[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38229-38230]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15284]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-1156; Airspace Docket No. 20-ANE-7]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Monhegan Island, ME

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Monhegan Island Heliport, Monhegan
Island, ME, to accommodate area navigation (RNAV) global positioning
system (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures (SIAPs) serving
this heliport. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and
management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations in the area.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, October 7, 2021. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Monhegan Island Heliport, Monhegan Island, ME, to
support instrument flight rules operations at this heliport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (86 FR 5043, January 19, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2020-1156 to
establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Monhegan Island Heliport, Monhegan Island, ME, to
accommodate area navigation (RNAV) global positioning system (GPS)
standard instrument approach procedures (SIAPs) serving this heliport.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

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

The Rule

    The FAA is amending 14 CFR part 71 by establishing Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Monhegan Island
Heliport, Monhegan Island, ME, to accommodate area navigation (RNAV)
global positioning system (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures
(SIAPs) serving this heliport. Subsequent to publication of the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, the FAA found the geographic coordinates of
Monhegan Island Heliport were incorrect. This action corrects the
error. These changes are necessary for continued safety and management
of IFR operations in the area.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,

Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANE ME E5 Monhegan Island, ME [New]

Monhegan Island Heliport, ME
    (Lat. 43[deg]45'52'' N, long. 69[deg]18'52'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
of the earth within a 6-mile radius of Monhegan Island Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 12, 2021.
Andreese C. Davis,
Manager, Airspace & Procedures Team South, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2021-15284 Filed 7-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: December 23, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 246)]
[Notices]
[Page 76273-76274]
[DOCID:fr23de05-51]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER06-252-001]

ISO New England Inc.; Notice of Filing

December 13, 2005.
    Take notice that on December 12, 2005, ISO New England, Inc. (the
ISO)

filed an additional interim revision to Market Rule 1 to aid the ISO in
implementing its Winter 2005/2006 Action Plan.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m., Eastern Time on December 27, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-7745 Filed 12-22-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 38)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 10188-10190]
[DOCID:fr26fe08-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0216; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-004-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Przedsiebiorstwo Doswiadczalno-
Produkcyjne Szybownictwa ``PZL-Bielsko'' Model SZD-50-3 ``Puchacz''
Gliders

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    On the pre-flight check of a SZD-50-3 glider, the Right Hand
(RH) wing airbrake was found impossible to retract. Investigation
revealed that the occurrence was caused by a loose bolt of the ``V''
shape airbrake bellcrank, named hereafter intermediate control
lever. The Left Hand (LH) wing lever also presented, to a lesser
extent, a loose bolt.

    The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address
the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 27, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0216;
Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-004-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On January 14, 2008, we issued AD 2008-02-09, Amendment 39-15339
(73 FR 3623, January 22, 2008). That AD required actions intended to
address an unsafe condition on the products listed above.
    AD 2008-02-09 was issued as an interim action in order to address
the need for the immediate inspection for loose attachment bolts in the
left-hand

and right-hand wing airbrake intermediate control lever requirement and
replacement if loose attachment bolts were found.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, issued Emergency
AD No. 2007-0275-E, dated October 24, 2007 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products.
    The EASA AD allows for repetitive inspections at intervals not to
exceed 100 hours time-in-service or 12 months, whichever occurs first
after the initial inspection if no loose bolts are found. The EASA AD
also requires replacing the split helical spring lock washers with tab
washers and the M8x34 bolts with M8x32 bolts on both wings at the next
1,000-hour inspection after the effective date of the AD.
    The Administrative Procedure Act does not permit the FAA to
``bootstrap'' a long-term requirement into an urgent safety of flight
action where the rule becomes effective at the same time the public has
the opportunity to comment. The short-term action and the long-term
action were analyzed separately for justification to bypass prior
public notice.
    We are issuing this proposed AD to address the repetitive
inspections and mandatory parts replacement issues.

