. This information will help EPA ensure projects are on schedule
to meet their goals and produce high-quality environmental outputs.
Additionally, requiring all EE grantees to submit their Quarterly and
Final reports using the proposed form will allow EPA's Office of
Environmental Education to accurately track and report the overall
impact of this grant program as well as contribute to the Agency's
Justice40 reporting requirements.
    Form Numbers: EPA Form Number 5800-082.
    Respondents/affected entities: Local education agencies, colleges
or universities, state education or environmental agencies, nonprofit
organizations as described in Section 501(C)(3) of the U.S. Internal
Revenue Code, noncommercial educational broadcasting entities as
defined and licensed by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (in accordance with
OMB and EPA regulations, title 2 CFR, parts 200 and 1500, the recipient
agrees to submit progress reports on a quarterly basis to the EPA
Project Officer within thirty (30) days after each reporting period and
the Final Report to the EPA Project Officer within one hundred twenty
(120) days after the expiration or termination of the approved project
period.
    Estimated number of respondents: 240 (per year).
    Frequency of response: Four times per year for the Quarterly
Progress Reports; one time for the Final Report.
    Total estimated burden: 800 hours (per year). Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $53,664 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: This is a new collection. Over time, the
Office of Environmental Education expects the burden numbers to
decrease due to increased access to technology.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2023-13950 Filed 6-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8856-8859]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3280]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0040; FRL-9335-5]

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: There will be a 4-day meeting of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP) to
consider and review scientific issues concerning chlorpyrifos health
effects.

DATES: The meeting will be held on April 10-13, 2012, from
approximately 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    Comments. The Agency encourages that written comments be submitted
by March 27, 2012, and requests for oral comments be submitted by April
3, 2012. However, written comments and requests to make oral comments
may be submitted until the date of the meeting, but anyone submitting
written comments after March 27, 2012, should contact the Designated
Federal Official (DFO) listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
For additional instructions, see Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
    Nominations. Nominations of candidates to serve as ad hoc members
of FIFRA SAP for this meeting should be provided on or before February
29, 2012.
    Webcast. This meeting may be webcast. Please refer to the FIFRA
SAP's Web site, http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap for information on how
to access the webcast. Please note that the webcast is a supplementary
public process provided only for convenience. If difficulties arise
resulting in webcasting outages, the meeting will continue as planned.
    Special accommodations. For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, and to request accommodation of a
disability, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time
as possible to process your request.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Conference Center, Lobby Level, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202.
    Comments. Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0040, by one of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility 's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2012-0040. If your comments contain any information that you consider
to be CBI or otherwise protected, please contact the DFO listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to obtain special instructions before
submitting your comments. EPA's policy is that all comments received
will be included in the docket without change and may be made available
on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the
docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Nominations, requests to present oral comments, and requests for
special accommodations. Submit nominations to serve as ad hoc members
of FIFRA SAP, requests for special seating accommodations, or requests
to present oral comments to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Jenkins, Jr., DFO, Office of
Science Coordination and Policy (7201M), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 I. General Information

 A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may,
however, be of interest to persons who are or may be required to
conduct testing of chemical substances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), FIFRA, and the Food Quality Protection Act of
1996 (FQPA). Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the DFO
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

 B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

 C. How may I participate in this meeting?

    You may participate in this meeting by following the instructions
in this unit. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that
you identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0040 in the subject line
on the first page of your request.
    1. Written comments. The Agency encourages that written comments be
submitted, using the instructions in ADDRESSES, no later than March 27,
2012, to provide FIFRA SAP the time necessary to consider and review
the written comments. Written comments are accepted until the date of
the meeting, but anyone submitting written comments after March 27,
2012, should contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Anyone submitting written comments at the meeting should bring
30 copies for distribution to FIFRA SAP.
    2. Oral comments. The Agency encourages that each individual or
group wishing to make brief oral comments to FIFRA SAP submit their
request to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT no
later than April 3, 2012, in order to be included on the meeting
agenda. Requests to present oral comments will be accepted until the
date of the meeting and, to the extent that time permits, the Chair of
FIFRA SAP may permit the presentation of oral comments at the meeting
by interested persons who have not previously requested time. The
request should identify the name of the individual making the
presentation, the organization (if any) the individual will represent,
and any requirements for audiovisual equipment (e.g., overhead
projector, 35 mm projector, chalkboard). Oral comments before FIFRA SAP
are

