[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 5, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6654-6655]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02232]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-312, OMB Control No. 3235-0354]

Proposed Collection; 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 19b-1.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 350l-3520), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Section 19(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'')
(15 U.S.C. 80a-19(b)) authorizes the Commission to regulate registered
investment company (``fund'') distributions of long-term capital gains
made more frequently than once every twelve months. Accordingly, rule
19b-1 under the Act (17 CFR 270.19b-1) regulates the frequency of fund
distributions of capital gains. Rule 19b-1(c) states that the rule does
not apply to a unit investment trust (``UIT'') if it is engaged
exclusively in the business of investing in certain eligible securities
(generally, fixed-income securities), provided that: (i) The capital
gains distribution falls within one of five categories specified in the
rule \1\ and (ii) the distribution is accompanied by a report to the
unitholder that clearly describes the distribution as a capital gains
distribution (the ``notice requirement'').\2\ Rule 19b-1(e) permits a
fund to apply to the Commission for permission to distribute long-term
capital gains that would otherwise be prohibited by the rule if the
fund did not foresee the circumstances that created the need for the
distribution. The application must set forth the pertinent facts and
explain the circumstances that justify the distribution.\3\ An
application that meets those requirements is deemed to be granted
unless the Commission denies the request within 15 days after the
Commission receives the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 270.19b-1(c)(1).
    \2\ The notice requirement in rule 19b-1(c)(2) supplements the
notice requirement of section 19(a) [15 U.S.C. 80a-19(a)], which
requires any distribution in the nature of a dividend payment to be
accompanied by a notice disclosing the source of the distribution.
    \3\ Rule 19b-1(e) also requires that the application comply with
rule 0-2 [17 CFR 270.02] under the Act, which sets forth the general
requirements for papers and applications filed with the Commission
pursuant to the Act and rules thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff estimates that three funds will file an
application under rule 19b-1(e) each year.\4\ The staff understands
that if a fund files an application it generally uses outside counsel
to prepare the application. The cost burden of using outside counsel is
discussed in Item 13 below. The staff estimates that, on average, a
fund's investment adviser would spend approximately 4 hours to review
an application, including 3.5 hours by an assistant general counsel at
a cost of $466 per hour and 0.5 hours by an administrative assistant at
a cost of $81 per hour, and the fund's board of directors would spend
an additional 1 hour at a cost of $4,465 per hour, for a total of 5
hours.\5\ Thus, the staff estimates that the annual hour burden of the
collection of information imposed by rule 19b-1(e) would be
approximately five hours per fund, at a cost of $6,136.50.\6\ Because
the staff estimates that, each year, three funds will file an
application pursuant to rule 19b-1(e), the total burden for the
information collection is 15 hours at a cost of $18,409.50.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This estimate is based on the average number of applications
filed with the Commission pursuant to rule 19b-1(e) in the prior
three-year period.
    \5\ The estimate for assistant general counsels is from SIFMA's
Management & Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry 2013,
modified by Commission staff to account for an 1800-hour work-year
and inflation and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm
size, employee benefits and overhead. The estimate for
administrative assistants is from SIFMA's Office Salaries in the
Securities Industry 2013, modified by Commission staff to account
for an 1800-hour work-year and inflation and multiplied by 2.93 to
account for bonuses, firm size, employee benefits and overhead. The
staff previously estimated in 2009 that the average cost of board of
director time was $4,000 per hour for the board as a whole, based on
information received from funds and their counsel. Adjusting for
inflation, the staff estimates that the current average cost of
board of director time is approximately $4,465.
    \6\ This estimate is based on the following calculations: $1,631
(3.5 hours x $466 = $1,631) plus $40.5 (0.5 hours x $81 = $40.5)
plus $4,465 equals $6,136.50 (cost of one application).
    \7\ This estimate is based on the following calculation:
$6,136.50 (cost of one application) multiplied by 3 applications =
$18,409.50 total cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff estimates that there is no hour burden associated
with complying with the collection of information component of rule
19b-1(c).
    As noted above, Commission staff understands that funds that file
an application under rule 19b-1(e) generally use outside counsel to
prepare the application.\8\ The staff estimates that, on average,
outside counsel spends 10 hours preparing a rule 19b-1(e) application,
including eight hours by an associate and two hours by a partner.
Outside counsel billing arrangements and rates vary based on numerous
factors, but the staff has estimated the average cost of outside
counsel as $400 per hour, based on information received from funds,
intermediaries, and their counsel. The staff therefore estimates that
the average cost of outside counsel preparation of the rule 19b-1(e)
exemptive application is $4,000.\9\ Because the staff estimates that,
each year, five funds will file an application pursuant to rule 19b-
1(e), the total annual cost burden imposed by the exemptive application
requirements of

