[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 133 (Thursday, July 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41822-41823]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16661]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land; Bismarck
Municipal Airport, Bismarck, North Dakota.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is considering a proposal to change 4.78 acres of
airport land from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use and to
authorize the sale of airport property located at Bismarck Municipal
Airport, Bismarck, North Dakota. The property's location for Parcel A
is a triangular parcel of 3.68 acres located west of the street
intersection of Airway Avenue and Rifle Range Drive; and the Parcel B
is a triangular parcel of 1.1 acres located north of the street
intersection of Airway Avenue and Rifle Range Drive within the City of
Bismarck, ND. The property's existing aeronautical use is grasslands
located outside the approach and departure surfaces of Runway 21 at the
Bismarck Municipal Airport, Bismarck, ND. Currently, ownership of the
property provides for protection of FAR Part 77 surfaces and compatible
land use which would continue to be protected with deed restrictions
required in the transfer of land ownership. The proposed non-
aeronautical use of the property will likely be zoned industrial
however, the exact usage has not been determined. The property is no
longer needed for aeronautical use.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 12, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by appointment at the FAA
Airports District Office, Mark J. Holzer, Program Manager, 2301
University Drive- Building 23B, Bismarck ND 58504-7595 Telephone: 701-
323-7380/Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> and Bismarck Municipal Airport, PO Box 991,
Bismarck, ND 58502.
    Written comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or
mailed to: Mark J. Holzer, Program Manager, Federal Aviation
Administration, Airports District Office, 2301 University Drive-
Building 23B, Bismarck, ND 58504-7595, Telephone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>/
FAX Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark J. Holzer, Program Manager,
Federal Aviation Administration, Airports District Office, 2301
University Drive-Building 23B, Bismarck, ND 58504-7595. Telephone
Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>/FAX Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 47107(h) of Title
49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the
Federal Register 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that
requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose.
    The property was acquired by the Bismarck Municipal Airport under
Federal ADP grant 8-38-0003-04. The proposed non-aeronautical use of
the property will likely be zoned industrial, however, the exact usage
has not been determined until sold to a private party. The property is
currently hayed. The release of the property and use of the property
will be in conformity with local and state laws. The Bismarck Municipal
Airport will receive Fair Market Value for the land.
    Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially
assist in the disposal of the subject airport property nor a
determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from the FAA. The
disposition of proceeds from the sale of the airport property will be
in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of
Airport Revenue, published in the Federal Register on February 16, 1999
(64 FR 7696).
    Property Description: within Section 12, Township 138 North, Range
80 West in Burleigh County of the State of North Dakota for; Tract A
description as part of Lot Two (2), Block One (1), of Bismarck Airport
Addition, Burleigh County, North Dakota, described as follows:
beginning at the most northerly corner of Lot Two (2), Block One (1),
of said Bismarck Airport Addition; thence South 00 degrees 34 minutes
26 seconds West, along the westerly boundary of said Lot Two (2), a
distance of 810.8 feet; thence North 39 degrees 12 minutes 28 seconds
East to the east boundary line of said Lot Two (2), a distance of
633.16 feet; thence North 50 degrees 46 minutes 12 seconds West, along
the easterly boundary of said Lot 2 (2), a distance of 506.22 feet to
the point of beginning. The above-described tract contains 3.68 acres,
more or less.
    Tract B description is Lot One (1) Block Twelve (12) of the
Bismarck Airport Addition. The above-described tract contains 1.1
acres, more or less.

    Issued in Bismarck Airports District Office, ND, on June 17,
2013.
Laurie J. Suttmeier,
Manager, Bismarck Airports District Office FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. 2013-16661 Filed 7-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74717-74718]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29301]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC15-46-000.
    Applicants: Verso Bucksport LLC, Verso Bucksport Power LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities and Requests for Expedited Action and
Confidential Treatment of Verso Bucksport LLC, et. al.
    Filed Date: 12/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20141208-5375.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG15-24-000.
    Applicants: Stephens Ranch Wind Energy II, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Stephens Ranch Wind Energy II, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5102.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: EG15-25-000.
    Applicants: Milo Wind Project, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Milo Wind Project, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: EG15-26-000.
    Applicants: Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1246-009; ER10-1982-010; ER10-1253-009; ER10-
1252-009; ER13-764-009; ER14-1927-001; ER12-2498-009; ER12-2499-009;
ER14-1776-003.

    Applicants: Consolidated Edison, Inc., Consolidated Edison Company
of New York, Inc., Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., Consolidated
Edison Solutions, Inc., CED White River Solar, LLC, CED White River
Solar 2, LLC, Alpaugh 50, LLC, Alpaugh North, LLC, Broken Bow Wind II,
LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of the Consolidated Edison
Inc. subsidiaries.
    Filed Date: 12/5/14.
    Accession Number: 20141205-5350.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/26/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2835-005.
    Applicants: Google Energy LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Google Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1750-002.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Consolidated Edison Company of New York.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35: Agreement No. 2013 Composite
Between Con Edison and NYPA to be effective 4/23/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5123.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-35-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing per 35: 2014-12-09_External Resource
Qual Compliance to be effective 12/2/2014.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-114-001.
    Applicants: Alterna Springerville LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Supplement to MBR
Filing to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20141208-5345.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-601-000.
    Applicants: Deseret Generation & Transmission Co-operative, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(1): Member Rate
Schedule Tariff Filing to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/8/14.
    Accession Number: 20141208-5342.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/29/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: EL15-28-000; QF96-54-004.
    Applicants: Pasadena Cogeneration L.P.
    Description: Petition for Temporary Waiver of Operating and
Efficiency Standards for Qualifying Cogeneration Facility of Pasadena
Cogeneration L.P. under EL15-28, et. al.
    Filed Date: 12/9/14.
    Accession Number: 20141209-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/9/14.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or 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 comment date. 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: December 9, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-29301 Filed 12-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR State Review Framework July 11, 2005 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Compliance 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part A 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title of the Information Collection 1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection 2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data 3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication 3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB 3( c) Consultations 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection 3( e) General Guidelines 3( f) Confidentiality 3( g) Sensitive Questions 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes 4( b) Information Requested 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management 5( c) Small Entity Flexibility 5( d) Collection Schedule 6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden 6( b) Estimating Government Burden 6( c) Bottom Line Burden and Cost Table 6( d) Reasons for Change of Burden 6( e) Burden Statement Part B This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information. 3 Part A 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title of the Information Collection ICR: State Review Framework ( EPA ICR Number 2185.01) OMB Control Number: N/ A " State Review Framework"

