[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 154 (Tuesday, August 11, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48088-48089]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19683]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC15-181-000.
    Applicants: 87RL 8me LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, Request for Expedited Consideration and Confidential
Treatment of 87RL 8me LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/3/15.
    Accession Number: 20150803-5276.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/24/15.

    Docket Numbers: EC15-182-000.
    Applicants: Talen Energy Marketing, LLC, Talen Renewable Energy,
LLC, Talen New Jersey Biogas, LLC, Talen New Jersey Solar, LLC.
    Description: Application for Approval Pursuant to Section 203 of
the Federal Power Act and Request for Waivers and Privileged Treatment
of Talen Energy Marketing, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1585-007; ER10-1594-007; ER10-1617-007; ER10-
1619-004; ER10-1620-005; ER10-1625-005; ER12-60-009; ER10-1632-009;
ER10-1628-007.
    Applicants: Alabama Electric Marketing, LLC, California Electric
Marketing, LLC, New Mexico Electric Marketing, LLC, Tenaska Alabama
Partners, L.P., Tenaska Alabama II Partners, L.P., Tenaska Georgia
Partners, L.P., Tenaska Power Management, LLC, Texas Electric
Marketing, LLC, Tenaska Power Services Co.
    Description: Supplement to December 22, 2014 Updated Market Power
Analysis of the Tenaska MBR Sellers.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2371-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to PWRPA IA and
Termination of Riggs Ranch WDT SA to be effective 9/22/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/3/15.
    Accession Number: 20150803-5242.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/24/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2372-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Air Products TX Interconnection
Refile to be effective 9/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 8/3/15.
    Accession Number: 20150803-5259.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/24/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2373-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Air Products TX NITSA & NOA
Refile to be effective 9/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 8/3/15.
    Accession Number: 20150803-5262.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/24/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2374-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended UFA Copper Mountain
Solar 4 Project to be effective 8/5/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2375-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revision to Attachment A,
Points of Receipt to be effective 9/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5108.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2376-000.
    Applicants: Energy Power Investment Company, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-based rate application
to be effective 9/3/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2377-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Gas-Electric Coordination
Compliance Filing in Docket No. EL14-27 to be effective 10/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2378-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: System Impact Study
Agreement, Service Agreement No. 51 to be effective 6/24/2015.
    Filed Date: 8/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150804-5154.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/25/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 5, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-19683 Filed 8-10-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17754-17756]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08461]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0083]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Mississippi Sound, Biloxi, MS

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain navigable waters on the Mississippi Sound over the Biloxi
Harbor Channel in Biloxi, MS. This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life and property on these navigable waters during the
2018 Biloxi Air Show. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels
from entering the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Sector Mobile (COTP) or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. on July 19, 2018 through 5
p.m. on July 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0083 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 on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Kyle D. Berry, Sector Mobile, Waterways
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On January 3, 2018, the sponsor for the 2018 Biloxi Air Show
submitted an application for a marine event permit for the air show
that will take place every day from 9 a.m. through 5 p.m. from July 19,
2018 through July 22, 2018. In response, on March 9, 2018, the Coast
Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Safety
Zone; Mississippi Sound, Biloxi, MS (83 FR 10419). There we stated why
we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory
action related to this air show. During the comment period that ended
April 9, 2018, we received no comments.

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 Mobile (COTP) has determined that
potential hazards associated with the air show on July 19, 2018 and
July 22, 2018 will be a safety concern for any vessels or persons in
the vicinity of waters of the navigable waters on the Mississippi Sound
over the Biloxi Harbor Channel in Biloxi, MS. The purpose of this rule
is to ensure the safety of vessels and persons before, during, and
after the air show.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published on
March 9, 2018. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule
from the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone on the Mississippi
Sound within the positions of 30[deg]23'22.6'' N 88[deg]50'54.9'' W;
30[deg]23'25.5'' N 88[deg]53'12.1'' W; 30[deg]22'52.3'' N
88[deg]50'55.8'' W; 30[deg]22'56.3'' N 88[deg]53'11.9'' W over the
Biloxi Harbor Channel in Biloxi, MS from 9 a.m. through 5 p.m. on July
19, 2018 through July 22, 2018. This rule is intended to ensure the
safety of vessels and persons before, during, and after the 2018 Biloxi
Air Show. No vessel or person is permitted to enter the zone without
obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated representative. A
designated representative may be a Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The
PATCOM maybe aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary
vessel. The PATCOM may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by
the call sign ``PATCOM''. All persons and vessels not registered with
the sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels are considered
spectators. The ``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard,
state, or local law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels assigned
or approved by the COTP to patrol the zone.
    Spectator vessels desiring to transit the zone may do so only with
prior approval of the PATCOM and when so directed by that officer shall
be operated at a minimum safe navigation speed in a manner that will
not endanger any other vessels. No spectator vessel shall anchor,
block, loiter, or impede the through transit of official patrol vessels
in the zone during the effective dates and times, unless cleared for
entry by or through an official patrol vessel. Any spectator vessel may
anchor outside the zone, but may not anchor in, block, or loiter in a
navigable channel. Spectator vessels may be moored to a waterfront
facility within the zone in such a way that they shall not interfere
with the progress of the air show. Such mooring must be complete at
least 30 minutes prior to the establishment of the zone and remain
moored through the duration of the air show.
    The COTP or a designated representative may forbid and control the
movement of all vessels in the zone.