Relevant Service Information

    Allstar PZL Glider Sp. z o. o. has issued Service Bulletin No. BE-
059/SZD-50-3/2007 ``PUCHACZ,'' dated October 15, 2007. The actions
described in this service information are intended to correct the
unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the 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 our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 6 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $480, or $80 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 12 work-hours and require parts costing $40, for a cost of
$1,000 per product.
    The estimated total cost on U.S. Operators includes the cumulative
costs associated with those airplanes affected by AD 2008-02-09.

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 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15339 (73 FR
3623, January 22, 2008), and adding the following new AD:

Przedsiebiorstwo Doswiadczalno-Produkcyjne Szybownictwa ``PZL-
Bielsko'': Docket No. FAA-2008-0216; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-
004-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by March 27, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2008-02-09, Amendment 39-15339.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model SZD-50-3 ``Puchacz'' gliders, all
serial numbers up to and including B-2207, 503199327, 503A04001,
503A05002, and 503A05003, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 27: Flight
Controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    On the pre-flight check of a SZD-50-3 glider, the Right Hand
(RH) wing airbrake was found impossible to retract. Investigation

revealed that the occurrence was caused by a loose bolt of the ``V''
shape airbrake bellcrank, named hereafter intermediate control
lever. The Left Hand (LH) wing lever also presented, to a lesser
extent, a loose bolt.
    This AD requires inspection of the LH and RH wing airbrake
intermediate control levers for loose attaching bolts and subsequent
repetitive inspections and corrective actions, as necessary. As a
terminating action, replacement of the bolts and their associated
washers is required.
    These actions are intended to address the identified unsafe
condition so as to prevent loss of the airbrake control system which
could result in an inadvertent forced landing with consequent
sailplane damage and/or passenger injury.

Requirements Retained From AD 2008-02-09

    (f) Do the following unless already done:
    (1) Within 10 days after February 1, 2008 (the effective date of
AD 2008-02-09), inspect the left-hand (LH) and the right-hand (RH)
wing airbrake intermediate control levers for loose attaching bolts
following Allstar PZL Glider Sp. z o. o. Service Bulletin No. BE-
059/SZD-50-3/2007 ``PUCHACZ,'' dated October 15, 2007.
    (2) Before further flight after the inspection required in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, if any loose bolt is found, replace the
split helical spring lock washers with tab washers and replace the
M8x34 bolts with M8x32 bolts on both wings following Allstar PZL
Glider Sp. z o. o. Service Bulletin No. BE-059/SZD-50-3/2007
``PUCHACZ,'' dated October 15, 2007. After doing this replacement,
no further action is required by this AD.

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance

    (g) If no loose bolts are found in the initial inspection
required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, repetitively inspect
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours time-in-service
(TIS) or 12 months, whichever occurs first, until you are required
to do the replacement in paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD. Do the
inspection following Allstar PZL Glider Sp. z o. o. Service Bulletin
No. BE-059/SZD-50-3/2007 ``PUCHACZ,'' dated October 15, 2007.
    (h) If any loose bolt is found during any inspection required in
paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight replace the split
helical spring lock washers with tab washers and replace the M8x34
bolts with M8x32 bolts on both wings following Allstar PZL Glider
Sp. z o. o. Service Bulletin No. BE-059/SZD-50-3/2007 ``PUCHACZ,''
dated October 15, 2007. After doing this replacement, no further
action is required by this AD.
    (i) Within the next 1,000 hours TIS after the effective date of
this AD, replace the split helical spring lock washers with tab
washers and replace the M8x34 bolts with M8x32 bolts on both wings
following Allstar PZL Glider Sp. z o. o. Service Bulletin No. BE-
059/SZD-50-3/2007 ``PUCHACZ,'' dated October 15, 2007. After doing
this replacement, no further action is required by this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (j) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using
any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight
Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (k) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Emergency AD No. 2007-0275-E, dated October 24, 2007; and Allstar
PZL Glider Sp. z o. o. Service Bulletin No. BE-059/SZD-50-3/2007
``PUCHACZ,'' dated October 15, 2007, for related information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on February 20, 2008.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-3579 Filed 2-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8654-8656]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3351]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0794]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Area; Hudson River South of the Troy Locks,
NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA) on the navigable waters of the Hudson River in New York, south of
the Troy Locks. This action is necessary to promote navigational
safety, provide for the safety of life and property, and facilitate the
reasonable demands of commerce. This action will impose restrictions on
vessels operating within the waters of the Hudson River south of the
Troy Locks when ice is a threat to navigation.

