[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13108-13109]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06075]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0104]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Lower Mississippi River, New Orleans, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
all navigable waters of the Lower Mississippi River from Mile Marker
(MM) 94.5 to MM 95.5, above Head of Passes. The safety zone is needed
to protect persons and vessels from potential hazards created by a
fireworks display. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is
prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
Sector New Orleans (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. on April
15, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0104 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Commander (LCDR) Howard Vacco,
Sector New Orleans, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
MM Mile Marker
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
because it is impracticable. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM
because we must establish this safety zone on April 15, 2018 to prevent
injury to persons and vessels and lack sufficient time to provide a
reasonable comment period and then consider those comments before
issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because urgent action is necessary to
protect the public and vessels from the hazards associated with a
fireworks display.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans (COTP) has determined
that potential hazards associated with a fireworks display on April 15,
2018, will be a safety concern for anyone within a one-mile range of
the Lower Mississippi River above Head of Passes. This rule is needed
to protect persons and vessels in the navigable waters within the
safety zone from the hazards associated with a fireworks display.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 7:30 p.m. through 8:30
p.m. on April 15, 2018. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters
between Mile Markers (MMs) 94.5 and 95.5 on the Lower Mississippi River
above Head of Passes. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
persons and vessels in these navigable waters from the hazards
associated with a fireworks display. No vessel or person will be
permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative. A designated representative is
a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector New
Orleans.
    The COTP or a designated representative may be contacted on VHF-FM
Channel 16 or 67. Persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety
zone must transit at their slowest safe speed and comply with all
lawful directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    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 protestors.

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 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on this rule only
encompassing a one-mile stretch of river for one hour in the evening.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 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 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
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will 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
section.
    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 will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

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
Directive 023-01, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting only one
hour that will prohibit entry within a one-mile stretch of the Lower
Mississippi River above Head of Passes. It is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph L60 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

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 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0104 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0104   Safety Zone; Lower Mississippi River, New Orleans,
LA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Lower Mississippi River, New Orleans, LA between Mile
Markers (MMs) 94.5 and 95.5 above Head of Passes.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 7:30 p.m.
through 8:30 p.m. on April 15, 2018.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23, entry into this zone is prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans (COTP) or
designated representative. A designated representative is a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector New
Orleans.
    (2) Vessels requiring entry into this safety zone must request
permission from the COTP or a designated representative. They may be
contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 or 67.
    (3) Persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone must
transit at their slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful
directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative.
    (d) Information broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public through Broadcast Notices to Mariners of any
changes in the planned schedule.

Wayne R. Arguin,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans.
[FR Doc. 2018-06075 Filed 3-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 49530]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19684]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001]

Gastroenterology Regulatory Endpoints and the Advancement of
Therapeutics; Public Workshop

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of public workshop.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, in cosponsorship with the American College of
Gastroenterology, the American Gastroenterological Association, the
Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America, Inc., the North American
Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, and
the Pediatric IBD Foundation, is announcing a 2-day public workshop
entitled ``Gastroenterology Regulatory Endpoints and the Advancement of
Therapeutics (GREAT II).'' Partners and stakeholders planning the
workshop also include patients and representatives from the Eunice
Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development at the National Institutes of Health. The purpose of this
workshop is to provide a forum to consider issues related to endpoints
that can support drug development in the following disease areas:
Pediatric and adult inflammatory bowel diseases.