When hailed or signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel shall
come to an immediate stop and comply with the directions given. Failure
to do so may result in expulsion from the zone, citation for failure to
comply, or both.
    The COTP or a designated representative may terminate the operation
of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the protection of
life or property. The COTP or a designated representative can terminate
enforcement of the safety zone at the conclusion of the air show.

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 protectors.

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 size, location,
and duration of the safety zone. This rule will take place on a small
area of Mississippi Sound, during a short duration of only eight hours,
lasting for four days from July 19, 2018 through July 22, 2018.
Additionally, the Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notices to Mariners
via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the safety zone so that waterway
users may plan accordingly for transits during this restriction, and
the rule also allows vessels to seek permission from the COTP or a
designated representative to enter the zone.

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 received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. 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 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 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide 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 on the Mississippi Sound, within the positions of
30[deg]23'22.6'' N 88[deg]50'54.9'' W; 30[deg]23'25.5'' N
88[deg]53'12.1'' W; 30[deg]22'52.3'' N 88[deg]50'55.8'' W;
30[deg]22'56.3'' N 88[deg]53'11.9'' W over the Biloxi Harbor Channel in
Biloxi, MS. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration (REC)
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 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.T08-0083 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0083  Safety Zone; Mississippi Sound, Biloxi, MS

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone. All navigable
waters of the Mississippi Sound, within the positions of
30[deg]23'22.6'' N 88[deg]50'54.9'' W; 30[deg]23'25.5'' N
88[deg]53'12.1'' W; 30[deg]22'52.3'' N 88[deg]50'55.8'' W;
30[deg]22'56.3'' N 88[deg]53'11.9'' W over the Biloxi Harbor Channel in
Biloxi, MS.
    (b) Enforcement period. This section is effective from 9 a.m. on
July 19, 2018 through 5 p.m. on July 22, 2018.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting through, or exiting
from this area is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Sector Mobile (COTP) or a designated representative. A designated
representative may be a Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM may be
aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The PATCOM
may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by the call sign
``PATCOM''.
    (2) All persons and vessels not registered with the event sponsor
as participants or official patrol vessels are considered spectators.
The ``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard, state, or
local law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels assigned or approved
by the COTP to patrol the regulated area.
    (3) Spectator vessels desiring to transit the regulated area may do
so only with prior approval of the COTP or a designated representative
and when so directed by that officer will be operated at a minimum safe
navigation speed in a manner that will not endanger participants in the
zone or any other vessels.
    (4) No spectator vessel shall anchor, block, loiter, or impede the
through transit of participants or official patrol vessels in the
regulated area during the effective dates and times, unless cleared for
entry by or through an official patrol vessel.
    (5) Any spectator vessel may anchor outside the regulated area, but
may not anchor in, block, or loiter in a navigable channel. Spectator
vessels may be moored to a waterfront facility within the regulated
area in such a way that they shall not interfere with the progress of
the event. Such mooring must be complete at least 30 minutes prior to
the establishment of the regulated area and remain moored through the
duration of the event.
    (6) The COTP or a designated representative may forbid and control
the movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or
signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an
immediate stop and comply with the directions given. Failure to do so
may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply,
or both.
    (7) The COTP or a designated representative may terminate the event
or the operation of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for
the protection of life or property.
    (8) The COTP or a designated representative can terminate
enforcement of the safety zone at the conclusion of the event.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through Broadcast Notices to
Mariners of the enforcement period for the temporary safety zone as
well as any changes in the planned schedule.

    Dated: April 17, 2018.
M.R. McLellan,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Mobile.
[FR Doc. 2018-08461 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 37285-37286]
[DOCID:fr28jy09-89]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60364; File No. SR-BATS-2009-026]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Amend BATS Fee Schedule to Impose
Fees for Ports Used for Order Entry and Receipt of Market Data