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR on February 15, 2011. This
rule is effective with actual notice for purposes of enforcement on
January 20, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2010-0794 and are available online by going to
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0794 in the ``Keyword''
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or e-mail Chief Warrant Officer Kary Moss, Coast Guard Sector New
York Waterways Management Division; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-
9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On December 10, 2010, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Regulated Navigation Area; Hudson River South of the
Troy Locks, NY'' in the Federal Register (75 FR 76943). We received no
comments on the proposed rule. A public meeting was not requested and
none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The 30-day delay would be contrary
to the public interest. As of January 20, 2011, ice formations in the
Hudson River require the commencement of Coast Guard icebreaking
operations. Without immediate implementation of this rule, the Coast
Guard will not be able to prevent underpowered tugs from transiting
through identified, unsafe ice conditions. This could lead to these
tugs with barges becoming beset in the ice and further delaying the
delivery of home heating oil to communities along the Hudson River and
within the region, as well as posing a safety threat to the environment
and a potential hazard to navigation.

Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is 33 U.S.C. 1221-1236; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define RNAs.
    Historically ice has been an impediment to navigation during
certain times of the year on the navigable waters of the Hudson River
south of the Troy Locks. West Point, Crum Elbow, Esopus Meadows,
Stuyvesant Anchorage, Hudson Anchorage, Silver Point, and Hyde Park are
all natural choke points on the Hudson River where ice buildup has the
potential to severely restrict vessel traffic.
    There are several situations faced by vessels during severe winter
conditions that can place the vessels, passengers, and crew in great
danger including being beset in the ice and ice accretion, where ice
forms on the superstructure and decks of transiting vessels thereby
affecting the vessel's stability. Ice may also cause significant damage
to propellers, rudders, and hull plating.
    The formation of ice on the Hudson River is subject to many
variables and is not consistent from year to year. During a moderate or
severe winter, the frozen waterways may impede a vessel's ability to
maneuver. Once ice build-up begins it can affect the transit of vessels
on the navigable waterways. In addition a vessel's watertight integrity
may also be compromised by ice abrasion and ice pressure on the
vessel's hull.
    Ice floes on the navigable waterways may also cause visual aids to
navigation to become submerged, destroyed, or moved off station. Ice
conditions on the navigable waterways may create hazardous conditions
in which the operations of certain vessels become unsafe.
    Previous ice seasons have shown that vessels with less than 3000
horsepower, while engaged in towing operations, have significant
difficulty transiting the Hudson River in locations where ice thickness
is on average eight inches or greater. This difficulty in transiting
the Hudson River during ice buildup poses a safety threat to the
environment and a potential hazard to navigation.
    It sometimes becomes necessary to impose operating restrictions to
ensure the safe navigation of vessels. During the 2009-2010 ice
navigation season the Coast Guard promulgated a Temporary Final Rule
that established an RNA for that period. That rule established
restrictions similar to those that the Coast Guard establishes in this
rule. This rule allows the Coast Guard to restrict and manage vessel
movement when hazardous ice conditions exist within a specified area of
the Hudson River.

Background

    The Regulated Navigation Area is intended to restrict vessels with
less than 3000 horsepower (HP) engaged in towing operations from
operating on the Hudson River south of the Troy Locks when ice
thickness is on average eight inches or greater, unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port (COTP) New York or a designated representative.
    The COTP New York will notify mariners of the location and
thickness of the ice as well as any restrictions via marine broadcast,
Local Notices to Mariners, and VTS New York. For the purpose of this
rule, the definition of horsepower in 46 CFR 10.107 applies.
    When the ice thickness reaches an average of eight inches or
greater on the Hudson River along reported routes, vessels of less than
3,000 HP engaged in towing operations will not be authorized to transit
unless in conjunction with scheduled Coast Guard icebreaking operations
in the