1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The State Review Framework (" Framework") is an oversight tool designed to assess state performance in enforcement and compliance assurance. The Framework's goal is to evaluate state performance by examining existing data to provide a consistent level of oversight and develop a uniform mechanism by which EPA Regions, working collaboratively with their states, can ensure that state environmental agencies are consistently implementing the national compliance and enforcement program in order to meet agreed upon goals and standards. Furthermore, the Framework is designed to foster dialogue on enforcement and compliance performance between the states that will enhance relationships and increase feedback, which will in turn lead to consistent program management and improved environmental results. Specifically, the Framework is a structured process that provides critical information on a state's ( or Region's, for states with EPA implemented programs) core enforcement and compliance assurance performance by employing existing data available in EPA's existing national databases and presented in management reports for each state. By the end of calendar year 2005 EPA expects to automate the management reports and make them available to the Regions and states. No new data collection is required for the national databases. Data from national databases will be complimented by data obtained through file reviews of a state environmental agency's compliance and enforcement files. No new data is required in these files; however, they will be reviewed to ensure proper and adequate documentation. The Framework process asks regions, states and local governments to examine the existing data described above in three core programs: Clean Air Act (" CAA"), Stationary Sources; Clean Water Act (" CWA"), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (" NPDES"); and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (" RCRA"), Subtitle C. The Framework process looks at thirteen ( 13) elements. The EPA evaluates the twelve ( 12) primary elements, and a thirteenth optional element, using data and file review metrics that require no new reporting burden. The utility of the Framework's metrics and the Implementation Guide are a direct result of the collaboration between states, Regions, Headquarters, and environmental leaders over the previous two years. These stakeholders provided extensive input and comments prior to the pilot phase of the project, which helped to shape the Framework. OECA recently completed an evaluation of pilot implementation, which includes input from the pilot states. The results of the evaluation of the Framework's pilot program have been used to improve the Framework and further ensure that it is narrowly crafted and only collects information that satisfies the Agency's needs. 4 The thirteen ( 13) elements mentioned above are: ( 1) The degree to which a state program has completed the universe of planned inspections ( addressing core requirements and Federal, state, and regional priorities); ( 2) The degree to which inspection reports and compliance reviews document inspection findings, including accurate descriptions of what was observed to sufficiently identify violation( s); ( 3) The degree to which inspection reports are completed in a timely manner, including timely identification of violations; ( 4) The degree to which significant violations ( e. g., significant noncompliance and high priority violations) and supporting information are accurately identified and reported to EPA's national databases in a timely manner; ( 5) The degree to which state enforcement actions include required corrective or complying actions ( i. e., injunctive relief) that will return facilities to compliance in a specific time frame; ( 6) The degree to which a state takes timely and appropriate enforcement actions, in accordance with policy relating to specific media; ( 7) The degree to which a state includes both gravity and economic benefit calculations for all penalties, appropriately using the BEN model or similar state model ( where in use and consistent with national policy); ( 8) The degree to which penalties in final enforcement actions collect appropriate economic benefit and gravity in accordance with applicable penalty procedures; ( 9) The degree to which enforcement commitments in the PPA/ PPG/ categorical grants ( i. e., written agreements to deliver a product/ project at a specified time), if they exist, are met and any products or projects are completed; ( 10) The degree to which the minimum data requirements are timely; ( 11) The degree to which the minimum data requirements are accurate; ( 12) The degree to which the minimum data requirements are complete, unless otherwise negotiated by the region and state or prescribed by a national initiative; and ( 13) ( Optional) Other program activities ( e. g., using outcome data, compliance assistance, self disclosure programs, innovative approaches, etc.). In the interest of accuracy and efficiency, the Framework also includes a five step protocol for managing the process: ( 1) pre review; ( 2) offsite review; ( 3) onsite review; ( 4) drafting of the report; and ( 5) composing the final report and follow up. After reviewing the level of performance based on the metrics developed under the 12 required performance elements, and other information collected in the review process, EPA will determine if a state or Region meets minimum performance levels.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection The purpose of this collection is to assess state performance in core enforcement and compliance assurance programs. The goals are to provide a consistent level of oversight and develop a uniform mechanism by which EPA Regions, working collaboratively with their states, can ensure that state environmental agencies are meeting agreed upon goals. It is important to note that all data requested by this collection is currently in EPA's or the state's databases and enforcement and compliance files. No additional monitoring or sampling will be required by this ICR.

While the data that the Agency will collect is pre existing, the Agency is permitted to review the states' Clean Air Act, Stationary Source program, the Solid Waste Disposal Act, Subtitle C program, and the Clean Water Act, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit 5 program to ensure adequate performance. The Agency's oversight authority for the aforementioned programs are:

( 1) Clean Air Act, Stationary Source program:

Section 114 allows collection of information from states. Specifically, the collection of the requested information is authorized by 40 CFR 70.4( j)( 1), which states that "[ a] ny information obtained or used in the administration of a State program shall be available to EPA upon request without restriction and in a form specified by the Administrator, including computer readable files to the extent practicable," and 40 CFR 70.10( c)( 1)( iii), which addresses EPA oversight of State and local agencies' compliance and enforcement efforts for major sources under Title V operating permit programs.

( 2) Solid Waste Disposal Act, Subtitle C program:

The Act refers to activities at companies that generate hazardous waste. At § 3007, the Agency is permitted to have access to and request records regarding hazardous waste generating activities. Additionally, 40 CFR 271.17( a) authorizes EPA, upon request without restriction, access to "[ a] ny information obtained or used in the administration of a State program."

( 3) Clean Water Act, NPDES program:

The Act refers to activities involving the discharge of materials into waters of the United States. At § 308, the Agency is permitted to review records to determine compliance with effluent limitations or treatment performance standards. Further, the NPDES state program regulations provide that "[ a] ny information obtained or used in the administration of a State program shall be available to EPA upon request without restriction." 40 CFR 123.41. Also, 40 CFR 123.43 requires states to provide EPA with information on NPDES program implementation.