July 22, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 21, 2009, BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange has filed a proposed rule change to amend the fee
schedule applicable to Members \3\ and non-members of the Exchange
pursuant to BATS Rules 15.1(a) and (c). Pursuant to the proposed rule
change the Exchange will commence charging fees to Members and non-
members for ports used to enter orders into Exchange systems and to
receive data from the Exchange. The Exchange will implement the
proposed rule change on the first day of the month immediately
following Commission approval (or on the date of approval, if on the
first business day of a month).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A Member is any registered broker or dealer that has been
admitted to membership in the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.batstrading.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to begin charging a
monthly fee for ports used to enter orders in the Exchange's trading
system and to receive data from the Exchange. The Exchange proposes to
charge $250.00 per month per pair \4\ of any port type other than a
Multicast PITCH Spin Server Port or a GRP Port. Thus, this proposed
charge will apply to all Exchange FIX, FIXDROP, DROP, TCP PITCH, TCP
FAST PITCH and TOP ports.\5\ In addition, the Exchange proposes to
provide all Exchange constituents that receive the Exchange's Multicast
PITCH Feed with 12 pairs of Multicast PITCH Spin Server Ports free of
charge and, if such ports are used, one free pair of GRP Ports. The
Exchange proposes to charge such customers $250.00 per month per
additional pair of GRP Ports or additional set of 12 pairs of Multicast
PITCH Spin Server Ports. The Exchange's proposal to provide certain
ports free of charge to Multicast Pitch customers is designed to
encourage use of the Exchange's Multicast PITCH Feed because such feed
is a relatively new offering by the Exchange and because the Exchange
believes that the feed is its most efficient feed, and thus, will
reduce infrastructure costs for both the Exchange and those who utilize
the feed. Any Member or non-member that has entered into the
appropriate agreements with the Exchange is permitted to receive
Multicast Pitch Spin Server Ports and GRP Ports from the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Each pair of ports will consist of one port at the
Exchange's primary data center and one port at the Exchange's
secondary data center.
    \5\ BATS FIX ports are the only ports that may be used to send
orders and related instructions to the Exchange. All other port
types, including Multicast PITCH and GRP Ports, permit Members and
non-members to receive information from the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the proposal, the change applies to Members that obtain
ports for direct access to the Exchange, non-member service bureaus
that act as a conduit for orders entered by Exchange Members that are
their customers, and market data recipients. The Exchange has
previously provided ports free of charge to all Members and non-members
that use such ports for order entry to the Exchange or for receipt of
market data. However, over time, the Exchange's infrastructure costs
have increased. In addition, the Exchange believes that providing ports
free of charge has not encouraged Members and non-members to reserve
and maintain ports efficiently, but rather, has led to a significant
number of ports that are reserved and enabled by such market
participants but are never used or are under used. Accordingly, the
Exchange believes that the imposition of port fees will help the
Exchange to continue to maintain and improve its infrastructure, while
also encouraging Exchange customers to request and enable only the
ports that are necessary for their operations related to the Exchange.
2. Statutory Basis
    The rule change proposed in this submission is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes that the proposed change is consistent with Section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ because it provides an equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and other
persons using its facilities. The Exchange believes that its proposed
port fees are reasonable in light of the benefits to members of direct
market access and

receipt of data, which data, other than the proposed access fee, is
currently provided free of charge. In addition, the Exchange believes
that its fees are equitably allocated among its constituents based upon
the number of access ports that they require to submit orders to the
Exchange or receive data from the Exchange. The Exchange believes that
its fees for access services will enable it to better cover its
infrastructure costs and to improve its market technology and services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Fees
for market access will be a component of the overall fees charged by
the Exchange to execute and route orders through the Exchange. As the
Commission has recognized, the market for execution and routing
services is extremely competitive.\8\ Market participants that choose
not to connect directly to the Exchange can readily access liquidity
available on the Exchange by directing their order flow to other venues
that, under Regulation NMS, must route to the Exchange if it has posted
the best price. Accordingly, the Exchange must set its fees, including
access service fees, at a level that will not deter market participants
from connecting to the Exchange; otherwise, potential users of the
Exchange's services will simply direct order flow to the Exchange's
multiple competitors. In addition, the Exchange believes that the
proposed port fees are consistent with or less than the port fees
charged by its competitors. With respect to market data, the Exchange
does not charge any fees for such data. Although it will now begin
imposing a fee related to access to such data, for market participants
that receive such data directly from the Exchange, the Exchange
believes that its free provision of data justifies such market
participants paying some amount in order to help the Exchange offset
the infrastructure costs of providing such data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2,
2008), 73 FR 74770 (December 9, 2008) (SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    B. institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BATS-2009-026 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BATS-2009-026. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BATS-2009-026 and should be
submitted on or before August 18, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17865 Filed 7-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 73 (Friday, April 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22615-22616]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08076]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee: Notice of
Public Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Commercial Space
Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC).

DATES: The meeting will take place on May 3, 2022 from 1:00 p.m. to
4:00 p.m. and May 4, 2022 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Quesada Auditorium, FAA Headquarters, 3rd Floor, 800
Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC. Guests should allow time for
security screening when entering the building. Instructions on how to
attend the meeting, copies of meeting minutes, and a detailed agenda
will be posted on the COMSTAC website at: https://www.faa.gov/space/additional_information/comstac/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Hatt, Designated Federal
Officer, U.S. Department of Transportation, at [email protected],
202-549-2325. Any committee related request should be sent to the
person listed in this section.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee was created
under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), in accordance with
Public Law 92-463. Since its inception, industry-led COMSTAC has
provided information, advice, and recommendations to the U.S.
Department of Transportation through FAA regarding technology,
business, and policy issues relevant to oversight of the U.S.
commercial space transportation sector.

II. Proposed Agenda

Day 1

DOT/FAA Welcome Remarks
VIP Welcoming Remarks
Briefings
Year in Review
COMSTAC
Introductions
COMSTAC Reports
    Regulatory Working Group

Day 2

FAA/AST Remarks
Briefings
    National Space Council
    Congressional Speaker
COMSTAC Reports
    Safety Working Group
    Innovation and Infrastructure Working Group
COMSTAC Discussion on Industry Consensus Standards
Public Comments
Future Taskers

III. Public Participation

    The meeting listed in this notice will be open to the public,
virtually. Please see the website not later than five working days
before the meeting for details on viewing the meeting on YouTube.