area, or operating with an assist tug or as part of a convoy, or
specifically authorized by the COTP New York.
    Operators of vessels that do not meet the criteria of the operating
restrictions, but who believe that they have the capability to operate
in ice safely, may seek a waiver from the COTP New York to continue
operating. Waivers may be requested by calling telephone number (718)
354-4356 or on VHF channel 13 or 16.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comments on the proposed rulemaking. No
changes were made to the Final Rule.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    The Coast Guard's implementation of the Regulated Navigation Area
will only be enforced at the location on the navigable waters of the
Hudson River south of the Troy Locks where ice conditions on average
are eight inches or greater, and only restrict vessels that are less
than 3,000 horsepower while engaged in towing operations.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners and operators of tugs with engines
below 3,000 total horsepower attempting to transit the Hudson River in
cold weather months when ice thickness is on average eight inches or
greater.
    This RNA will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Tugs
with less than 3,000 total horsepower have historically been unable to
transit the Hudson River when ice thickness is on average eight inches
or greater. Operators have generally taken these vessels out of service
or use vessels that are capable of operating in such conditions.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their

regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the
Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards
(e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation;
test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves establishing a Regulated Navigation
Area restricting tugs with less than 3,000 total horsepower from
transiting the Hudson River when ice thickness is on average eight
inches or greater. An environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.165 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.165  Regulated Navigation Area; Hudson River South of the
Troy Locks, NY.

    (a) Regulated navigation area. All navigable waters of the Hudson
River south of the Troy Locks.
    (b) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    (1) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer, or a Federal, State, or local law
enforcement officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port
(COTP) New York.
    (2) Horsepower (HP) means the total maximum continuous shaft
horsepower of all the vessel's main propulsion machinery.
    (c) Applicability. This section applies to tugs with less than
3,000 horsepower when engaged in towing operations.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this
section, vessels less than 3,000 horsepower while engaged in towing
operations are not authorized to transit that portion of the Hudson
River south of the Troy Locks when ice thickness on average is eight
inches or greater.
    (2) All Coast Guard assets enforcing this Regulated Navigation Area
can be contacted on VHF marine band radio, channel 13 or 16. The COTP
can be contacted at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the public may contact the COTP
to suggest changes or improvements in the terms of this Regulated
Navigation Area.
    (3) All persons desiring to transit through a portion of the
regulated area that has operating restrictions in effect must contact
the COTP at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or on VHF channel 13 or 16
to seek permission prior to transiting the affected regulated area.
    (4) The COTP will notify the public of any changes in the status of
this Regulated Navigation Area by Marine Safety Information Broadcast
on VHF-FM marine band radio, channel 22A (157.1 MHZ).

    Dated: January 20, 2011.
Daniel A. Neptun,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-3351 Filed 2-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3149-3150]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00687]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

    Docket Number: PR21-14-000.
    Applicants: Permian Highway Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)/: Petition for NGPA
Section 311 Rate Approval to be effective 12/8/2020 under PR21-14.
    Filed Date: 1/7/2021.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>15.
    Comments/Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/28/2021.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-376-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Rate Schedule S-2 Flow Through
Refund Report TETCO OFO.
    Filed Date: 1/7/21.
    Accession Number: 20210107-5004.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/19/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211

and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on
or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may
be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 8, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-00687 Filed 1-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 126 (Monday, July 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31317-31318]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13908]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9995-56-OP]

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council; Notification of
Public Teleconference and Public Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification of public teleconference meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby provides notice that
the

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) will meet on
the dates and times described below. All meetings are open to the
public. Members of the public are encouraged to provide comments
relevant to the specific issues being considered by the NEJAC. For
additional information about registering to attend the meeting or to
provide public comment, please see ``REGISTRATION'' under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. Due to a limited number of telephone lines, attendance
will be on a first-come, first served basis. Pre-registration is
required.