limited to approximately 5 minutes unless prior arrangements have been
made. In addition, each speaker should bring 30 copies of his or her
comments and presentation slides for distribution to the FIFRA SAP at
the meeting.
    3. Seating at the meeting. Seating at the meeting will be open and
on a first-come basis.
    4. Request for nominations to serve as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP
for this meeting. As part of a broader process for developing a pool of
candidates for each meeting, FIFRA SAP staff routinely solicits the
stakeholder community for nominations of prospective candidates for
service as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP. Any interested person or
organization may nominate qualified individuals to be considered as
prospective candidates for a specific meeting. Individuals nominated
for this meeting should have expertise in one or more of the following
areas: Cholinergic and non-cholinergic mechanisms, cholinesterase
inhibition, developmental neurotoxicity, epidemiology (particularly
reproductive/developmental, environmental), exposure assessment of
pesticides (both residential and agricultural worker), human
biomonitoring data and interpretation of such data, human health risk
assessment, mode of action analysis--people with experience with the
mode of action framework, and organophosphate pesticides
pharmacokinetics. Nominees should be scientists who have sufficient
professional qualifications, including training and experience, to be
capable of providing expert comments on the scientific issues for this
meeting. Nominees should be identified by name, occupation, position,
address, and telephone number. Nominations should be provided to the
DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or before February
29, 2012. The Agency will consider all nominations of prospective
candidates for this meeting that are received on or before this date.
However, final selection of ad hoc members for this meeting is a
discretionary function of the Agency.
    The selection of scientists to serve on FIFRA SAP is based on the
function of the panel and the expertise needed to address the Agency's
charge to the panel. No interested scientists shall be ineligible to
serve by reason of their membership on any other advisory committee to
a Federal department or agency or their employment by a Federal
department or agency except the EPA. Other factors considered during
the selection process include availability of the potential panel
member to fully participate in the panel's reviews, absence of any
conflicts of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality,
independence with respect to the matters under review, and lack of
bias. Although financial conflicts of interest, the appearance of lack
of impartiality, lack of independence, and bias may result in
disqualification, the absence of such concerns does not assure that a
candidate will be selected to serve on FIFRA SAP. Numerous qualified
candidates are identified for each panel. Therefore, selection
decisions involve carefully weighing a number of factors including the
candidates' areas of expertise and professional qualifications and
achieving an overall balance of different scientific perspectives on
the panel. In order to have the collective breadth of experience needed
to address the Agency's charge for this meeting, the Agency anticipates
selecting approximately 10 ad hoc scientists.
    FIFRA SAP members are subject to the provisions of 5 CFR part 2634,
Executive Branch Financial Disclosure, as supplemented by the EPA in 5
CFR part 6401. In anticipation of this requirement, prospective
candidates for service on the FIFRA SAP will be asked to submit
confidential financial information which shall fully disclose, among
other financial interests, the candidate's employment, stocks and
bonds, and where applicable, sources of research support. The EPA will
evaluate the candidates financial disclosure form to assess whether
there are financial conflicts of interest, appearance of a lack of
impartiality or any prior involvement with the development of the
documents under consideration (including previous scientific peer
review) before the candidate is considered further for service on FIFRA
SAP. Those who are selected from the pool of prospective candidates
will be asked to attend the public meetings and to participate in the
discussion of key issues and assumptions at these meetings. In
addition, they will be asked to review and to help finalize the meeting
minutes. The list of FIFRA SAP members participating at this meeting
will be posted on the FIFRA SAP Web site at http://epa.gov/scipoly/sap
or may be obtained from the OPP Regulatory Public Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

 II. Background

 A. Purpose of FIFRA SAP

    FIFRA SAP serves as the primary scientific peer review mechanism of
EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) and is
structured to provide scientific advice, information and
recommendations to the EPA Administrator on pesticides and pesticide-
related issues as to the impact of regulatory actions on health and the
environment. FIFRA SAP is a Federal advisory committee established in
1975 under FIFRA that operates in accordance with requirements of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act. FIFRA SAP is composed of a permanent
panel consisting of seven members who are appointed by the EPA
Administrator from nominees provided by the National Institutes of
Health and the National Science Foundation. FIFRA, as amended by FQPA,
established a Science Review Board consisting of at least 60 scientists
who are available to the SAP on an ad hoc basis to assist in reviews
conducted by the SAP. As a peer review mechanism, FIFRA SAP provides
comments, evaluations and recommendations to improve the effectiveness
and quality of analyses made by Agency scientists. Members of FIFRA SAP
are scientists who have sufficient professional qualifications,
including training and experience, to provide expert advice and
recommendation to the Agency.