rule 19b-1(e) is estimated to be $12,000.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ This understanding is based on conversations with
representatives from the fund industry.
    \9\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 10
hours multiplied by $400 per hour equals $4,000.
    \10\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: $4,000
multiplied by 3 funds equals $12,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission staff estimates that there are approximately 2,230
UITs \11\ that may rely on rule 19b-1(c) to make capital gains
distributions. The staff estimates that, on average, these UITs rely on
rule 19b-1(c) once a year to make a capital gains distribution.\12\ In
most cases, the trustee of the UIT is responsible for preparing and
sending the notices that must accompany a capital gains distribution
under rule 19b-1(c)(2). These notices require limited preparation, the
cost of which accounts for only a small, indiscrete portion of the
comprehensive fee charged by the trustee for its services to the UIT.
The staff believes that as a matter of good business practice, and for
tax preparation reasons, UITs would collect and distribute the capital
gains information required to be sent to unitholders under rule 19b-
1(c) even in the absence of the rule. The staff estimates that the cost
of preparing a notice for a capital gains distribution under rule 19b-
1(c)(2) is approximately $50. There is no separate cost to mail the
notices because they are mailed with the capital gains distribution.
Thus, the staff estimates that the capital gains distribution notice
requirement imposes an annual cost on UITs of approximately
$111,500.\13\ The staff therefore estimates that the total cost imposed
by rule 19b-1 is $123,500.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 2019 Investment Company Fact Book, Investment Company
Institute, available at https://www.ici.org/pdf/2019_factbook.pdf.
    \12\ The number of times UITs rely on the rule to make capital
gains distributions depends on a wide range of factors and, thus,
can vary greatly across years and UITs. UITs may distribute capital
gains biannually, annually, quarterly, or at other intervals.
Additionally, a number of UITs are organized as grantor trusts, and
therefore do not generally make capital gains distributions under
rule 19b-1(c), or may not rely on rule 19b-1(c) as they do not meet
the rule's requirements.
    \13\ This estimate is based on the following calculation: 2,230
UITs multiplied by $50 equals $111,500.
    \14\ $111,500 (total cost associated with rule 19b-1(c)) +
$12,000 (total cost associated with rule 19b-1(e)) = $123,500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Cynthia
Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: January 31, 2020.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-02232 Filed 2-4-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8689-8691]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02556]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0288; FRL-10016-56-Region 3]

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 1997 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard Second Maintenance Plan for the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state

implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. This revision pertains to the Commonwealth's plan,
submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP), for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) (referred to as the ``1997 ozone NAAQS'') in
the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area. EPA is approving these revisions
to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 11, 2021.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0288. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (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 through
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keila M. Pag[aacute]n-Incle, Planning
& Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2926. Ms. Pag[aacute]n-Incle can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On September 3, 2020 (85 FR 54954), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In the
NPRM, EPA proposed approval of Pennsylvania's plan for maintaining the
1997 ozone NAAQS in the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area through July
25, 2027, in accordance with CAA section 175A. The formal SIP revision
was submitted by PADEP on February 27, 2020.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    On July 25, 2007 (72 FR 40749 effective July 25, 2007), EPA
approved a redesignation request (and maintenance plan) from PADEP for
the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area. In accordance with section
175A(b), at the end of the eighth year after the effective date of the
redesignation, the state must also submit a second maintenance plan to
ensure ongoing maintenance of the standard for an additional 10 years,
and in South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA,\1\ the D.C.
Circuit held that this requirement cannot be waived for areas, like the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area, that had been redesignated to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS prior to revocation and that
were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 175A sets forth the criteria for adequate maintenance
plans. In addition, EPA has published longstanding guidance that
provides further insight on the content of an approvable maintenance
plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address five elements:
(1) An attainment emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance demonstration;
(3) a commitment for continued air quality monitoring; (4) a process
for verification of continued attainment; and (5) a contingency
plan.\2\ PADEP's February 27, 2020 submittal fulfills Pennsylvania's
obligation to submit a second maintenance plan and addresses each of
the five necessary elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni Memo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the September 3, 2020 NPRM, EPA allows the
submittal of a less rigorous, limited maintenance plan (LMP) to meet
the CAA section 175A requirements by demonstrating that the area's
design value \3\ is well below the NAAQS and that the historical
stability of the area's air quality levels shows that the area is
unlikely to violate the NAAQS in the future. EPA evaluated PADEP's
February 27, 2020 submittal for consistency with all applicable EPA
guidance and CAA requirements. EPA found that the submittal met CAA
section 175A and all CAA requirements, and proposed approval of the LMP
for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP. The effect of this action makes certain commitments
related to the maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS Federally
enforceable as part of the Pennsylvania SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations. The design value for an ozone nonattainment
area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequent to the publication of the September 3, 2020 NPRM, EPA
discovered a minor computational error in the data presented in Table
1: ``Typical Summer Day NOX and VOC Emissions for the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area.'' While the data are correct, the
total NOX emissions were summed incorrectly in Table 1. The
correct total is 73.13 tons/day, not 81.03 tons/day as presented in the
table. See 85 FR 54954. However, since the actual data are correct, and
since the incorrect total over-reports rather than under-reports the
emissions, EPA believes this to be a harmless error which does not
impact the rationale in the NPRM for our approval of Pennsylvania's
submittal. Other specific requirements of PADEP's February 27, 2020
submittal and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in
the NPRM and will not be restated here.