DATES: The NEJAC will convene a public teleconference meeting on
Wednesday, August 14, 2019, starting at 3:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The
meeting discussion will focus on several topics including, but not
limited to, the discussion and deliberation of final letters that
address environmental justice concerns raised during the NEJAC public
meeting in Bethesda, MD, April 29-May 2, 2019, and a presentation from
the Office of Research and Development on research funding. One public
comment period relevant to the specific issues being considered by the
NEJAC (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) is scheduled for Wednesday,
August 14, 2019, starting at 5:30 p.m., Eastern Time. Members of the
public who wish to participate during the public comment period are
highly encouraged to pre-register by 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time on
Friday, August 09, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions or correspondence concerning
the public meeting should be directed to Karen L. Martin, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, by mail at 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
(MC2202A), Washington, DC 20460; by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Additional information about the NEJAC is available
at https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/national-environmental-justice-advisory-council.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The Charter of the NEJAC states that the
advisory committee ``will provide independent advice and
recommendations to the Administrator about broad, crosscutting issues
related to environmental justice. The NEJAC's efforts will include
evaluation of a broad range of strategic, scientific, technological,
regulatory, community engagement and economic issues related to
environmental justice.''

Registration

    Registration for the August 14, 2019, public teleconference will be
processed at https://nejac-august-2019-public-teleconference.eventbrite.com. Pre-registration is required.
Registration closes at 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time on Friday, August 09,
2019. The deadline to sign up to speak during the public comment
period, or to submit written public comments, is 11:59 p.m., Eastern
Time on Friday, August 09, 2019. When registering, please provide your
name, organization, city and state, email address, and telephone number
for follow up. Please also indicate whether you would like to provide
public comment during the meeting, and whether you are submitting
written comments before the Friday, August 09, 2019, deadline.

A. Public Comment

    Individuals or groups making remarks during the public comment
period will be limited to three (3) minutes. To accommodate the number
of people who want to address the NEJAC, only one representative of a
particular community, organization, or group will be allowed to speak.
Written comments can also be submitted for the record. The suggested
format for individuals providing public comments is as follows: Name of
speaker; name of organization/community; city and state; and email
address; brief description of the concern, and what you want the NEJAC
to advise EPA to do. Written comments received by registration
deadline, will be included in the materials distributed to the NEJAC
prior to the teleconference. Written comments received after that time
will be provided to the NEJAC as time allows. All written comments
should be sent to Karen L. Martin, EPA, via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
B. Information About Services for Individuals With Disabilities or
Requiring English Language Translation Assistance

    For information about access or services for individuals requiring
assistance, please contact Karen L. Martin, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request special accommodations for a
disability or other assistance, please submit your request at least
fourteen (14) working days prior to the meeting, to give EPA sufficient
time to process your request. All requests should be sent to the
address, email, or phone/fax number listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

    Dated: June 12, 2019.
Matthew Tejada,
Director, Office of Environmental Justice.
[FR Doc. 2019-13908 Filed 6-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73080-73081]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28713]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-1492]

Two-Phased Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls Technical
Sections; Draft Guidance for Industry; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending the
comment period for a notice of availability of draft guidance for
industry (GFI #227) entitled ``Two-Phased Chemistry, Manufacturing, and
Controls Technical Sections'' that appeared in the Federal Register of
October 20, 2014. In that notice, FDA made available for comment the
draft guidance, which provides recommendations to sponsors submitting
chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (CMC) data submissions. The
Agency is taking this action in response to a request for an extension
to allow interested persons additional time to submit comments.

DATES: FDA is extending the comment period on the draft guidance.
Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by
February 17, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the draft guidance to
the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Longstaff, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-145), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of October 20, 2014 (79 FR 62635) FDA
published a notice announcing the availability of draft guidance for
industry (GFI #227) entitled ``Two-Phased Chemistry, Manufacturing, and
Controls (CMC) Technical Sections.'' It is intended to provide
recommendations to industry regarding CMC data submitted to the Center
for Veterinary Medicine to support approval of a new animal drug or
abbreviated new animal drug. The notice invited comments on the draft
guidance by December 19, 2014.
    The Agency received a request for a 60-day extension of the comment
period for the draft guidance. The request conveyed concern that the
current 60-day comment period does not allow sufficient time to
respond.
    FDA has considered the request and is extending the comment period
for the draft guidance for 60 days, until February 17, 2015. The Agency
believes that a 60-day extension allows adequate time for interested
persons to submit comments without significantly delaying further FDA
action on this guidance document.