 B. Public Meeting

    Chlorpyrifos (0,0-diethyl-0-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridyl
phosphorothioate) is a broad-spectrum, chlorinated organophosphate (OP)
insecticide. Like other OPs, chlorpyrifos binds to and phosphorylates
the enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChE) in both the central (brain) and
peripheral nervous systems. This can lead to accumulation of
acetylcholine and, ultimately, at sufficiently high doses, to clinical
signs of toxicity. In 2011, the Agency released a preliminary human
health risk assessment for chlorpyrifos. The focus of this assessment
was on the cholinesterase (ChE) inhibiting potential of chlorpyrifos.
Consistent with this focus, EPA evaluated the extensive database of ChE
data for multiple lifestages and selected points of departure (PoDs)
based on consideration of all quality and reliable data. There is,
however, a growing body of literature with laboratory animals (rats and
mice) indicating that gestational and/or early postnatal exposure to
chlorpyrifos may cause persistent effects into adulthood. The results
of both in vivo and in vitro studies on chlorpyrifos have led some
research groups to propose that changes in brain connectivity and/or
neurochemistry may underlie these changes into adulthood. In addition,
there are epidemiology studies evaluating pre- and post-natal
chlorpyrifos or other OP exposure in

mother-infant pairs that have reported associations with birth
outcomes, childhood neurobehavioral and neurodevelopment outcomes in
the offspring when evaluated in neonates, infants, and young children.
    In 2008, the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) reviewed a draft
science issue paper on the human health effects of chlorpyrifos which
provided a preliminary review of the scientific literature on
experimental toxicology and epidemiology studies available at that
time. In 2010, the Agency developed a draft ``Framework for
Incorporating Human Epidemiologic & Incident Data in Health Risk
Assessment'' which provides the conceptual foundation for evaluating
multiple lines of scientific evidence in the context of the
understanding of the adverse outcome pathway (or mode of action). This
draft framework uses modified Bradford Hill Criteria to evaluate the
sufficiency of evidence to establish key events within a mode of
action(s) and explicitly considers such concepts as strength,
consistency, dose response, temporal concordance and biological
plausibility. Since the 2008 SAP on chlorpyrifos, the Agency has
performed further analyses on the existing and new epidemiology results
in mothers and children, available biomonitoring data, and experimental
toxicology studies evaluating proposed adverse outcome pathways in the
context of human health risk assessment. Specifically, the Agency is
evaluating available literature on the potential for chlorpyrifos to
cause long term adverse effects from early life exposure, in vivo and
in vitro studies evaluating mechanistic aspects of chlorpyrifos, and
the potential for adverse effects below doses established from ChE
inhibition that are used for regulatory purposes. At this time, the
Agency is working towards a weight of evidence evaluation integrating
the epidemiology studies with the experimental toxicology studies for
the neurodevelopmental outcomes. This analysis is complex and
multifaceted as it involves different lines of scientific evidence
(i.e., in vivo and in vitro experimental toxicology studies, explicit
consideration of adverse outcome pathways, exposure, epidemiology, and
biomonitoring data). As such, the Agency believes that peer review on
the status of the current analysis is important.

C. FIFRA SAP Documents and Meeting Minutes

    EPA's background paper, related supporting materials, charge/
questions to FIFRA SAP, FIFRA SAP composition (i.e., members and ad hoc
members for this meeting), and the meeting agenda will be available by
approximately mid-March. In addition, the Agency may provide additional
background documents as the materials become available. You may obtain
electronic copies of these documents, and certain other related
documents that might be available electronically, at http://www.regulations.gov and the FIFRA SAP homepage at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap.
    FIFRA SAP will prepare meeting minutes summarizing its
recommendations to the Agency approximately 90 days after the meeting.
The meeting minutes will be posted on the FIFRA SAP Web site or may be
obtained from the OPP Regulatory Public Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: February 2, 2012.
Frank Sanders,
Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-3280 Filed 2-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P