III. EPA's Response to Comments Received

    EPA received one comment which was not relevant to this action or
to air quality.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS limited maintenance
plan for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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. EPA will submit a report containing this action 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 not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 12, 2021. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action pertaining to Pennsylvania's limited maintenance
plan for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area may not be challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 3, 2021.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

0
2. In Sec.  52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding
an entry for ``1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard
Second Maintenance Plan for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area'' at
the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2020  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State
    Name of non-regulatory SIP          Applicable        submittal     EPA approval date        Additional
             revision                 geographic area        date                                explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
1997 8-Hour Ozone National         Harrisburg-Lebanon-     2/27/2020  2/9/2021, [insert
 Ambient Air Quality Standard       Carlisle Area.                     Federal Register
 Second Maintenance Plan for the                                       citation].
 Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-02556 Filed 2-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 53)]
[Notices]
[Page 13276-13277]
[DOCID:fr19mr10-68]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0236; FRL-8817-1]

Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee; Notice of Public Meetings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, EPA gives
notice of a public meeting of the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee
(PPDC) on April 29 and 30, 2010. A draft agenda is under development
that will include reports from and discussions about current issues
from the following PPDC work groups: Work Group on 21st Century
Toxicology/New Integrated Testing Strategies; Work Group on Web-
Distributed Labeling; and Work Group on Comparative Safety Statements
for Pesticide Product Labeling. Discussion topics will also cover
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issues regarding
pesticides and current Endangered Species Act issues. PPDC work group
meetings are also being scheduled and are open to the public. The PPDC
PRIA Process Improvements Work Group will meet on April 28, 2010, from
1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Information about all PPDC work group meetings can be
found on EPA's website at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ppdc.

DATES: The PPDC meeting will be held on Thursday, April 29, 2010, from
9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and Friday, April 30, 2010, from 9 a.m. to noon.
    To request accommodation of a disability, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATON CONTACT, preferably at least 10
days

prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process
your request.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Conference Center on the
lobby level at EPA's location at 1 Potomac Yard South, 2777 S. Crystal
Drive, Arlington, VA. This location is approximately one mile from the
Crystal City Metro Station.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Margie Fehrenbach, Office of
Pesticide Programs (7501P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-4775; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
particular interest to persons who work in agricultural settings or
persons who are concerned about implementation of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); and the amendments to both of these
major pesticide laws by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996;
and the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA). Potentially
affected entities may include, but are not limited to: Agricultural
workers and farmers; pesticide industry and trade associations;
environmental, consumer, and farmworker groups; pesticide users and
growers; pest consultants; State, local and Tribal governments;
academia; public health organizations; food processors; and the public.
If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0236. Although a part
of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. 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 Office
of Pesticide Programs (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
Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.
    A draft agenda is being developed and will be posted by March 26,
2010, on EPA's web site at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ppdc/.

II. Background

    EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) is entrusted with the
responsibility to help ensure the safety of the American food supply,
the education and protection from unreasonable risk of those who apply
or are exposed to pesticides occupationally or through use of products,
and general protection of the environment and special ecosystems from
potential risks posed by pesticides.
    The Charter for EPA's PPDC was established under the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, in September 1995,
and has been renewed every 2 years since that time. PPDC's Charter was
renewed October 30, 2009, for another 2-year period. The purpose of
PPDC is to provide advice and recommendations to the EPA Administrator
on issues associated with pesticide regulatory development and reform
initiatives, evolving public policy and program implementation issues,
and science issues associated with evaluating and reducing risks from
use of pesticides. It is determined that PPDC is in the public interest
in connection with the performance of duties imposed on the Agency by
law. The following sectors are represented on the PPDC: Pesticide
industry and trade associations; environmental/public interest,
consumer, and animal rights groups; farm worker organizations;
pesticide user, grower, and commodity groups; Federal and State/local/
Tribal governments; the general public; academia; and public health
organizations.
    Copies of the PPDC Charter are filed with appropriate committees of
Congress and the Library of Congress and are available upon request.

III. How Can I Request to Participate in this Meeting?

    PPDC meetings are open to the public and seating is available on a
first-come basis. Persons interested in attending do not need to
register in advance of the meeting. Comments may be made during the
public comment session of each meeting or in writing to the address
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural workers, Agriculture,
Chemicals, Endangered species, Foods, Pesticide labels, Pesticides and
pests, Public health.