DATES: The public workshop will be held on October 21 and 22, 2013,
from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The public workshop will be held at the National Institutes
of Health, 31 Center Dr., Natcher Conference Center, Building 45,
Bethesda, MD 20892-2178.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Bugin, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX: 301-
796-9905, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This workshop will address endpoints for
registration trials. Stakeholders, including industry sponsors,
academia, patients, and FDA, will be engaged to address challenging
issues related to selection of endpoints and assessment methodologies
in registration trials for products intended to treat adult and/or
pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. The definition and measurement of
treatment benefit in Crohn's disease registration trials, the role of
existing and future clinical outcome assessments including development
of patient reported outcome measures, timing of endpoint assessments,
and dose-finding strategies will be discussed. In addition, there will
be a followup to previous workshop discussions of endpoints and
clinical trial design for ulcerative colitis registration trials.
Strategies and methods to overcome the challenges of developing drugs
in pediatric populations and facilitate the collection of dosing,
safety, and efficacy information for drugs not currently approved for
use in children will be discussed.
    Participation in the Public Workshop:
    Registration: There is no fee to attend the public workshop, but
attendees must register in advance. Space is limited, and registration
will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons interested in
attending this workshop must register online at http://www.great2.org
before October 1, 2013. For those without Internet access, please
contact Kevin Bugin (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) to register.
Onsite registration will not be available.
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Kevin Bugin (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7
days in advance.
    Transcripts: Transcripts of the workshop will be available for
review at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov approximately 30 days
after the workshop. A transcript will also be available in either hard
copy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information
request. Send written requests to the Division of Freedom of
Information (ELEM-1029), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn
Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857. Send faxed requests to 301-
827-9267.

    Dated: August 8, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-19684 Filed 8-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 86 (Monday, May 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26462-26463]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09453]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0720; FRL-10008-10]

Pesticide Registration Review; Draft Human Health and/or
Ecological Risk Assessments for Several Pesticides; Notice of
Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's draft human
health and/or ecological risk assessments for the registration review
of acetochlor, ethofumesate, fipronil, forchlorfenuron, halohydantoins,
inorganic sulfites, novaluron, oxadiazon, peroxy compounds,
peroxyoctanoic acid, picloram, rotenone, sodium percarbonate,
spiromesifen, thiophanate-methyl and carbendazim. In addition, the
agency will not be publishing draft risk assessments for spirodiclofen
because all products containing that active ingredient are subject to
cancellation effective December 31, 2020.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 6, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, to the docket identification (ID)
number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the Table in
Unit IV, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, are available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For pesticide specific information contact: The Chemical Review
Manager for the pesticide of interest identified in the Table in Unit
IV.
    For general questions on the registration review program, contact:
Melanie Biscoe, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the Chemical Review Manager identified in the Table in Unit IV.

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low- income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Background

    Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform
its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. As part of the registration review process,
the Agency has completed comprehensive draft human health and/or
ecological risk assessments for all pesticides listed in the Table in
Unit IV. After reviewing

comments received during the public comment period, EPA may issue a
revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk
assessment, and respond to comments and may request public input on
risk mitigation before completing a proposed registration review
decision for the pesticides listed in the Table in Unit IV. Through
this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is
based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects
on human health and the environment.

III. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed
in the Table in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural
Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with
widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must
perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

IV. What action is the Agency taking?

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability
of EPA's human health and/or ecological risk assessments for the
pesticides shown in the following table and opens a 60-day public
comment period on the risk assessments. The Agency notes that draft
risk assessments for spirodiclofen will not be published because all
products containing that active ingredient are subject to cancellation
effective December 31, 2020.