    The Department is committed to provide equal access to this meeting
for all program participants. If you are in need of assistance or
require a reasonable accommodation for this meeting, please contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section at least
10 calendar days before the meeting. Sign and oral interpretation can
be made available if requested 10 calendar days before the meeting.
    Interested members of the public may submit relevant written
statements for the COMSTAC members to consider under the advisory
process. Statements may concern the issues and agenda items mentioned
above and/or additional issues that may be relevant for the U.S.
commercial space transportation industry. Interested parties wishing to
submit written statements should contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in writing (mail or email) 10 working days
in advance of the meeting so that the information can be made available
to COMSTAC members for their review and consideration before the
meeting. Written statements should be supplied in the following
formats: One hard copy with original signature and/or one electronic
copy via email. Portable Document Format (PDF) attachments are
preferred for email submissions. A detailed agenda will be posted on
the FAA website at https://www.faa.gov/space/additional_information/comstac/.

James A. Hatt,
Designated Federal Officer, Commercial Space Transportation Advisory
Committee, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of
Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2022-08076 Filed 4-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 116 (Friday, June 15, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35870-35873]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14417]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-1179; FRL-9685-7]

Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; Partial
Disapproval of ``Infrastructure'' State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to its authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
is taking final action to disapprove two narrow portions of submissions
made by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to address
the section 110(a)(1) and (2) requirements of the CAA, often referred
to as the ``infrastructure'' State Implementation Plan (SIP).
Specifically, we are finalizing the disapproval of portions of WDNR's
submissions intended to meet certain requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
Among other conditions, section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires states
to correctly address oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor
to ozone in their respective prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) programs. EPA is finalizing disapproval of a portion of
Wisconsin's submissions intended to satisfy this requirement. EPA is
also finalizing disapproval of a portion of Wisconsin's submissions
because the SIP currently contains a new source review (NSR) exemption
for fuel changes as major modifications where the source was capable of
accommodating the change before January 6, 1975. The proposed rule
associated with this final action was published on April 20, 2012.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 16, 2012.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2007-1179. All documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be
publicly-available only in hard copy. Publicly-available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you
telephone Andy Chang at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is our response to comments received on the proposed
rulemaking?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this action?

    Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, and implementing EPA
guidance, states were required to submit either revisions to their
existing EPA approved SIPs necessary to provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, or certifications that their existing SIPs for
ozone and particulate matter already met those basic requirements. The
statute requires that states make these submissions within 3 years
after the promulgation of new or revised NAAQS. However, intervening
litigation over the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS created uncertainty about how states were to proceed.\1\
Accordingly, both EPA and the states were delayed in addressing these
basic SIP requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, e.g., Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc.,
531 U.S. 457 (2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a consent decree with Earth Justice, EPA agreed to make
completeness findings with respect to these SIP submissions. Pursuant
to this consent decree, EPA published completeness findings for all
states for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008, and for all
states for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS on October 22, 2008.
    On October 2, 2007, EPA issued a guidance document entitled
``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards,'' making recommendations to states concerning these
SIP submissions (the 2007 Guidance). Within the 2007 Guidance, EPA gave
general guidance relevant to matters such as the timing and content of
the submissions. Wisconsin made its infrastructure SIP submission for
the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS on December 12, 2007. The
State provided supplemental submissions to EPA on January 24, 2011, and
March 28, 2011.
    On April 28, 2011, EPA published its proposed action on the Region
5 states' submissions (see 76 FR 23757). Notably, we proposed to find
that Wisconsin had met the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
concerning state PSD programs generally, and in particular the
requirement to include NOX as a precursor to ozone (see 76
FR 23757 at 23760-23761), thereby satisfying the

requirement that the State has an adequate PSD program pursuant to
section 110(a)(2)(C) for both the 1997 ozone and 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA noted that each state's PSD program must meet certain
basic program requirements, e.g., if a state lacks specific required
provisions needed to address NOX as a precursor to ozone,
the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring an adequate
permitting program must be considered not to be met, irrespective of
the pollutant being addressed in the infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the comment period for the April 28, 2011, proposed
rulemaking, EPA received three sets of comments. Two of the commenters
observed that although we had proposed to approve Wisconsin's
infrastructure SIP as meeting the correct requirements for
NOX as a precursor to ozone in the State's PSD program,
Wisconsin's PSD SIP does not contain the most recent PSD program
revisions required by EPA for this purpose. One of the commenters also
noted that Wisconsin's existing SIP does not meet current EPA
requirements with respect to NSR because Wisconsin has not included
fuel changes as ``major modifications'' in its NSR program for certain
sources under certain conditions. A detailed discussion of these
comments as they relate to Wisconsin's SIP was included in the April
20, 2012, proposed rulemaking (see 77 FR 23647), which is the basis for
this final action.
    As a result of the comments received in response to our April 28,
2011, proposed rulemaking, we did not promulgate final action on those
two limited aspects of Wisconsin's infrastructure SIP in our July 13,
2011, final rulemaking (see 76 FR 41075). We did, however, promulgate
final action on all other applicable elements of Wisconsin's
infrastructure SIP. In the July 13, 2011, rulemaking, we committed to
address the issues raised in the comments concerning NOX as
a precursor to ozone and the definition of ``major modification''
related to fuel changes for certain sources in Wisconsin in a separate
action; our April 20, 2012, proposed rulemaking and this final
rulemaking serve as that action.
    On April 20, 2012, we proposed to disapprove the State's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to two narrow issues related
to section 110(a)(2)(C). During the comment period on the April 20,
2012, proposed rulemaking, EPA received two comment letters. EPA
addresses the significant and relevant comments in this final action,
specifically in the following section.