    Dated: March 12, 2010.
Steven Bradbury,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 2010-6077 Filed 3-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11307-11309]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05759]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-D-0031]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments Waiver
Applications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice solicits comments on collections of information associated with
Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) waiver
applications.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by May 28, 2019.

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 28, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of May 28, 2019. 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-2008-D-0031 for ``CLIA Waiver Applications.'' 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.
     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.gpo.gov/fdsys/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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber Sanford, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

CLIA Waiver Applications--OMB Control Number 0910-0598--Extension

    Congress passed the CLIA (Pub. L. 100-578) in 1988 to establish
quality standards for all laboratory testing. The purpose was to ensure
the accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of patient test results
regardless of where the test took place. CLIA requires that clinical
laboratories obtain a certificate from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services (the Secretary), before accepting materials derived from
the human body for laboratory tests (42 U.S.C. 263a(b)). Laboratories
that perform only tests that are ``simple'' and that have an
``insignificant risk of an erroneous result'' may obtain a certificate
of waiver (42 U.S.C. 263a(d)(2)). The Secretary has delegated to FDA
the authority to determine whether particular tests (waived tests) are
``simple'' and have ``an insignificant risk of an erroneous result''
under CLIA (69 FR 22849, April 27, 2004).
    On January 30, 2008, FDA published a guidance document entitled
``Recommendations for Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of
1988 (CLIA) Waiver Applications for Manufacturers of In Vitro
Diagnostic Devices--Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff'' (https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm079632.htm). This guidance describes
recommendations for device manufacturers submitting to FDA an
application for determination that a cleared or approved device meets
this CLIA standard (CLIA waiver application). The guidance recommends
that CLIA waiver applications include a description of the features of
the device that make it ``simple''; a report describing a hazard
analysis that identifies potential sources of error, including a
summary of the design and results of flex studies and conclusions drawn
from the flex studies; a description of fail-safe and failure alert
mechanisms and a description of the studies validating these
mechanisms; a description of clinical tests that demonstrate the
accuracy of the test in the hands of intended operators; and
statistical analyses of clinical study results.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Number of                                                        Total operating
                     Activity                          Number of      responses  per    Total annual   Average  burden    Total hours    and maintenance
                                                      respondents       respondent       responses      per  response                         costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLIA Waiver Application...........................              13                1               13            1,200           15,600         $350,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs associated with this collection of information.

                                                   Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                       Average burden
                              Activity                                  Number of       records per      Total annual         per          Total hours
                                                                      recordkeepers     recordkeeper       records       recordkeeping
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLIA Waiver Records................................................              13                1               13            2,800           36,400
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The total number of reporting and recordkeeping hours is 52,000
hours. FDA bases the burden on an Agency analysis of premarket
submissions with clinical trials similar to the waived laboratory
tests. Based on previous years' experience with CLIA waiver
applications, FDA expects 13 manufacturers to submit one CLIA waiver
application per year. The time required to prepare and submit a waiver
application, including the time needed to assemble supporting data,
averages 1,200 hours per waiver application for a total of 15,600 hours
for reporting. Based on previous years' experience with CLIA waiver
applications, FDA expects that each manufacturer will spend 2,800 hours
creating and maintaining the record for a total of 36,400 hours.
    The total operating and maintenance cost associated with the waiver
application is estimated at $350,000. This cost is largely attributed
to clinical study costs incurred, which include site selection and
qualification, protocol review, and study execution (initiation,
monitoring, closeout, and clinical site/subject compensation--including
specimen collection for study as well as shipping and supplies).

    Our estimated burden for the information collection reflects a
decrease of 27 responses and 27 records, and a corresponding overall
decrease of 108,000 hours. We attribute this adjustment to a decrease
in the average number of submissions we received over the last few
years.

    Dated: March 20, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-05759 Filed 3-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26021-26022]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10007]

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

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: EC21-88-000.
    Applicants: KES Kingsburg, L.P.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of KES Kingsburg, L.P.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5186.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

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

    Docket Numbers: EG21-140-000.
    Applicants: Orangeville Energy Storage LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Orangeville Energy Storage LLC.
    Filed Date: 5/4/21.
    Accession Number: 20210504-5190.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/25/21.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1214-004; ER11-3917-003.
    Applicants: Mojave Solar LLC, Coso Geothermal Power Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Coso Geothermal Power
Holdings, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210506-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1436-016; ER10-2742-015; ER14-153-009; ER14-
154-009; ER15-1604-004; ER16-517-004; ER18-533-003; ER18-534-003; ER18-
535-003; ER18-536-003; ER18-537-003; ER18-538-004; ER20-1641-002.
    Applicants: Tilton Energy LLC, Dynegy Lee II, LLC, Eagle Point
Power Generation LLC, Gibson City Energy Center, LLC, Grand Tower
Energy Center, LLC, Lee County Generating Station, LLC, Montepelier
Generating Station, LLC, Monument Generating Station, LLC, O.H.
Hutchings CT, LLC, Shelby County Energy Center, LLC, Sidney, LLC,
Southern Illinois Generation Company, LLC, Tait Electric Generating
Station, LLC, Yankee Street, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Rockland
Sellers.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.