The information collected through this ICR will aid the Agency in achieving EPA's Strategic Plan goal to increase compliance and environmental stewardship. This goal was developed in response to the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act and is described in EPA's 2003 Strategic Plan, Goal 5, " Compliance and Environmental Stewardship."

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data EPA will use the data obtained from the collection to determine if a state or Region meets minimum performance levels. Such a determination is necessary to reward states that are performing adequately and provide assistance to states that are not meeting minimum performance levels.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 6 3( a) Nonduplication The information to be obtained under this ICR has not been collected by EPA or any other federal agency.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission On April 26, 2005, EPA published a pre ICR Federal Register Notice announcing its intent to submit an ICR to OMB regarding the State Review Framework. Attachment A includes a copy of this Federal Register Notice. EPA received only one set of comments to the Federal Register Notice. These comments came from the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality.

Below are comments and our responses thereto:

Response to comments submitted by the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality:

Comment 1: Additional state data may need to be created for the review, which would create a burden for the state. Response 1: The State Review Framework is based on three sources of data: 1) Data from the national media databases; 2) Data from a state's inspection and enforcement files; 3) negotiated compliance and enforcement commitments in grant work plans. The Framework does provide for the inclusion of other data the state believes are important for EPA to consider during the review. This last category of data is voluntary and may be provided to EPA at the discretion of the state. If it chooses to share additional information, a state may use some level of resources in pulling already existing state data, but this review process does not envision a state creating any new data.

The Framework was pilot tested in ten states before being made final at the beginning of July 2005. These pilots were evaluated and the recommendations from the evaluation incorporated into the process and documents of the State Review Framework. The burden hours calculated for this ICR are based on information obtained from the pilot states and reflect the time required to collect and provide the data from state files. The burden for reporting media specific enforcement information is covered by separate program ICRs.

As the Review is carried out in all 50 states over the next few years, OECA is committed to monitoring and evaluating various aspects of the review process, in order to take advantage of lessons learned and make the review process as efficient as possible. This monitoring will include tracking the resource burden that the review requires of states. The media specific Discussion Guides that OECA has provided to the Regional Offices to use when reviewing the state programs already asks that regions and states discuss the burden required by the review and to note it in their final reports. OECA encourages the states to track the resources used during the review and provide that data to us as we conduct further evaluation of the project. 7 Comment 2: A state should not be held accountable for future program data requirements that are not in effect at the time of the review. Response 2: The Framework documentation point out that the standards used to evaluate state performance are national policy and guidance, consistent state policy and guidance, and/ or negotiated commitments. The Framework is designed to only use existing program data and not be the driver for new or additional program data requirements. A state will be reviewed based on the policy and guidance in place during the review period. For example, if the review period is FY 2004, only the policies and guidance in place at that time will be used to assess state performance. To make sure that this is clear to those implementing the Framework, we have added a phrase to this effect in the " Overview" document.

3( c) Consultations EPA consulted with several key state and media associations in the course of developing the State Review Framework. The leadership and membership of these organizations were instrumental in helping OECA develop the initial concept for the State Review Framework, in working to develop the main components and metrics, completing pilot projects and providing input into the evaluation. These associations are:

ECOS ASIWPCA ASTSWMO STAPPA/ ALAPCO The main contacts with these organizations are:

Environmental Council of States ( ECOS)

Steve Thompson Executive Director Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 405 702 7163 President of ECOS Bob King Deputy Commissioner South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 803 896 8940 Secretary of ECOS Howard Roitman Director, Environment Programs Colorado Department of Health and Environment 303 692 3475 Chair, Compliance Committee 8 Mary Blakeslee Senior Deputy ECOS 202 624 3665 Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators ( ASIWPCA)

Roberta Savage Executive Director ASIWPCA Washington, DC 202 642 898 0905 Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials ( ASTSWMO) Steve Cobb Alabama Department of Environmental Management sac@ adem. state. al. us Chair, Hazardous Waste Subcommittee ( ASTSWMO)

Cheryl Coleman Land and Waste Management Bureau South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control colemact@ dhec. sc. gov Vice Chair, Hazardous Waste Subcommittee ( ASTSWMO)

Barbara Simco Deputy Director ASTSWMO 202 624 5824 State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators/ Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officers ( STAPPA/ ALAPCO)

Eddie Terrill Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 405 7024100 Vice President, STAPPA/ ALAPCO Mary Stewart Douglas Senior Staff Associate Washington, DC 202 624 7864 9 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection Each respondent will report only one time every three years.

3( e) General Guidelines This information collection is consistent with OMB guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.5( d)( 2).

3( f) Confidentiality Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B  Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3( g) Sensitive Questions The collection in this ICR does not contain any sensitive questions.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents and SIC Codes The respondents for this ICR will be the following: Forty ( 40) of the fifty ( 50) states and six ( 6) territories/ commonwealths. There are no SIC codes for the Respondents.

4( b) Information Requested ( i) Data items, including recordkeeping requirements The State Review Framework requests information on the contribution of state enforcement activities to federally delegated programs. There are no recordkeeping requirements associated with this collection.

The collection process will compile information on the state's enforcement and compliance activities, including inspection coverage, enforcement timeliness and appropriateness, penalty calculations and fines collected, and data quality, accuracy and completeness.

( ii) Respondent Activities Respondent will engage in the following activities during the Framework process:

1. Pre Review and Offsite Review Review elements and metrics 10 Train/ brief state staff & managers on review substance and process. Collect files, policies, data sets, reports etc.

2. Onsite Review Participate in kick off meeting. Assist/ facilitate EPA review of files and data sets Participate in discussion of program with EPA 3. Report Drafting Review and comment on draft report 4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3 Coordination of review with the state agency Coordination of the review within EPA 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities Agency activities associated with the State Review Framework consist of the following:

( 1) Review elements and metrics ( 2) Train/ brief state staff & managers on review substance and process ( 3) Collect files, policies, data sets, reports etc. ( 4) Participate in kick off meeting. ( 5) Assist/ facilitate EPA review of files and data sets ( 6) Participate in discussion of program with EPA ( 7) Review and comment on draft report ( 8) Coordination of review with the state agency ( 9) Coordination of the review within EPA 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management The Agency will provide respondents with guidelines for conducting the review and will provide a model report to aid the respondents and encourage consistent responses. Over the course of the review process the Agency will work with the states and provide assistance as necessary. All of the state reports will be submitted electronically. National data used to assess state performance already resides in various EPA databases. These data are covered by other Information Collection Requests or regulatory language. Additional data will come from the review of state inspection and enforcement files, which is the data that are to be collected based on this request.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility 11 Small entities will not be affected as the collection will only be completed by EPA Regions, States and territories.