II. Request for Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments 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, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: December 2, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-28713 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


The EPA modeling identified 265 State or municipallyowned entities, as well as subdivisions, within the CAIR region. The EPA excluded from the analysis government owned entities that were not projected to have at least one unit with generating capacity of 25 MW or greater in the Base 750 Case. Thus, we excluded 184 entities from the analysis. We found that 81 government entities will be potentially affected by CAIR. Of the 81 government entities, 20 may experience compliance costs in excess of 1 percent of revenues in 2010, and 39 may in 2015, based on our assumptions of how the affected States implement control measures to meet their emissions budgets as set forth in this rulemaking.

Government entities projected to experience compliance costs in excess of 1 percent of revenues have some potential for significant impact resulting from implementation of the CAIR. However, as noted above, it is EPA's position that because these government entities can pass on their costs of compliance to rate payers, they will not be significantly impacted. Furthermore, the decision to include only units greater than 25 MW in size exempts 179 government entities that would otherwise be potentially affected by the CAIR.

The above points aside, potentially adverse impacts of the CAIR on State and municipality owned entities could be limited by the fact that the cap and trade program is designed such that States determine how NOx allowances are to be allocated across units. A State that wishes to mitigate the impact of the rule on State or municipalityowned entities might choose to allocate NOx allowances in a manner that is favorable to these entities. Finally, the 751 use of cap and trade in general will limit impacts on entities owned by small governments relative to a less flexible command and control program.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 13132, entitled " Federalism" ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure " meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications."

" Policies that have federalism implications" is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have " substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States,

or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government."

This rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the relationship between the Federal government and the States, and this rule does not impact that relationship. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to 752 promote communications between EPA and State and local governments, EPA specifically solicited comment on this rule from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175, entitled " Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments" ( 65 FR 67249,

November 9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure " meaningful and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have Tribal implications." This rule does not have " Tribal implications" as specified in Executive Order 13175.

This rule addresses transport of pollution that are precurors for ozone and PM2.5. The CAA provides for States and Tribes to develop plans to regulate emissions of air pollutants within their jurisdictions. The regulations clarify the statutory obligations of States and Tribes that develop plans to implement this rule. The Tribal Authority Rule ( TAR) give Tribes the opportunity to develop and implement CAA programs, but it leaves to the discretion of the Tribe whether to develop these programs and which programs, or appropriate elements of a program, the Tribe will adopt.

This rule does not have Tribal implications as defined by Executive Order 13175. It does not have a substantial 753 direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, because no Tribe has implemented a federally enforceable air quality management program under the CAA at this time. Furthermore,

this rule does not affect the relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian Tribes. The CAA and the TAR establish the relationship of the Federal government and Tribes in developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing to modify that relationship. Because this rule does not have Tribal implications, Executive Order 13175 does not apply.

If one assumes a Tribe is implementing a Tribal Implementation Plan, today's rule could have implications for that Tribe, but it would not impose substantial direct costs upon the Tribe, nor preempt Tribal law. As provided above, EPA has estimated that the total annual private costs for the rule for the CAIR region as implemented by State,

Local, and Tribal governments is approximately $ 2.4 billion in 2010 and $ 3.6 billion in 2015 ( 1999$). There are currently very few emissions sources in Indian country that could be affected by this rule and the percentage of Tribal land that will be impacted is very small. For Tribes that choose to regulate sources in Indian country, the costs would be attributed to inspecting regulated facilities and enforcing adopted regulations. 754 Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule, EPA consulted with Tribal officials in developing this rule. The EPA has encouraged Tribal input at an early stage. Also, EPA held periodic meetings with the States and the Tribes during the technical development of this rule.