    Accession Number: 20210505-5185.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1073-004; ER10-2460-019; ER10-2461-020; ER10-
2463-019; ER10-2466-020; ER10-2895-022; ER10-2917-022; ER10-2918-023;
ER10-2920-022; ER10-2921-022; ER10-2922-022; ER10-2966-022; ER10-3167-
014; ER11-2201-023; ER11-2383-018; ER11-3941-020; ER11-3942-025; ER11-
4029-019; ER12-1311-019; ER12-161-024; ER12-2068-019; ER12-645-025;
ER12-682-020; ER13-1139-022; ER13-1346-013; ER13-1613-015; ER13-17-017;
ER13-203-014; ER13-2143-015; ER14-1964-013; ER14-25-019; ER14-2630-015;
ER16-287-008; ER17-482-007; ER19-1074-007; ER19-1075-007; ER19-1076-
004; ER19-2429-005; ER19-529-007; ER20-1447-003; ER20-1806-003.
    Applicants: Alta Wind VIII, LLC, Bear Swamp Power Company LLC, BIF
II Safe Harbor Holdings, LLC, BIF III Holtwood LLC, Bishop Hill Energy
LLC, Black Bear Development Holdings, LLC, Black Bear Hydro Partners,
LLC, Black Bear SO, LLC, Blue Sky East, LLC, BREG Aggregator LLC,
Brookfield Energy Marketing Inc., Brookfield Energy Marketing LP,
Brookfield Energy Marketing US LLC, Brookfield Power Piney & Deep Creek
LLC, Brookfield Renewable Energy Marketing US, Brookfield Renewable
Trading and Marketing LP, Brookfield Smoky Mountain Hydropower LP,
Brookfield White Pine Hydro LLC, California Ridge Wind Energy LLC,
Canandaigua Power Partners, LLC, Canandaigua Power Partners II, LLC,
Catalyst Old River Hydroelectric Limited Partnership, Carr Street
Generating Station, L.P., Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P., Erie Wind,
LLC, Evergreen Wind Power, LLC, Evergreen Wind Power III, LLC, Granite
Reliable Power, LLC, Great Lakes Hydro America, LLC, Hawks Nest Hydro
LLC, Imperial Valley Solar 1, LLC, Mesa Wind Power Corporation, Niagara
Wind Power, LLC, Prairie Breeze Wind Energy LLC, Regulus Solar, LLC,
Rumford Falls Hydro LLC, Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, Stetson
Holdings, LLC, Stetson Wind II, LLC, Vermont Wind, LLC, Windstar
Energy, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Alta Wind
VIII, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-44-002.
    Applicants: Altavista Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Altavista Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1006-000; ER21-1007-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: EL Paso Electric Company submits response to the
Commission's March 29, 2021 letter.
    Filed Date: 4/28/21.
    Accession Number: 20210428-5220.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/19/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1401-001.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation,
Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: 2021 Interchange Agreement Annual
Filing-Stay to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1506-001.
    Applicants: Shaw Creek Solar, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Shaw Creek Solar, LLC Amendment to
the Application for MBR Authority to be effective 5/23/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5178.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1752-001.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to First Revised Service
Agreement No. 398 to be effective 5/6/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5170.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1858-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: CapX Brookings OMA-537-
0.1.0-Filing to be effective 7/5/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1859-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Rate Schedule No. 214 of
Arizona Public Service Company.
    Filed Date: 5/5/21.
    Accession Number: 20210505-5175.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/26/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1860-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: TFO Interim Tariff Rate
Revision to Conform with PUCT to be effective 4/30/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210506-5023.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1861-000.
    Applicants: BP Energy Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 7/6/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210506-5060.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1862-000.
    Applicants: Cedar Creek II, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Market-Based Rate
Tariff Filing to be effective 7/6/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210506-5067.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1863-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: RE Sumter (Sumter County
Solar) Amended and Restated LGIA Filing to be effective 4/9/2021.
    Filed Date: 5/6/21.
    Accession Number: 20210506-5094.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/27/21.

    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 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: May 6, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-10007 Filed 5-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31131-31132]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13775]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86191; File No. SR-Phlx-2019-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Order Granting
Approval of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Allocation and
Prioritization of Automatically Executed Trades

June 24, 2019.