5( d) Collection Schedule Each Respondent will complete the four step protocol for managing the process one time every three years: ( 1) pre review and offsite review; ( 3) onsite review; ( 4) drafting of the report; and ( 5) composing the final report and follow up. In the initial year, twenty ( 20) states are scheduled to complete the review process. In the second year another twenty ( 20) states are scheduled with the remaining ten states completing the review process in year three.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden and Costs The estimated total hour burden for response is 384 hours per respondent. This burden hour estimate translates to a cost of $ 12,678 per entity that voluntarily completes the survey resulting in the total of $ 633,880. There is no recurring respondent burden associated with this ICR. No capital or operations and maintenance costs are incurred by respondents under this ICR.

The labor costs in the following table are based on the following average labor rates:

Legal: $ 45.64 ( Lawyers) Managerial: $ 37.22 ( General and operations managers) Technical: $ 31.96 ( Environmental engineers) Clerical: $ 16.81 ( Executive secretaries and administrative assistants)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor's, Bureau of Labor Statistics, " Table 1. National employment and wage data from the Occupational Employment Statistics survey by occupation, May 2004," http:// www. bls. gov/ news. release/ ocwage. t01. htm.

Table 1. Respondents' Burden and Costs Information Collection Activity Legal $ 45.64/ hour Mang. $ 37.22/ hour Tech. $ 31.96/ hour Cler. $ 16.81/ hour Cap./

Startup cost Oper. and Maint. ( O& M cost)

1. Pre Review and Offsite Review Review elements and metrics 5.2 14.8 31 2.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 Train/ brief state staff & managers on review substance and process. 4.4 11.2 23 8.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 12 Information Collection Activity Legal $ 45.64/ hour Mang. $ 37.22/ hour Tech. $ 31.96/ hour Cler. $ 16.81/ hour Cap./

Startup cost Oper. and Maint. ( O& M cost)

Collect files, policies, data sets, reports etc. 3.8 10.8 75.8 4.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 2. Onsite Review Participate in kick off meeting. 2.8 9.6 12.66 1.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 Assist/ facilitate EPA review of files and data sets 2 16.4 22.06 16.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 Participate in discussion of program with EPA 1.8 14.8 18.06 2.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 3. Report Drafting Review and comment on draft report 1.8 17.6 11 1.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3 Coordination of review with the state agency 0.8 14.4 5.2 2.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 Coordination of the review within EPA 0.4 13 2.8 1.0 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 TOTAL HOURS/ Respondent 23.00 ($ 45.65) 122.6 ($ 37.22) 201.58 ($ 31.96) 37.0 ($ 16.81)

LABOR COST/ Respondent $ 1,049.95 $ 4,563.17 $ 6,442.50 $ 621.97 No. of Respondents: 40 Total hours: 384.18/ Respondent x 40 Respondents = 15,367 Total Cost: $ 12,677.59/ Respondent x 40 respondents = $ 507,104 6( b) Estimating Agency Burden EPA Regions I through X will participate in the State Review Framework process and the following table details the hour and cost burden per region. These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management ( OPM) " 2005 General Schedule" which excludes locality rates of pay.

The cost for the Regional table ( Table 2) is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows: 13 Legal $ 41.38 ( GS 14, Step 5) Managerial $ 35.01 ( GS 13, Step 5) Technical $ 25.98 ( GS 12, Step 1) Clerical $ 14.06 ( GS 6, Step 3)

The cost for the Headquarters table ( Table 3) is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

Legal $ 47.99 ( GS 14, Step 5) Managerial $ 40.61 ( GS 13, Step 5) Technical $ 30.13 ( GS 12, Step 1) Clerical $ 16.31 ( GS 6, Step 3)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management ( OPM) " 2005 General Schedule" and includes the locality payment for the Washington D. C. area.

Table 2. Agency Burden and Cost ( per Region)

Information Collection Activity legal $ 41.38/ hour man. $ 35.01/ hour tech. $ 25.98 / hour cler. $ 14.06/ hour Capit al/

Startup cost ( O& M cost)

1. Pre Review and Offsite Review Review elements and metrics 0 9.5 1 0 0 0 Train/ brief state staff & managers on review substance and process. 0 4.5 13 0 0 0 Collect files, policies, data sets, reports etc. 0 1.5 6 0 0 0 2. Onsite Review Participate in kick off meeting. 0 0 42 3.5 0 0 Assist/ facilitate on site review of files and data sets 0 24 60 1.75 0 0 Participate in discussion of program with state 0 1.5 37.5 1.75 0 0 3. Report Drafting Review and comment on draft report 0 13 48 0 0 0 14 Information Collection Activity legal $ 41.38/ hour man. $ 35.01/ hour tech. $ 25.98 / hour cler. $ 14.06/ hour Capit al/

Startup cost ( O& M cost)

4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3 Coordination of review with the state agency 0 1.5 40 0.5 0 0 Coordination of the review within EPA 0 0 40 0 0 0 Total Agency hours 0.0 55.5 287.5 7.5 0.0 0.0 Total Agency costs 0.0 $ 1943.1 $ 7,469.2 5 $ 105.45 TOTAL REGIONAL AGENCY HOURS: 350.50 ( x 10 Regions = 3,505. 0) TOTAL REGIONAL AGENCY COST: $ 9,517.80 x 10 Regions = $ 95,178.00)

Table 3. Agency Burden and Cost ( Headquarters)

Information Collection Activity legal $ 47.99/ hour man. $ 40.61/ hour tech. $ 30.13 / hour cler. $ 16.31/ hour Capital/ Start up cost ( O& M cost)