II. What is our response to comments received on the proposed
rulemaking?

    The public comment period for EPA's proposal to disapprove the
narrow portions of the submittals from Wisconsin addressing the current
regulatory requirements for NOX as a precursor to ozone in
PSD permitting and the definition of ``major modification'' related to
fuel changes for certain sources \3\ closed on May 21, 2012. EPA
received two comment letters, one of which was not relevant to this
rulemaking. A synopsis of the significant individual comments contained
in the other letter, as well as EPA's response to each comment, is
discussed below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Although the evaluation of states' definitions of ``major
modification'' related to fuel changes was not a criterion outlined
in EPA's April 28, 2011 proposed rulemaking, this issue is
intrinsically linked to states' PSD regulations, covered under
section 110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 1: WDNR submitted a comment letter that states that
although Wisconsin's SIP does not explicitly include all portions of
the regulatory language EPA required states to adopt in the ``Final
Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule to Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990
Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of Significant
Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter, and
Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline'' (Phase 2 Rule) (see
70 FR 71612), WDNR does in fact consider NOX as a precursor
of ozone in its permitting decisions. WDNR also states that it has
consistently treated NOX as a precursor to ozone, and
existing language in Wisconsin Administrative Code section NR
405.02(25i) clearly gives WDNR the authority to regulate NOX
as a precursor for ozone, as it has been identified as such by EPA.
WDNR further states that it is not aware of any situation where it has
not consistently used this existing authority in its major NSR program.
Lastly, WDNR states that in response to EPA's and the public's concern
over this issue, it currently has under development a revision to
Wisconsin Administrative Code section NR 405.02(25i) to ensure that the
language is wholly consistent with Federal language contained in 40 CFR
51.166, as required by the Phase 2 Rule. Upon revision and final
adoption at the state level, WDNR has committed to submit the revisions
to EPA for approval and incorporation into the SIP.
    Response 1: EPA recognizes that Wisconsin currently has some
authority to treat NOX as a precursor to ozone in permitting
decisions, and EPA appreciates the State's efforts to ensure that
NOX is correctly evaluated as a precursor to ozone in fact.
However, the Phase 2 Rule obligates states to make explicit regulatory
changes in order to clarify and remove any ambiguity concerning the
requirement that NOX be treated as a precursor to ozone in
permitting contexts in specific ways. The Phase 2 Rule requires states
to submit SIP revisions incorporating the requirements of the rule,
including these specific NOX as a precursor to ozone
provisions, by June 15, 2007 (see 70 FR 71612 at 71683). As explained
in our April 20, 2012, proposed rulemaking, states that had not
incorporated the necessary changes specific to NOX as a
precursor to ozone as required by the Phase 2 Rule were included in
EPA's March 27, 2008, ``Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State
Implementation Plans for the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS'' and received a
finding of failure to submit related to section 110(a)(2)(C) for this
reason (see 73 FR 16205).
    As a result of EPA's own regulations, submission deadlines, and
actions germane to the explicit identification of NOX as a
precursor to ozone in Federally approved PSD programs, EPA is
finalizing the disapproval of portions of Wisconsin's infrastructure
SIP submission with respect to the NOX as a precursor to
ozone provision requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS.
    EPA appreciates Wisconsin's efforts to develop SIP revisions that
will be wholly consistent with the Federal language contained in 40 CFR
51.166. EPA will work actively with the State to ensure that the
necessary SIP revisions are completed as expeditiously as possible. In
the interim, we will work actively with the State to ensure that
NOX is correctly treated as a precursor to ozone in a manner
consistent with the requirements of the Phase 2 Rule.
    Comment 2: In the same comment letter, WDNR recognizes that its
definition of ``major modification'' as found in Wisconsin
Administrative Code section NR 405.02(21)(b)5.a. does not include
language that recognizes prohibitions on fuel use exemptions that may
have been contained in Federally-issued PSD permits issued prior to
EPA's approval of Wisconsin's PSD SIP. However, WDNR does not agree
with the notion that the omission in fact allows more exemptions than
what is allowed by Federal rules.
    WDNR states that under its title V operating permit program, all
applicable requirements to a source are included in