I. Introduction

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on May 15, 2019, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the
proposed rule change relating to the allocation and prioritization of
automatically executed trades. The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on May 22, 2019.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposed rule change. This order approves
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 85876 (May 16,
2019), 84 FR 23595 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to adopt new Rule 1089 to describe in greater
detail the manner in which Phlx will process, prioritize and allocate
transactions. The current Phlx rule, Rule 1014(g)(vii) and (viii),
describes the allocation process generally and relies on a calculation
to describe how different market participants may be allocated. The
Exchange now proposes to sequentially describe the manner in which an
order would be allocated, including the allocation method, rounding and
all potential allocation scenarios. The proposal generally codifies the
Exchange's current practices while adding more explicit language to the
rule text. In addition, the Exchange proposes to codify its round robin
allocation of odd lots that is not set forth in its current rules.
    The Exchange proposes to retain its existing allocation methodology
and priorities in the new rule. For example, Public Customer orders
will continue to have priority over non-Public Customer interest at the
same price, provided the Public Customer order is an executable order.
Generally, the Specialist and/or Directed Registered Option Trader
(``DROT'') priority is then applied, before the ROT priority \4\ and
remaining interest. The proposed rule also codifies the manner in which
rounding will be handled and makes conforming changes to the Exchange's
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ After the DROT Priority is applied, the System excludes the
Specialist/DROT from the total number of contracts that is utilized
(denominator) in calculating the ROT Priority in proposed Rule
1089(a)(1)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its proposal, the Exchange proposes one change to its existing
allocation scheme. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to amend the
current allocation a Specialist is entitled to receive when a
Specialist is also the DROT, and the order is directed to a particular
market maker (a ``Directed Order'') for 5 contracts or fewer. Today, a
Specialist is entitled to the allocation of orders of 5 contracts or
fewer only when such order is either not a Directed Order or is a
Directed order for 5 contracts or fewer, but the DROT is not quoting at
the inside price. If the order for 5 contracts or fewer is a Directed
Order and the DROT is also the Specialist, then the Specialist
currently is entitled to receive only the DROT allocation of 40% of the
order, rather than the full size of the allocation of the order for 5
contracts or fewer.
    The Exchange proposes that, assuming there is no Public Customer
interest present at the same price, the Specialist would be entitled to
the entire allocation of the order of 5 contracts or fewer where the
Specialist is also the DROT and the Specialist receives the Directed
Order and has a quote at the best price when the Directed Order is
received. This specialist entitlement for orders of 5 contracts or
fewer would apply only after the Opening Process and would not apply to
auctions.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, the Commission
finds that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a
national securities exchange.\5\ Specifically, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Act,\6\ which requires, among other things, that the rules of a
national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to 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 to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In approving this rule change, the Commission has considered
the rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the Exchange proposes to revise its rules
governing how it processes, prioritizes, and allocates transactions,
including by codifying practices that were not set forth in the
Exchange's rules, by deleting its existing rules and adopting a new
rule. The Commission believes that the Exchange's proposal protects
investors and the public interest because it enhances the transparency
of its transaction allocation process for market participants using its
facilities. Therefore, the Commission finds that this enhanced
transparency is consistent with the Act.
    With respect to the Exchange's proposal to modify the specialist
allocation to provide the Directed Specialist with the entire
allocation of a Directed Order where the order is for 5 contracts or
fewer, the Commission notes that the Directed Specialist will not be
entitled to this allocation when there is a Public Customer present at
the same price or when the Specialist is not quoting at the inside when
the order is received. The Commission further notes that the modified
specialist entitlement is identical to the existing specialist
allocation of orders of 5 contracts or fewer where the order is not a
Directed Order, which is provided to specialists in recognition of the
specialists' affirmative market making obligations. The Commission
finds that the proposed specialist allocation for Directed Orders of 5
contracts or fewer is consistent with the Act in that the proposal
should promote just and equitable principles of trade.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered that, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\7\ the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2019-20) be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

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

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

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-13775 Filed 6-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 196)]
[Notices]
[Page 59755-59756]
[DOCID:fr11oc06-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-464-000]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Application

October 3, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 21, 2006, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR)
Pipeline), 1001 Louisiana, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in docket CP06-
464-000 an application pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA), as amended, for authority to develop, construct, and operate the
Storage Enhancement Project--2008, consisting of the acquisition and
conversion of the depleted Cold Springs 1 natural gas reservoir located
in Kalkaska County, Michigan, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket

number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY, (202)
208-3676.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Dawn
McGuire, Attorney, ANR Pipeline Company, 1001 Louisiana, Houston, Texas
77002, or call<PHONE_NUMBER> or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of

environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the
right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link.