1. Pre Review and Offsite Review Train/ brief state and region staff & managers on review substance and process. 2 6 3 15 0 0 Collect files, policies, data sets, reports etc. 0 10 15 25 0 0 2. Onsite Review Participate in kick off meeting. 0 2 2 5 0 0 Participate in discussion of the program with the Regions 0 30 20 10 0 0 3. Report Drafting Review and comment on draft report 1 10 15 5 0 0 4. Coordination of Parts 1, 2 & 3 Coordination of the review within EPA 0 15 2 0 0 0 15 Information Collection Activity legal $ 47.99/ hour man. $ 40.61/ hour tech. $ 30.13 / hour cler. $ 16.31/ hour Capital/ Start up cost ( O& M cost)

TOTAL 3 73 57 60 0 0 TOTAL COST $ 143.97 $ 2964.53 $ 1717.41 $ 978.60 TOTALS Hours: 193 Labor Cost: $ 5804.50 6( c) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables Table 3. Total Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary No. of Respondent s No. of Activities Total hours Total Labor Costs Total Capital and Start up costs Total Annual O& M costs Respondent 40 9 15,367.20 $ 507,103.60 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 Table 4. Total Estimated Agency Burden and Cost Summary No. of Activities Total hours Total Labor Costs Total Capital and Start up costs Total Annual O& M costs Regions 9 3505.00 ( for all ten regions) $ 95,178.00 ( for all ten regions) $ 0.0 $ 0.0 Headquarters 6 193 $ 5804.50 $ 0.0 $ 0.0 6( d) Reasons for Changes in Burden Since this is a new information collection, there is no change in burden for this collection.

6( e) Burden Statement The average annual respondent burden for each state is 384.18 hours. This estimate includes time for ( 1) reviewing elements and metrics; ( 2) training and briefing state staff & 16 managers on review substance and process; ( 3) collecting files, policies, data sets, reports etc.; ( 4) participating in kick off meetings; ( 5) assisting/ facilitating EPA review of files and data sets; ( 6) participating in discussion of program with EPA; ( 7) reviewing and commenting on draft report; ( 8) coordinating of review with the state agency; and ( 9) coordinating of the review within EPA. There is no record keeping burden for this collection as the State Review Framework does not include record keeping requirements. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Numbers for EPA's regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number OECA 2005 0014, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N. W., Washington, D. C. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the OECA Docket is ( 202) 566 1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select " search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. You can also send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number OECA 2005 0014 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15435-15436]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05790]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-N-0297]

Draft Pharmaceutical Quality/Chemistry Manufacturing and Controls
Data Exchange; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is requesting
comment on the draft Pharmaceutical Quality/Chemistry Manufacturing and
Controls (PQ/CMC) Data Exchange for the electronic submission of PQ/CMC
data. This document provides draft design of Health Level 7 (HL7) Fast
Health Interoperability Resources (FHIR) profiles that contain the data
elements and terminologies associated with PQ/CMC subject areas and
scoped to some of what is currently submitted in Module 3 of the
electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) submission. It is not
intended to be comprehensive in covering all eCTD product quality
information, only those concepts that were considered amenable to
structuring and would bring value to the quality review process. The
Agency is seeking comment on the mapping of the PQ/CMC data elements to
the various FHIR Resources. This document should not be viewed as
guidance, technical specification, or an implementation guide, as it is
meant solely for comment. The FHIR mapping presented in this document
is bound to the HL7 FHIR R5 draft release. As such, it is likely that
some parts of the mapping presented in this document may change based
on comments during the HL7 balloting and reconciliation process.
However, since HL7 balloting has variable and extensive timelines, the
Agency determined that it would be prudent to provide an early
opportunity for comment that will inform final development of the
exchange standard.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments by May 17, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before May 17, 2022. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of May 17, 2022. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

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

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2022-N-0297 for ``Draft Pharmaceutical Quality/Chemistry
Manufacturing and Controls (PQ/CMC) Data Exchange for the electronic
submission of PQ/CMC data; Request for Comments.'' Received comments,
those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-
402-7500.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available

for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your
name and contact information to be made publicly available, you can
provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your
comments and you must identify this information as ``confidential.''
Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except
in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law.
For more information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets,
see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryan Spells, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 1117, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>; Stephen Ripley, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Bldg.
71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>; Norman
Gregory, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration,
7500 Standish Pl. (HFV-143), Rockville, MD 20855,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Michael Kerrigan, Center
for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish
Pl. (HFV-143), Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    PQ/CMC is a term used to describe manufacturing and testing data of
pharmaceutical products. PQ/CMC encompasses topics such as drug
stability, quality specification, batch formula, and batch analysis,
which are important aspects of drug development. PQ/CMC plays an
integral part in the regulatory review process and life cycle
management of pharmaceutical products. The development of a structured
format for PQ/CMC data will enable consistency in the content and
format of PQ/CMC data submitted, thus providing a harmonized language
for submission content, allowing reviewers to query the data, and, in
general, contributing to a more efficient and effective regulatory
decision-making process by creating a standardized data dictionary.
    The impetus for this standardization effort was the provisions from
the 2012 Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub.
L. 112-144), which authorized the Agency to require certain submissions
to be submitted in a specified electronic format. PQ/CMC
standardization supports FDA's regulatory needs in receiving structured
and standardized data in pharmaceutical quality and includes two
objectives: (1) To standardize the pharmaceutical quality data that is
currently received by FDA in eCTD Module 3 from the sponsoring
organizations, and (2) to use these structured elements and develop a
FHIR data exchange solution.
    Through this notice, the Agency is seeking comment on the mapping
of the PQ/CMC data elements to the various FHIR Resources. After
receiving comments, the Agency intends to issue guidance on the
standardization of PQ/CMC data elements and terminologies for
electronic submissions.

II. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft data
elements and terminologies at either https://www.fda.gov/industry/fda-resources-data-standards or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: March 15, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-05790 Filed 3-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 149 (Tuesday, August 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46375-46376]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18886]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Rule 23c-3 and Form N-23c-3, SEC File No. 270-373, OMB Control
No. 3235-0422.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') a request for extension of the
previously approved collection of information discussed below.
    Rule 23c-3 (17 CFR 270.23c-3) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) permits a registered closed-end
investment company (``closed-end fund'' or ``fund'') that meets certain
requirements to repurchase common stock of which it is the issuer from
shareholders at periodic intervals, pursuant to repurchase offers made
to all holders of the stock. The rule enables these funds to offer
their shareholders a limited ability to resell their shares in a manner
that previously was available only to open-end investment company
shareholders. To protect shareholders, a closed-end fund that relies on
rule 23c-3 must send shareholders a notification that contains
specified information each time the fund makes a repurchase offer (on a
quarterly, semi-annual, or annual basis, or, for certain funds, on a
discretionary basis not more often than every two years). The fund also
must file copies of the shareholder notification with the Commission
(electronically through the Commission's Electronic Data Gathering,
Analysis, and Retrieval System (``EDGAR'')) on Form N-23c-3, a filing
that provides certain information about the fund and the type of offer
the fund is making.\1\ The fund

must describe in its annual report to shareholders the fund's policy
concerning repurchase offers and the results of any repurchase offers
made during the reporting period. The fund's board of directors must
adopt written procedures designed to ensure that the fund's investment
portfolio is sufficiently liquid to meet its repurchase obligations and
other obligations under the rule. The board periodically must review
the composition of the fund's portfolio and change the liquidity
procedures as necessary. The fund also must file copies of
advertisements and other sales literature with the Commission as if it
were an open-end investment company subject to section 24 of the
Investment Company Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-24) and the rules that implement
section 24. Rule 24b-3 under the Investment Company Act (17 CFR
270.24b-3), however, exempts the fund from that requirement if the
materials are filed instead with the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (``FINRA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Form N-23c-3, entitled ``Notification of Repurchase Offer
Pursuant to Rule 23c-3,'' requires the fund to state its
registration number, its full name and address, the date of the
accompanying shareholder notification, and the type of offer being
made (periodic, discretionary, or both).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The requirement that the fund send a notification to shareholders
of each offer is intended to ensure that a fund provides material
information to shareholders about the terms of each offer. The
requirement that copies be sent to the Commission is intended to enable
the Commission to monitor the fund's compliance with the notification
requirement. The requirement that the shareholder notification be
attached to Form N-23c-3 is intended to ensure that the fund provides
basic information necessary for the Commission to process the
notification and to monitor the fund's use of repurchase offers. The
requirement that the fund describe its current policy on repurchase
offers and the results of recent offers in the annual shareholder
report is intended to provide shareholders current information about
the fund's repurchase policies and its recent experience. The
requirement that the board approve and review written procedures
designed to maintain portfolio liquidity is intended to ensure that the
fund has enough cash or liquid securities to meet its repurchase
obligations, and that written procedures are available for review by
shareholders and examination by the Commission. The requirement that
the fund file advertisements and sales literature as if it were an
open-end fund is intended to facilitate the review of these materials
by the Commission or FINRA to prevent incomplete, inaccurate, or
misleading disclosure about the special characteristics of a closed-end
fund that makes periodic repurchase offers.
    Based on staff experience, the Commission staff estimates that 21
funds make use of rule 23c-3 annually, including six funds that are
relying upon rule 23c-3 for the first time. The Commission staff
estimates that on average a fund spends 89 hours annually in complying
with the requirements of the rule and Form N-23c-3, with funds relying
upon rule 23c-3 for the first time incurring an additional one-time
burden of 28 hours. The Commission therefore estimates the total annual
burden of the rule's and form's paperwork requirements to be 2,037
hours. In addition to the burden hours, the Commission estimates that
the average yearly cost to each fund that relies on rule 23c-3 to print
and mail repurchase offers to shareholders is approximately $29,966.50.
The Commission estimates total annual cost is therefore approximately
$629,297.
    Estimates of the average burden hours and costs are made solely for
the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act and are not derived from a
comprehensive or even representative survey or study of the costs of
Commission rules and forms. Compliance with the collection of
information requirements of the rule and form is mandatory only for
those funds that rely on the rule in order to repurchase shares of the
fund. The information provided to the Commission on Form N-23c-3 will
not be kept confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following Web site, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: July 28, 2015.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-18886 Filed 8-3-15; 08:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 227)]
[Notices]
[Page 66182-66184]
[DOCID:fr27no07-100]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2007-29114]

Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee; Vacancies

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of committee establishment and request for applications.

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

SUMMARY: The Secretary of Homeland Security is establishing the
Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory

Committee (DRBOSAC) under authority of the Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation Act of 2006, Public Law 109-241. Individuals interested
in serving on this committee are invited to apply for membership.

DATES: Application forms for membership should reach the Coast Guard on
or before January 28, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may request a copy of the charter for the Delaware River
and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee or a form to apply for membership
by writing to Captain David L. Scott, Designated Federal Officer (DFO)
of the Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee, USCG Sector
Delaware Bay, 1 Washington Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19147. Send your
application in written form to the above street address. A copy of this
notice, the Committee Charter, and the application form are available
in our online docket, USCG-2007-29114, at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gerald Conrad, Assistant to the
DFO of the Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee, at 215-
271-4824.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Establishment of the Delaware River and Bay
Oil Spill Advisory Committee. The Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463), governs the establishment of
committees by Federal agencies. Section 607 of the Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-241) requires the
Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating to
establish a Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee. The
Commandant of the Coast Guard will select the people to be on the
advisory committee.
    The DRBOSAC shall provide advice and recommendations and a ranking
of priorities for measures to improve the prevention of, and response
to, future oil spills in the Delaware River and Delaware Bay to the
Commandant of the Coast Guard, the Governors of the States of New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, the Committee on Commerce, Science
and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives.
    FACA requires advisory committees to meet at least yearly. However,
we anticipate that this Committee will meet more frequently.
Subcommittees, if established, may also meet between meetings of the
parent committee. Most meetings will be held at Coast Guard Sector
Delaware Bay in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but some meetings may be
held at nearby facilities.