Three meetings were held with the Crow Tribe, where the Tribe expressed concerns about potential impacts of the rule on their coal mine operations. In addition, EPA held three calls with Tribal environmental professionals to address concerns specific to the Tribes. These discussions have given EPA valuable information about Tribal concerns regarding the development of this rule. The EPA has provided briefings for Tribal representatives and the newly formed National Tribal Air Association ( NTAA), and other national Tribal forums. Input from Tribal representatives has been taken into consideration in development of this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks Executive Order 13045, " Protection of Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks" ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that ( 1) is determined to be " economically significant" as defined under Executive Order 12866, and ( 2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 755 disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, Section 5   501 of the Order directs the Agency to evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This final rule is not subject to the Executive Order,

because it does not involve decisions on environmental health or safety risks that may disproportionately affect children. The EPA believes that the emissions reductions from the strategies in this rule will further improve air quality and will further improve children's health.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Executive Order 13211 ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)

provides that agencies shall prepare and submit to the Administrator of the Office of Regulatory Affairs, OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for certain actions identified as " significant energy actions." Section 4( b) of Executive Order 13211 defines " significant energy actions" as " any action by an agency ( normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance notices of final rulemaking, and 756 notices of final rulemaking ( 1) ( i) a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and ( ii) likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or ( 2) designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a " significant energy action." This final rule is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, and this rule may have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

If States choose to obtain the emissions reductions required by this rule by regulating EGUs, EPA projects that approximately 5.3 GWs of coal fired generation may be removed from operation by 2010. In practice, however, the units projected to be uneconomic to maintain may be ' mothballed,' retired, or kept in service to ensure transmission reliability in certain parts of the grid. For the most part, these units are small and infrequently used generating units that are dispersed throughout the CAIR region. Less conservative assumptions regarding natural gas prices or electricity demand would create a greater incentive to keep these units operational. The EPA projects that the average annual electricity price will increase by less than 2.7 percent in the CAIR region and that natural gas prices will increase by less than 1.6%. The EPA does 757 not believe that this rule will have any other impacts that exceed the significance criteria.

The EPA believes that a number of features of today's rulemaking serve to reduce its impact on energy supply.

First, the optional trading program provides considerable flexibility to the power sector and enables industry to comply with the emission reduction requirements in the most cost effective manner, thus minimizing overall costs and the ultimate impact on energy supply. The ability to use banked allowances from the existing title IV SO2 trading program and the NOx SIP Call Trading Program also provide additional flexibility. Second, the CAIR caps are set in two phases and provide adequate time for EGUs to install pollution controls. For more details concerning energy impacts, see the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Clean Air Interstate Rule ( March 2005).

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act Section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act ( NTTAA) of 1995 ( Public Law No. 104 113; 15 U. S. C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( e. g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices) developed 758 or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to OMB, with explanations when an agency does not use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

This rule would require all sources that participate in the trading program under part 96 to meet the applicable monitoring requirements of part 75. Part 75 already incorporates a number of voluntary consensus standards.

Consistent with the Agency's Performance Based Measurement System ( PBMS), part 75 sets forth performance criteria that allow the use of alternative methods to the ones set forth in part 75. The PBMS approach is intended to be more flexible and cost effective for the regulated community; it is also intended to encourage innovation in analytical technology and improved data quality. At this time, EPA is not recommending any revisions to part 75; however, EPA periodically revises the test procedures set forth in part 75. When EPA revises the test procedures set forth in part 75 in the future, EPA will address the use of any new voluntary consensus standards that are equivalent.

Currently, even if a test procedure is not set forth in part 75 EPA is not precluding the use of any method, whether it constitutes a voluntary consensus standard or not, as long as it meets the performance criteria specified; however, any 759 179 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Concerns in EPA's NEPA Compliance Analyses. Office of Federal Activities, Washington, D. C., April, 1998. alternative methods must be approved through the petition process under Sec. 75.66 before they are used under part 75.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations Executive Order 12898, " Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations," requires Federal agencies to consider the impact of programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low income populations. According to EPA guidance, 179 agencies are to assess whether minority or lowincome populations face risks or a rate of exposure to hazards that are significant and that " appreciably exceed or is likely to appreciably exceed the risk or rate to the general population or to the appropriate comparison group."

( EPA, 1998)

In accordance with Executive Order 12898, the Agency has considered whether this rule may have disproportionate negative impacts on minority or low income populations. The Agency expects this rule to lead to reductions in air pollution and exposures generally. For this reason,

negative impacts to these sub populations that appreciably 760 exceed similar impacts to the general population are not expected.

K. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S.

House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A Major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is a " major rule" as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2).

L. Judicial Review Section 307( b)( 1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This Section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit if ( i) the agency action consists of " nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, by the Administrator,"

or ( ii) such action is locally or regionally applicable, if 761 " such action is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based on such a determination."

Any final action related to CAIR is " nationally applicable" within the meaning of section 307( b)( 1). As an initial matter, through this rule, EPA interprets section 110 of the CAA, a provision which has nationwide applicability. In addition, CAIR applies to 28 States and the District of Columbia. CAIR is also based on a common core of factual findings and analyses concerning the transport of pollutants between the different States subject to it. Finally, EPA has established uniform approvability criteria that would be applied to all States subject to CAIR. For these reasons, the Administrator also is determining that any final action regarding CAIR is of nationwide scope and effect for purposes of section 307( b)( 1). Thus, any petitions for review of final actions regarding CAIR must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date final action is published in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Regional haze, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 72, 73, 74, 77 and 78 Acid rain, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Electric utilities, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 96 Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Electric utilities, Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone ( Interstate Air Quality Rule) page ____ of ____ 763 ______________________________

Dated:

______________________________

Stephen L. Johnson Acting Administrator


[Federal Register: August 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 165)]
[Notices]
[Page 50412-50414]
[DOCID:fr25au06-64]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0670; FRL-8084-8]

Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petitions for Establishment or
Amendment to Regulations for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on
Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide
petitions proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations for
residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 25, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0670 and pesticide petition number (PP), 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
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket'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 telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0670. 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 e-
mail. The Federal 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without going
through regulations.gov, your e-mail 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.
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
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, 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 telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne I. Miller, PM 23, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. 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.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations in
40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
food commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition
contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA
section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting
of the pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA
rules on this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov/. To locate this information on the home

page of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the
OPP docket ID number. Once the search has

located the docket, clicking on the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list
of all documents in the docket for the pesticide including the petition
summary.

New Tolerance

    PP 7F 4851. Dow AgroSciences LLC formerly known as DowElanco, 9330
Zionville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054, proposes to establish a
tolerance for residues of the fungicide, flumetsulam in or on food
commodity dry beans at 0.05 parts per million. Gas chromatography and
mass spectroscopy is use to measure and evaluate the chemical
residue(s).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, flumetsulam, dry beans.

    Dated: August 17, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. E6-14129 Filed 8-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 217 (Tuesday, November 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69767-69768]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28519]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76341; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-098]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Mini Options

November 4, 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 October 22, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``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 Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ 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.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE proposes to replace the reference to ``Google, Inc.'' with
``Alphabet, Inc.'' in Interpretation and Policy .22 to Rule 5.5.
    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.

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
    The purpose of this filing is to update Interpretation and Policy
.22 to Rule 5.5 in order to reflect the new name for a class that is
eligible for Mini-option contracts. Specifically, Rule 5.5.22 permits
the Exchange to list Mini-option contracts on five option classes,
including Google, Inc. (``Google''). Google recently reorganized and
created a new public holding company called Alphabet, Inc.
(``Alphabet''). The symbol ``GOOGL'' remains unchanged. As a result,
the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 5.5.22 by replacing the name
``Google, Inc.'' with ``Alphabet, Inc.'' No other changes are being
proposed by this filing.

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\5\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \6\ 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 the Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the current filing proposes to change the name
``Google, Inc.'' to ``Alphabet, Inc.'' in order to reflect the new
ownership structure and is consistent with the Act because Rule 5.5.22
will now accurately reflect the name of this class that is eligible for
Mini-options trading.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change does not
impose any burden on intramarket competition because it applies to all
Trading Permit Holders. There is no burden on intermarket competition
as the proposed change would update Rule 5.5.22 to reflect the new name
for a class that is eligible for Mini-options trading. As a result,
there would be no substantive changes to the Exchange's operations or
its rules.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-2015-098 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-2015-098. 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 filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal offices 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-2015-098,
and should be submitted on or before December 1, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-28519 Filed 11-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P