    Comment Date: October 24, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-16761 Filed 10-10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 75503]
[DOCID:fr20de05-88]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549.
Extension:
    Rule 17a-5(c); SEC File No. 270-199; OMB Control No. 3235-0199.
    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 (``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 17a-5(c) [17 CFR 240.17a-5(c)] under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 requires certain broker-dealers who carry customer accounts
to provide statements of the broker-dealer's financial condition to
their customers. Paragraph (5) of Rule 17a-5(c) provides a conditional
exemption from this requirement. It is estimated that approximately 375
broker-dealer respondents with approximately 109 million public
customer accounts incur an average burden of 130,000 hours per year to
comply with this rule.
    Rule 17a-5(c) does not contain record retention requirements.
Compliance with the rule is mandatory. Responses are not 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 control number.
    General comments regarding the estimated burden hours should be
directed to the following persons: (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 e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief

Information Officer, Office of Information Technology, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Comments
must be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget within 30 days
of this notice.

    Dated: December 12, 2005.
Jonathan Katz,
Secretary. (..continued) 2
 [FR Doc. E5-7529 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


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

General Comment:Coenzyme PQQ, Methoxatin, 2, 7,9-Tricarboxypyrroloquinoline quinine,  4,5-dihydro-4,5-dioxo-1 H-pyrrolo (2,3-f) quinoline-,7,9-tricarboxylic acid


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 196 (Thursday, October 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 57167]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22362]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4480-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

New York; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of New York (FEMA-4480-DR), dated March 20, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on August 23, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Chad Gorman, of
FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this
disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Thomas J. Fargione as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

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

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-22362 Filed 10-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 172 (Friday, September 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53051-53052]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21166]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1864-187]

Upper Peninsula Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for
Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-project Use of Project Lands.
    b. Project No: 1864-187.
    c. Date Filed: June 20, 2014.
    d. Applicant: Upper Peninsula Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Bond Falls.
    f. Location: Ontonagon River in Ontonagon and Gogebic Counties,
Michigan, and Vilas County, Wisconsin. The project occupies federal
lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service within the Ottawa
National Forest.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Shawn Puzen, Upper Peninsula Power Company,
700 North Adams Street, P.O. Box 19001, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54307-
9001; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Patricia A. Grant at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: September 26, 2014.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Please include the project number (P-1864-187) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors

filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document
on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee proposes to remove the
current maintenance building at the Victoria development (02) of the
Bond Falls project, and replace it with a new building, to be
constructed in the area of the existing boat landing parking area. The
boat landing parking area and associated recreation facilities will be
moved to the area vacated by the current maintenance building.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field (P-9951) to access the document. You
may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-
208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call (202) 502-
8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the
address in item (h) above. Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied
by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared
by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR
385.2010.

    Dated: August 26, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-21166 Filed 9-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Notices]
[Page 27623-27625]
[DOCID:fr17my10-121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-
2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2004-17195; FMCSA-2006-23773]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
21 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained

without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective June 3, 2010. Comments must be
received on or before June 16, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-6480;
FMCSA-2000-7006; FMCSA-2000-7165; FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2004-17195;
FMCSA-2006-23773, using any of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments
on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This Notice addresses 21 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 21 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:
James C. Askin, Paul J. Bannon, Ernie E. Black, Ronnie F. Bowman, Gary
O. Brady, Stephen H. Goldcamp, Steven F. Grass, Wai F. King, Dennis E.
Krone, Richard J. McKenzie, Jr., Christopher J. Meerten, Craig W.
Miller, William J. Miller, Robert J. Mohorter, James A. Mohr, Roderick
F. Peterson, Tommy L. Ray, Jr., George S. Rayson, Donald W. Sidwell,
Elmer K. Thomas, and Raul R. Torres.
    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the
medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3)
that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file and
retains a copy of the certification on his/her person while driving for
presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement
official. Each exemption will be valid for two years unless rescinded
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two-year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 21 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 63289; 69 FR 8260; 71 FR
16410; 73 FR 78186; 64 FR 68195; 65 FR 20251; 67 FR 38311; 69 FR 26921;
71 FR 27033; 67 FR 17102; 69 FR 17267; 71 FR 16410; 65 FR 20245; 65 FR
57230; 65 FR 33406; 65 FR 45817; 65 FR 77066; 68 FR 1654; 70 FR 7545;
73 FR 11989; 69 FR 17263; 69 FR 31447; 71 FR 6826; 71 FR 19602). Each
of these 21 applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has
submitted evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues
to meet the standard specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the
vision impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of
safety while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the
past two years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision
exemption standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for
predicting each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in
interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the
exemption for each renewal applicant for a period of two years is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by June 16, 2010.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then

requesting and evaluating, if needed, subsequent comments submitted by
interested parties. As indicated above, the Agency previously published
Notices of final disposition announcing its decision to exempt these 21
individuals from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The
final decision to grant an exemption to each of these individuals was
made on the merits of each case and made only after careful
consideration of the comments received to its Notices of applications.
The Notices of applications stated in detail the qualifications,
experience, and medical condition of each applicant for an exemption
from the vision requirements. That information is available by
consulting the above cited Federal Register publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: May 5, 2010.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-11705 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21267-21268]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08225]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0483]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Chincoteague Bay, Chincoteague,
VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the operating schedule that
governs SR 175 Bridge across Lewis Channel and Black Narrows, mile 3.5
at Chincoteague, VA. The change will eliminate the need for the current
operating schedule and return the bridge to open on demand. The change
does not include the last consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July
for the annual Pony swim.