Request for Applications

    The Committee will be composed of 27 members who are appointed by
the Commandant of the Coast Guard and who have a particular expertise,
knowledge, and experience regarding the transportation, equipment, and
techniques that are used to ship cargo and to navigate vessels in the
Delaware River and Delaware Bay, as follows:
    (A) Three members who are employed by port authorities that oversee
operations on the Delaware River or have been selected to represent
these port authorities, of whom--
    (i) One member shall be an employee or representative of the Port
of Wilmington;
    (ii) One member shall be an employee or representative of the South
Jersey Port Corporation;
    (iii) One member shall be an employee or representative of the
Philadelphia Regional Port Authority.
    (B) Two members who represent organizations that operate tugs or
barges that utilize the port facilities on the Delaware River and
Delaware Bay.
    (C) Two members who represent shipping companies that transport
cargo by vessel from ports on the Delaware River and Delaware Bay, of
whom at least one may not be a representative of a shipping company
that transports oil or petroleum products.
    (D) Two members who represent operators of oil refineries adjacent
to the Delaware River and Delaware Bay.
    (E) Two members who represent State-licensed pilots who work on the
Delaware River and Delaware Bay.
    (F) One member who represents labor organizations whose members
load and unload cargo at ports on the Delaware River and Delaware Bay.
    (G) One member who represents local commercial fishing interests or
an aquaculture organization that depends on fisheries and resources of
the Delaware River or Delaware Bay.
    (H) Three members who represent environmental organizations active
with respect to the Delaware River and Delaware Bay, including a
watershed advocacy group and a wildlife conservation advocacy group.
    (I) One member who represents an organization affiliated with
recreational fishing interests in the vicinity of the Delaware River
and Delaware Bay.
    (J) Two members who are scientists or researchers associated with
an academic institution, and who have professional credentials in
fields of research relevant to oil spill safety, oil spill response, or
wildlife and ecological recovery.
    (K) Two members who are municipal or county officials from
Delaware.
    (L) Two members who are municipal or county officials from New
Jersey.
    (M) Two members who are municipal or county officials from
Pennsylvania.
    (N) One member who represents an oil spill response organization
located on the lower Delaware River and Delaware Bay.
    (O) One member who represents the general public.
    The DRBOSAC may also consist of an appropriate number (as
determined by the Commandant of the Coast Guard) of non-voting members
who represent Federal agencies and the agencies of the states of New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware with an interest in oil spill
prevention in the Delaware River and Delaware Bay.
    The members outlined in (A) can be either Special Government
Employees (SGEs) or representatives. Members who are merely employed by
port authorities shall be designated as SGEs and members that represent
these port authorities shall be designated as representative members.
    The members in paragraphs (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), (H), (I),
(K), (L), (M) and (N) are representative members and not Special
Government Employees as defined in section 202(a) of Title 18, United
States Code.
    The members in paragraphs, (J), and (O) serve as Special Government
Employees as defined in section 202(a) of Title 18, United States Code.
    The terms of office for members initially appointed to the
committee shall expire 18 months from the date of their appointment.
Applicants may be required to pass an appropriate security background
check prior to appointment to the committee.
    Applicants should submit their application on Form DOT F 1120.1 to
Captain David L. Scott at the address given in the ADDRESSES section at
the beginning of this Notice. The application form is available from
Mr. Gerald Conrad by calling him at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by going to the
docket for this notice [USCG-2007-29114] at http://www.regulations.gov.

    While attending meetings or otherwise engaged in Committee
business, members will be reimbursed for travel expenses as permitted
under applicable Federal travel regulations. However, members will not
receive any salary or other compensation for their service on the
Committee.
    In support of the policy of the U.S.C.G. on gender and ethnic
diversity, we encourage qualified women and members of minority groups
to apply.
    If you are selected as a Special Government Employee (SGE),
including a member of the general public, we will

require you to complete a Confidential Financial Disclosure Report (OGE
Form 450). We may not release the report or the information in it to
the public, except under an order issued by a Federal court or as
otherwise provided under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a).

    Dated: October 13, 2007.
David. L. Scott,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commanding Officer, Sector Delaware Bay.
 [FR Doc. E7-23044 Filed 11-26-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 210 (Monday, October 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75464-75466]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26132]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79149; File No. SR-BatsBZX-2016-65]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BZX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to BZX
Rule 11.13, Order Execution and Routing

October 25, 2016.
    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 12, 2016, Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BZX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(1) to
describe when an order marked as ``short'' may be eligible for routing
when a short sale price test restriction is in effect.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, 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 parts of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(1) to
describe when an order to sell marked \5\ as ``short'' \6\ may be
eligible for routing when a short sale price test restriction is in
effect. Under Rule 201 of Regulation SHO,\7\ a short sale order in a
covered security \8\ generally cannot be executed or displayed by a
Trading Center,\9\ such as the Exchange, at a price that is at or below
the current national best bid (``NBB'') \10\ when a short sale circuit
breaker is in effect for the covered security (the ``short sale price
test restriction'').\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 242.200(g).
    \6\ The term ``short sale'' is defined as ``any sale of a
security which the seller does not own or any sale which is
consummated by the delivery of a security borrowed by, or for the
account of, the seller.'' 17 CFR 242.200(a).
    \7\ See 17 CFR 242.201; Securities Exchange Act Release No.
61595 (February 26, 2010), 75 FR 11232 (March 10, 2010).
    \8\ Rule 201(a)(1) of Regulation SHO defines the term ``covered
security'' to mean any ``NMS stock'' as defined under Rule
600(b)(47) of Regulation NMS. Rule 600(b)(47) of Regulation NMS
defines an ``NMS stock'' as ``any NMS security other than an
option.'' Rule 600(b)(46) of Regulation NMS defines an ``NMS
security'' as ``any security or class of securities for which
transaction reports are collected, processed, and made available
pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan, or an effective
national market system plan for reporting transactions in listed
options.'' 17 CFR 242.201(a)(1); 17 CFR 242.600(b)(46); and 17 CFR
242.600(b)(47).
    \9\ Rule 201(a)(9) of Regulation SHO states that the term
``Trading Center'' shall have the same meaning as in Rule 600(b)(78)
of Regulation NMS. Rule 600(b)(78) of Regulation NMS defines a
``Trading Center'' as ``a national securities exchange or national
securities association that operates an SRO trading facility, an
alternative trading system, an exchange market maker, an OTC market
maker, or any other broker or dealer that executes orders internally
by trading as principal or crossing orders as agent.'' 17 CFR
242.200(a)(9); 17 CFR 242.600(b)(78).
    \10\ 17 CFR 242.201(a)(4); 17 CFR 242.600(b)(42).
    \11\ 17 CFR 242.201(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Rule 11.13(b)(1), an order marked ``short'' when a short sale
price test restriction is in effect is not eligible for routing by the
Exchange. If an order is ineligible for routing due to a short sale
price test restriction and such order is an Immediate or Cancel
(``IOC'') Order \12\ or a BZX Market Order,\13\ then