its operation permit. As a result, WDNR states that it clearly
recognizes that requirements contained in a Federally-issued PSD permit
would be an applicable requirement to the source and that it would be
included in the source's title V operating permit, therefore making the
requirement fully enforceable under State and Federal law.
    WDNR states that this issue is a very narrow one, and that it is
not aware of a single situation where an omission has occurred in
practice. Further, WDNR believes that the omission in its definition of
``major modification'' was an oversight that occurred during rule
writing, and cites a previous commitment to EPA to make a correction.
Lastly, WDNR states that a correction to the definition in question has
begun, and will be part of the same rulemaking effort that will address
the NOX as a precursor to ozone provision.
    Response 2: EPA agrees that this issue is a very narrow one, and
that an omission in practice is perhaps nonexistent. Nonetheless, as
explained in EPA's April 20, 2012, proposed rulemaking, this is an
issue that has previously arisen, and that the State has acknowledged
and agreed to address. WDNR's previous commitment to address the issue,
dated June 1, 2011, did not include a date certain by which it would
complete the requested revision of the State's regulation. As a result,
EPA could not promulgate an approval or conditional approval of the
section 110(a)(2)(C) portion of Wisconsin's infrastructure SIP for the
1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to this narrow
issue.
    EPA recognizes that in practice, WDNR has the authority and means
to ensure adherence to the prohibitions on fuel use exemptions in
certain instances, consistent with our own definition of ``major
modification.'' However, our regulations along with a previous request
to the State to make appropriate revisions to the SIP necessary to
address this issue result in finalizing the disapproval of Wisconsin's
infrastructure SIP submissions for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS. This narrow disapproval pertains to the NSR exemption for fuel
changes as ``major modifications'' where the source was capable of
accommodating the change before January 6, 1975. Once again, we note
that this disapproval is a narrow one, and limited to the specific
state regulatory language concerning the exemption.
    EPA appreciates WDNR's efforts to correct the definition of ``major
modification'' and will actively work with the State to ensure that
alignment of the State and Federal definition for ``major
modification'' occurs as expeditiously as possible. In addition, we
will work actively with the State as needed to ensure adherence to the
prohibitions on fuel use exemptions in Federally-issued permits.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    For the reasons discussed in the proposed rulemaking, EPA is taking
final action to disapprove two narrow portions of Wisconsin's
infrastructure SIP submissions for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS with respect to section 110(a)(2)(C). Specifically, we are
finalizing disapproval of portions of Wisconsin's submissions because
the current SIP does not satisfy the requirements of the Phase 2 Rule
for explicit identification of NOx as a precursor to ozone in PSD
permitting. We are also finalizing disapproval of portions of
Wisconsin's submissions because the current SIP contains an
impermissible NSR exemption for fuel changes as ``major modifications''
where the source was capable of accommodating the change before January
6, 1975. These grounds for disapproval are narrow, and pertain only to
these specific deficiencies in Wisconsin's SIP. The State has begun the
process for rectifying these two issues, and we will work with the
State to rectify these issues promptly.
    Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final disapproval of a submission
that addresses a requirement of a Part D Plan (section 171-section 193
of the CAA), or is required in response to a finding of substantial
inadequacy as described in section 110(k)(5) starts a sanction clock.
The provisions in the submissions we are disapproving were not
submitted by Wisconsin to meet either of those requirements. Therefore,
no sanctions under section 179 will be triggered.
    The full or partial disapproval of a SIP revision triggers the
requirement under section 110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than 2 years from the date of the
disapproval unless the State corrects the deficiency, and the
Administrator approves the plan or plan revision before the
Administrator promulgates such FIP. As previously mentioned, Wisconsin
has begun the process to rectify each of these deficiencies. Further,
EPA anticipates acting on WDNR's submissions to address these two
issues within the 2-year time frame prior to our FIP obligation on
these very narrow issues. In the interim, EPA expects WDNR to address
NOx as a precursor to ozone correctly for PSD permitting consistent
with the requirements of the Phase 2 Rule, and to ensure adherence to
the prohibitions on fuel use exemptions in Federally-issued permits.
The State has indicated that it will be addressing both issues
correctly in permitting decisions in the interim, so EPA anticipates
that the practical implications of these disapprovals should be
minimal.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely disapproves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule disapproves pre-existing requirements under state
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it 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).

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
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,

as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely disapproves a state rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it disapproves a state rule
implementing a Federal Standard.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
section 804(2).
    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 August 14, 2012. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule 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 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 30, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Amend Sec.  52.2591 by adding paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2591  Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving the portions of Wisconsin's
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS with respect to two narrow
issues that relate to section 110(a)(2)(C):
    (1) The requirement for consideration of NOx as a precursor to
ozone; and
    (2) The definition of ``major modification'' related to fuel
changes for certain sources.
    (d) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving the portions of Wisconsin's
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to
two narrow issues that relate to section 110(a)(2)(C):
    (1) The requirement for consideration of NOx as a precursor to
ozone; and
    (2) The definition of ``major modification'' related to fuel
changes for certain sources.