                      Table--Draft Risk Assessments Being Made Available for Public Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Chemical review manager and
Registration review case name and No.                 Docket ID No.                     contact information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetochlor, Case 7230................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0298                        Linsey Walsh,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                374-0588.
Ethofumesate, Case 2265..............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0406                        Andrew Muench,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8263.
Fipronil, Case 7423..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0448                        Darius Stanton,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-0433.
Forchlorfenuron, Case 7057...........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0641                        Srijana Shrestha,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><PHONE_NUMBER>.
Halohydantoins, Case 3055............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0220                        Peter Bergquist,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8563.
Inorganic Sulfites, Case 4056 and      EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0598                        Matthew B. Khan,
 7019<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8613.
Novaluron, Case 7615.................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0171                        Robert Little,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8156.
Oxadiazon, Case 2485.................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0782                        Sergio Santiago,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8606.
Peroxy Compounds, Case 4072..........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0546                        Kendall Ziner,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8829.
Peroxyoctanoic acid, Case 5081.......  EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0341                        Kendall Ziner,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8829.
Picloram, Case 0096..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0740                        Veronica Dutch,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                308-8585.
Rotenone, Case 0255..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0572                        R. David Jones,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                305-6725.
Sodium percarbonate, Case 6059.......  EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0354                        Kendall Ziner,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                347-8829
Spirodiclofen (no risk assessment),    EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0262                        Veronica Dutch,
 Case 7443<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                308-8585.
Spiromesifen, Case 7442..............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0263                        Veronica Dutch,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>703-
                                                                                308-8585.
Thiophanate-methyl and carbendazim,    EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0004                        Alexandra Feitel,
 Case 2680<EMAIL_ADDRESS><PHONE_NUMBER>.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.53(c), EPA is providing an opportunity,
through this notice of availability, for interested parties to provide
comments and input concerning the Agency's draft human health and/or
ecological risk assessments for the pesticides listed in the Table in
Unit IV. The Agency will consider all comments received during the
public comment period and make changes, as appropriate, to a draft
human health and/or ecological risk assessment. EPA may then issue a
revised risk assessment, explain any changes to the draft risk
assessment, and respond to comments.
    Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or
information in response to this document. To be considered during a
pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
     To ensure that EPA will consider data or information
submitted, interested persons must submit the data or information
during the comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider
data or information submitted at a later date.
     The data or information submitted must be presented in a
legible and useable form. For example, an English translation must
accompany any material that is not in English and a written transcript
must accompany any information submitted as an audiographic or
videographic record. Written material may be submitted in paper or
electronic form.
     Submitters must clearly identify the source of any
submitted data or information.
     Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or
information that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However,
submitters must explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider
the data or information in the pesticide's registration review.
    As provided in 40 CFR 155.58, the registration review docket for
each pesticide case will remain publicly accessible through the
duration of the registration review process; that is, until all actions
required in the final decision on the registration review case have
been completed.

(Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.)

    Dated: April 9, 2020.
Mary Reaves,
Acting Director,Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2020-09453 Filed 5-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31978-31979]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12015]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77848; File No. SR-CBOE-2016-024]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 2 Thereto, Relating to AIM Retained Orders