the order will be cancelled. If an order is ineligible for routing due
to a short sale price test restriction and such order is a Limit
Order,\14\ the Exchange will post the unfilled balance of the order to
the BZX Book,\15\ subject to the price sliding process as defined in
paragraph (g) of Exchange Rule 11.9.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Exchange Rule 11.9(b)(1).
    \13\ See Exchange Rule 11.9(a)(2). The Exchange also proposes to
remove the reference to BZX Market Orders in Rule 11.13(b)(1) as BZX
Market Orders with a time-in-force of Day that are ineligible for
routing due to a short sale price test restriction pursuant to Rule
201 of Regulation SHO are not cancelled, but rather posted to the
BZX Book pursuant to Exchange Rule 11.9(a)(2). All other BZX Market
Orders are handled in accordance with Exchange Rule 11.13(a).
    \14\ See Exchange Rule 11.9(a)(1).
    \15\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(e).
    \16\ In sum, under Exchange Rule 11.9(g), a short sale order
that, at the time of entry, could not be executed or displayed in
compliance with Rule 201 of Regulation SHO will be re-priced by the
System at one minimum price variation above the current NBB
(``Permitted Price''). See Exchange Rule 11.9(g) for a full
description of the Exchange's Short Sale Price Sliding Process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to specify in Rule 11.13 that orders marked
``short'' may be eligible for routing by the Exchange when a short sale
price test restriction is in effect where the User \17\ selects either
the Post to Away \18\ or ROOC \19\ routing options.\20\ In contrast to
all other routing strategies, which are routed to other Trading Centers
for immediate execution, the Post to Away and ROOC routing options are
orders that are sent to other Trading Centers for posting and/or later
execution as further described below. Under the Post to Away routing
option, the remainder of a routed order is routed to and posted to the
order book of a destination on the System routing table,\21\ as
specified by the User. ROOC is a routing option for orders that the
User wishes to designate for participation in the opening, re-opening
(following a halt, suspension, or pause), or closing process of a
primary listing market other than the Exchange (e.g., the New York
Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE''), Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq''),
NYSE MKT LLC, or NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'')) if received before
the opening/re-opening/closing time of such market. If shares remain
unexecuted after attempting to execute in the opening, re-opening, or
closing process, they are either posted to the BZX Book, executed, or
routed to destinations on the System routing table.\22\ Orders routed
pursuant to the Post to Away and ROOC routing options that are
identified as ``short'' are subject to the receiving Trading Center's
processes for handling short sale orders in compliance with Rule 201 of
Regulation SHO.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Exchange Rule 1.5(cc).
    \18\ See 11.13(b)(3)(H).
    \19\ See 11.13(b)(3)(N).
    \20\ The Exchange also proposes to specify within Rule
11.13(b)(1) that the short sale price test restriction is declared
pursuant to Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.
    \21\ The term ``System routing table'' is defined as the ``the
proprietary process for determining the specific trading venues to
which the System routes orders and the order in which it routes
them.'' See Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(3).
    \22\ Shares returned to the Exchange after routing are handled
in accordance with Exchange Rules, including Rule 11.13(a).
    \23\ See, e.g., Nasdaq Rule 4763; NYSE Rule 440B; and Nasdaq's
Regulation SHO Frequently Asked Questions (updated March 10, 2011),
available at https://nasdaqtrader.com/content/marketregulation/regsho/regshoFAQs.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(1), IOC Orders marked ``short'' that
are not eligible for routing during a short sale price test restriction
will continue to be cancelled.\24\ The unfilled portions of Limit
Orders marked ``short'' that are ineligible for routing due to a short
sale price test restriction Exchange will continue to be posted to the
BZX Book subject to the price sliding process as defined in paragraph
(g) of Exchange Rule 11.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See supra note 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \25\ and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \26\ because it is designed to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system,
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities, and, in general, protect
investors and the public interest. Specifically, the proposed changes
are designed to ensure clarity in the Exchange's rulebook with respect
to the routing of orders in compliance with Rule 201 of Regulation SHO.
In addition, providing Users the ability to send short sale orders that
are routable pursuant to the Post to Away and ROOC routing options
provides them additional flexibility with regard to the handling of
their orders. The Exchange notes that short sale orders routed pursuant
to the Post to Away or ROOC routing options are identified as ``short''
and, therefore, subject to the receiving Trading Center's processes for
handling short sale orders in compliance with Regulation SHO.\27\ The
Exchange also notes that other national securities exchanges do not
expressly prohibit the routing of short sale orders. For example,
Nasdaq and NYSE Arca allow for the routing of short sale orders
generally, and do not limit a short sale order's ability to route to
certain routing options.\28\ Thus, the proposal is directly targeted at
removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open
market and national market system. The proposed rule change also is
designed to support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \29\ of the Act
in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and dealers
and among exchange markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \27\ See supra note 22.
    \28\ See e.g., Nasdaq Rules 4702(a) (stating generally that an
``[o]rder may . . . may be routed to other market centers for
potential execution if designated as `Routable' '') and 4763 (not
prohibiting the routing of a short sale order during a short sale
price test). See also e.g., NYSE Arca Rule 7.6P (not prohibiting the
routing of a short sale order during a short sale price test).
    \29\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange is
simply proposing to reflect in its rules that orders marked ``short''
may be routed to an away market for execution under two specific
routing strategies offered by the Exchange.

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

    Not applicable.

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) by
its terms, 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 \30\ and
paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\31\ the Exchange has
designated this rule filing as non-controversial. The Exchange has
given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (1) Necessary or
appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection of
investors; or (3) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved
or 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-BatsBZX-2016-65 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-BatsBZX-2016-65. 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 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-BatsBZX-2016-65, and should
be submitted on or before November 21, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-26132 Filed 10-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P