[FR Doc. 2012-14417 Filed 6-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 20, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 118)]
[Notices]
[Page 35475-35477]
[DOCID:fr20jn06-79]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53979; File No. SR-Phlx-20006-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Reducing Staffing
Requirements for Options Specialist Units

June 14, 2006.
    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 4, 2006, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the

proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared by the Phlx. On June 6, 2006, the Phlx filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change,
as amended, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified the rationale for
reducing staffing for foreign currency options and made non-
substantive changes to the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Phlx proposes to amend Phlx Rule 501(d) to reduce the mandatory
staffing requirement to be approved as an options or foreign currency
options specialist unit and to retain such status, while continuing to
enable the Exchange's Options Allocation, Evaluation and Securities
Committee (``Options Allocation Committee'') \4\ to require a unit to
obtain additional staffing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Phlx By-Law Article X, Section 10-7. The Options
Allocations Committee has jurisdiction over, among other things: the
appointment of specialists on the options and foreign currency
options trading floors; allocation, retention and transfer of
privileges to deal in options on the trading floors; and
administration of the 500 series of Phlx rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is set forth below. Proposed
new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in [brackets]:
Rule 501. Specialist Appointment
    (a)-(c)--No Change.
    (d) To be approved as a specialist unit and to retain the privilege
of such status, an options or foreign currency options specialist unit
must maintain the approved clearing arrangements and capital structure
stated on their application as described in (b)(2) and (b)(3) above.
Changes regarding the requirements in (b)(4) must be submitted and
approved by the Committee. In addition, each unit must consist of at
least the following staff for each [quarter turret (or equivalent
portion of a] trading floor specialist post[)]: (1) One head
specialist; and (2)[two] one assistant specialist[s with respect to
options specialist units (of which at least one] that must be
associated with the specialist unit[); and (3) one specialist clerk].
The Committee, in its discretion, may require a unit to obtain
additional staff depending upon the number of assigned options classes
and associated order flow.
(e)-(f)--No Change.
    Commentary--No Change.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change, as amended, is to provide
flexibility in options and foreign currency options specialist unit
staffing by reducing the mandatory staffing requirement, in light of
increased automation respecting options trading.
    Currently, Phlx Rule 501(d) requires that in order to be approved
as an options or foreign currency options specialist unit and retain
such status, the specialist unit shall have at each quarter turret or
trading post one head specialist, two assistant specialists (at least
one of whom must be associated with the specialist unit), and one
specialist clerk.\5\ However, as the Exchange and member organizations
continue to enhance options trading technology and options orders are
now automatically executed on the Exchange over 90% of the time, the
need to maintain the present required staffing levels for every
specialist unit (three specialists and a clerk) is significantly
reduced.\6\ The Exchange believes that, in light of such technological
advances, and in conjunction with requests from specialist units for
greater staffing flexibility, requiring only one assistant specialist
and eliminating the requirement for a specialist clerk is warranted.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Exchange is also proposing to make non-substantive
changes to Phlx Rule 501(d) such as deletion of obsolete references
to quarter turrets, which are no longer used on the floor.
    \6\ Furthermore, the Phlx believes that the number of foreign
currency option orders executed on the Exchange does not warrant
high staffing levels. In 2005, as an example, the number of foreign
currency option orders executed on the Exchange was less than 1% of
the overall number of option orders executed on the Exchange.
Telephone conversation between Jurij Trypupenko, Director, Phlx and
David Michehl, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation,
Commission on June 13, 2006.
    \7\ The changes proposed in Phlx Rule 501(d) herein are not
intended to alter other specialist unit obligations established by
Phlx rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal, as amended, is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that the
proposal is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
and to protect investors and the public interest, by adding flexibility
to specialist staffing requirements while retaining the ability of the
Options Allocations Committee to require additional staffing where
appropriate, which should enhance operational efficiencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change, as
amended, will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change, as amended; or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Phlx-2006-30 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2006-30. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Phlx. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-Phlx-2006-30 and should be submitted on or before July
11, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-9605 Filed 6-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: October 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 199)]
[Notices]
[Page 53279-53283]
[DOCID:fr16oc09-104]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0664]

Request for Nominations for Voting Members on Public Advisory
Panels or Committees

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting
nominations for voting members to serve on the Device Good
Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee, certain device panels of the
Medical Devices Advisory Committee, the National Mammography Quality
Assurance Advisory Committee, and the Technical Electronic Products
Radiation Safety Standards Committee in the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health. Nominations will be accepted for current vacancies
and those that will or may occur through August 31, 2010.
    FDA has a special interest in ensuring that women, minority groups,
and individuals with disabilities are adequately represented on
advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of qualified
candidates from these groups.

DATES:  Because scheduled vacancies occur on various dates throughout
each year, no cutoff date is established for the receipt of
nominations. However, when possible, nominations should be received at
least 6 months before the date of scheduled vacancies for each year, as
indicated in this notice.

ADDRESSES:  All nomination for membership should be sent electronically
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight &
Management Staff (HF-4), 5600 Fishers Lane, rm. 14C03, Rockville, MD
20857. Information about becoming a member on a FDA advisory committee
can also be obtained by visiting FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/
AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For specific Committee questions,
contact the following persons listed in table 1 of this document.