May 17, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On March 22, 2016, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to codify the Exchange's
Automated Improvement Mechanism (``AIM'') Retained Order functionality
in its rules. On April 1, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to
the proposal. On April 4, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 2 to
the proposal.\3\ The proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No.
2, was published for comment in the Federal Register on April 8,
2016.\4\ No comment letters were received on the proposed rule change.
This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment
No. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 2 superseded Amendment No. 1 in its entirety.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77511 (April 4,
2016), 81 FR 20697 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    Under CBOE Rule 6.74A, a Trading Permit Holder (``TPH'') that
represents agency orders may electronically execute an order it
represents as agent (``Agency Order'') against principal interest or
against a solicited order provided it submits the Agency Order for
electronic execution into the AIM auction (``Auction'') for processing.
If certain eligibility requirements contained in CBOE Rule 6.74A(a) \5\
are not satisfied, then both the Agency Order and the matching contra
order(s) will be cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Specifically, to be eligible for processing via AIM, the
Agency Order must be: (1) In a class designated as eligible for
Auctions and within the designated eligibility size parameters as
determined by the Exchange; (2) stopped with a principal or
solicited order priced at the national best bid or offer (``NBBO'')
(if 50 standard option contracts or 500 mini-option contracts or
greater) or one cent/one minimum increment better than the NBBO (if
less than 50 standard option contracts or 500 mini-option
contracts); and (3) submitted in a series in which at least three
Market-Makers are quoting if submitted during regular trading hours.
See CBOE Rule 6.74A(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The AIM Retained Order (``A:AIR'') functionality allows TPHs the
ability to choose, on an order-by-order basis, whether an Agency Order
should continue into the Hybrid Trading System \6\ for processing
rather than cancel in the event that an Auction cannot occur.\7\
Specifically, the Exchange proposes to define an AIM Retained Order as
the transmission of two or more orders for crossing pursuant to CBOE
Rule 6.74A, with the Agency Order priced at the market or a limit price
in the standard increment for the option series and marked with a
contingency instruction to route the Agency Order for processing and
cancel any contra orders if an Auction cannot occur (including if the
conditions described in CBOE Rule 6.74A(a) are not met).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Hybrid Trading System refers to the Exchange's trading
platform as defined in Rule 1.1(aaa) (Hybrid Trading System).
    \7\ According to the Exchange, there are a variety of
circumstances in which an AIM order may be submitted to the Exchange
for processing, but an auction may not occur. For example, a TPH may
submit an order for AIM processing that is not AIM eligible because
one or more of the conditions required for an AIM auction to occur
pursuant to Rule 6.74A(a) is not present. In addition, an order that
is otherwise AIM eligible may not be able to process for a variety
of reasons, including, but not limited to circumstances in which AIM
functionality is suspended. In either of such cases, A:AIR
functionality may allow the Agency Order to process despite the
overall order not being AIM eligible. See Notice, supra note 4, at
20698.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE also proposes that orders marked ``A:AIR'' containing Agency
Orders that are not priced at the market, or that are priced with a
limit price not in the standard increment for the option series in
which they are entered, would be cancelled. The Exchange proposes this
interpretation to ensure that A:AIR orders are properly priced to allow
the Exchange to book the Agency Order in the event an Auction cannot
occur.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 20698.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE proposes to make the A:AIR order functionality available on
those order management platforms as determined by the Exchange and
announced via Regulatory Circular. The Exchange also proposes to
clarify that in the event that a TPH submits a matched Agency Order for
electronic execution into the Auction that is ineligible for processing
because it does not meet the conditions described in CBOE Rule
6.74A(a), both the Agency Order and any solicited contra orders will be
cancelled unless marked as an AIM Retained Order pursuant to proposed
Interpretation and Policy .09 to CBOE Rule 6.74A.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ According to the Exchange, the current A:AIR functionality
is used primarily by smart router technology to ensure that
ineligible AIM orders are submitted into the Hybrid Trading System
for processing and not cancelled. See Notice, supra note 4, at
20698. Whereas traditional brokers and dealers are equipped to
manually handle cancelled orders that are returned to them and may
revise the cancelled orders' terms or contact their customers for
further instructions, the Exchange states that smart routers are
generally all electronic algorithmic systems that may not allow for
manual handling of cancelled orders. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange proposes to make changes to Interpretation
and Policy .08 to CBOE Rule 6.53C regarding price reasonability checks
on complex orders to harmonize non-specific references to the current
A:AIR functionality in CBOE Rule 6.53C with the language in proposed
Interpretation and Policy .09 to CBOE Rule 6.74A. The Exchange states
that these changes are non-substantive and intended only to harmonize
existing references to A:AIR functionality in its rules with the
definition of A:AIR orders set forth in proposed Interpretation and
Policy .09 to CBOE Rule 6.74A.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 20698.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\11\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ 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 facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest and that the
rules not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. In particular, the Commission
notes that, according to the Exchange, the A:AIR functionality provides
an execution opportunity for customer orders that a TPH submitted for
crossing via AIM but

cannot be executed via AIM.\13\ Such opportunity could help protect the
interest of investors by helping to ensure that ineligible AIM Agency
Orders are processed, rather than cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \13\ See Notice, supra note 4, at 20699.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2016-024), as modified
by Amendment No. 2, be, and hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-12015 Filed 5-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


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

<META name="generator" content="PDFCreactiveX HTML Export">
<META name="creation-date" content="11/06/2008 01:51:26 ">
<TITLE></TITLE>