DATES: This rule is effective May 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG
2014-0483 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Kashanda Booker, Fifth Coast Guard District Bridge
Administration Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On January 26, 2015, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) entitled, ``Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Chincoteague Bay, Chincoteague, VA'' in the Federal Register (80 FR
3933). We received no comments on this rule. No public meeting was
requested and none was held.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 33 U.S.C. 499.
The purpose of this rule is to allow for a less restrictive operating
schedule while still balancing the needs of the marine and vehicular
traffic. The draw of the SR 175 Bridge will open on demand in
accordance with 33 CFR 117.5 except: From 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last
consecutive Wednesday and Thursday in July, the draw need not be opened
for the annual Pony swim.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The bridge owner, Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), who
owns and operates SR 175 Bridge across Lewis Channel and Black Narrows,
mile 3.5, at Chincoteague, VA has requested to change 33 CFR 117.1005.
    In 2011, a new single-leaf bascule bridge was constructed on a new
alignment replacing the former swing-type bridge that was located
downstream from the Chincoteague maritime community. The new alignment
resulted in boaters having an improved channel access and the number of
necessary bridge openings reduced.
    The vertical clearance of the single-span bascule bridge is 15 feet
above mean high water in the closed position and unlimited in the open
position. The horizontal clearance is 60 feet between fender systems.
    The current operating schedule allows the draw to open on demand
from midnight to 6 a.m., and every one and a half hours from 6 a.m. to
midnight (at 6 a.m., 7:30 a.m., 9 a.m., 10:30 a.m., 12 p.m., 1:30 p.m.,
3 p.m., 4:30 p.m., 6 p.m., 7:30 p.m., 9 p.m., 10:30 p.m., and
midnight); except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive
Wednesday and Thursday in July, the draw need not be opened. This has
been the regular operating schedule since November 16, 2006.
    Based on the decreased number of bridge openings since 2011, the
Chincoteague maritime community and the Accomack County Board of
Supervisors favored a less restrictive opening schedule by proposing a
test deviation from scheduled openings to an ``on demand'' schedule
while still balancing the needs of marine and vehicular traffic. The
monthly vessel openings at the SR 175 Bridge submitted by VDOT are as
follows:

                                                                  Bridge Opening Counts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 APR  2013   MAY  2013   JUNE 2013   JUL  2013   AUG  2013   SEPT 2013   OCT  2013   NOV  2013   DEC  2013   JAN  2014   FEB  2014  MAR  2014  APR  2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     1             4           7           7           7           6           7           3           2           0           0           0          3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bridge logs revealed that from April 2013 to April 2014, the SR
175 Bridge had experienced only 47 total vessel openings.
    The SR 175 Bridge is the only vehicular connection between the
mainland and Eastern Shore of Virginia and Chincoteague Island. Tourism
is a dominant industry of Chincoteague Island with activities taking
place in the Town of Chincoteague, Chincoteague Island and Assateague
Island.
    From August 4, 2014 to November 3, 2014, the draw of the SR 175
Bridge, mile 3.5, at Chincoteague, opened on signal in accordance with
the general operating regulations set out at 33 CFR 117.5.
    The monthly vessel openings at the SR 175 Bridge submitted by VDOT
are as follows:

                          Bridge Opening Counts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     September 2014           October  2014            November 2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           3                             5                       1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the bridge log and discussions with the local community,
allowing the bridge to return to an open on demand schedule except for
the Pony swim will meet the reasonable needs to navigation and
vehicular traffic. Therefore, 33 CFR 117.1005 will be amended to only
deviate from the on demand schedule during the Pony swim.

V. Regulatory Analysis

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

Executive Orders, and we discuss First Amendment rights of protesters.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget. This rule will make a regulatory burden less restrictive by
allowing for the bridge to open on signal for the majority of the year.
This rule takes into account the reasonable needs of navigation while
taking into account vehicular traffic.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rule. 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.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section IV.A
above, this final rule would not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under Section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    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.

C. 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).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this 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.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a
determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. This action is categorically excluded from
further review, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the
Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

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

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise 117.1005 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.1005  Chincoteague Channel.

    The draw of the SR 175 Bridge, mile 3.5, at Chincoteague shall open
on demand; except from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on the last consecutive
Wednesday and Thursday in July, the draw need not be opened.

    Dated: March 29, 2016.
Stephen P. Metruck,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2016-08225 Filed 4-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P