                             Table 1.--Contact Information for Committees and Panels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Contact Person                                          Committee/Panel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geretta P. Wood, Center for Devices and Radiological     Device Panels of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee
 Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
 Hampshire Ave., White Oak Bldg. 66, Room 1682, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normica Facey, Center for Devices and Radiological       National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory
 Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New          Committee
 Hampshire Ave., White Oak Bldg. 66, Room 4652, Silver Spring, MD 20993, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collin L. Figueroa, Center for Devices and Radiological  Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee
 Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
 Hampshire Ave., White Oak Bldg. 66, Room 3438, Silver Spring, MD 20993, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard V. Kaczmarek, Center for Devices and             Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards
 Radiological Health, Food and Drug                       Committee
 Administration,10903 New Hampshire Ave., White Oak
 Bldg. 66, Room 4536, Silver Spring, MD 20993,
 e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Vacancies

    FDA is requesting nominations of voting members for vacancies
listed as follows:

        Table 2.--Committee/Panel Expertise Needed and Vacancies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Current and
      Committee/Panel expertise needed          Upcoming    Approximate
                                               Vacancies    Date Needed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anesthesiology and Respiratory Therapy        3            December 1,
 Devices Panel of the Medical Devices                       2009
 Advisory Committee--anesthesiologists,
 pulmonary medicine specialists, or other
 experts who have specialized interests in
 ventilator support, pharmacology,
 physiology, or the effects and
 complications of anesthesia
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Circulatory System Devices Panel of the       1            July 1, 2010
 Medical Devices Advisory Committee--
 interventional cardiologists,
 electrophysiologists, invasive (vascular)
 radiologists, vascular and cardiothoracic
 surgeons, and cardiologists with special
 interest in congestive heart failure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Toxicology    2            March 1, 2010
 Devices Panel of the Medical Devices
 Advisory Committee--doctors of medicine or
 philosophy with experience in clinical
 chemistry, clinical toxicology, clinical
 pathology, clinical laboratory medicine,
 endocrinology, and diabetes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dental Products Panel of the Medical Devices  3            Immediately
 Advisory Committee--dentists, engineers and  2            November 1,
 scientists who have expertise in the areas                 2009
 of dental implants, dental materials,
 periodontology, tissue engineering, and
 dental anatomy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel of   2            Immediately
 the Medical Devices Advisory Committee--
 experts with broad, cross-cutting
 scientific, clinical, analytical or
 mediation skills
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ear, Nose and Throat Devices Panel of the     1            Immediately
 Medical Devices Advisory Committee--
 otologists, neurotologists, audiologists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel    2            January 1,
 of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee--                2010
 transplant specialists,
 gastroenterologists, urologists and
 nephrologists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel of  2            Immediately
 the Medical Devices Advisory Committee--     1            September 1,
 surgeons (general, plastic, reconstructive,                2010
 pediatric, thoracic, abdominal, pelvic and
 endoscopic); dermatologists; experts in
 biomaterials, lasers, wound healing, and
 quality of life; and biostatisticians
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Hospital and Personal Use Devices     3            January 1,
 Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory                      2010
 Committee--internists, pediatricians,
 neonatologists, endocrinologists,
 gerontologists, nurses, biomedical
 engineers or microbiologists/infection
 control practitioners or experts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hematology and Pathology Devices Panel of     5            Immediately
 the Medical Devices Advisory Committee--     1            March 1, 2010
 hematologists (benign and/or malignant
 hematology), hematopathologists (general
 and special hematology, coagulation and
 homeostasis, and hematological oncology),
 gynecologists with special interests in
 gynecological oncology, cytopathologists,
 and molecular pathologists with special
 interests in development of predictive and
 prognostic biomarkers
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Immunology Devices Panel of the Medical       3            Immediately
 Devices Advisory Committee--persons with
 experience in medical, surgical, or
 clinical oncology, internal medicine,
 clinical immunology, allergy, molecular
 diagnostics, or clinical laboratory
 medicine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microbiology Devices Panel of the Medical     1            Immediately
 Devices Advisory Committee--infectious       3            March 1, 2010
 disease clinicians, e.g., pulmonary disease
 specialists, sexually transmitted disease
 specialists, pediatric infectious disease
 specialists, experts in tropical medicine
 and emerging infectious diseases, biofilm
 development; mycologists; clinical
 microbiologists and virologists; clinical
 virology and microbiology laboratory
 directors, with expertise in clinical
 diagnosis and in vitro diagnostic assays,
 e.g., hepatologists; molecular biologists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Molecular and Clinical Genetics Devices       1            Immediately
 Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory        1            June 1, 2010
 Committee--experts in human genetics and in
 the clinical management of patients with
 genetic disorders, e.g., pediatricians,
 obstetricians, neonatologists; individuals
 with training in inborn errors of
 metabolism, biochemical and/or molecular
 genetics, population genetics, epidemiology
 and related statistical training, and
 clinical molecular genetics testing (e.g.,
 genotyping, array CGH, etc.); individuals
 with experience in genetics counseling,
 medical ethics; and individuals with
 experience in ancillary fields of study
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neurological Devices Panel of the Medical     5            Immediately
 Devices Advisory Committee--neurosurgeons    2            December 1,
 (cerebrovascular and pediatric),                           2009
 neurologists (stroke, pediatric, pain
 management, and movement disorders),
 interventional neuroradiologists,
 psychiatrists, and biostatisticians
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices Panel of    1            February 1,
 the Medical Devices Advisory Committee--                   2010
 experts in perinatology, embryology,
 reproductive endocrinology, pediatric
 gynecology, gynecological oncology,
 operative hysteroscopy, pelviscopy,
 electrosurgery, laser surgery, assisted
 reproductive technologies, contraception,
 postoperative adhesions, and cervical
 cancer and colposcopy; biostatisticians and
 engineers with experience in obstetrics/
 gynecology devices; urogynecologists;
 experts in breast care, gynecology in the
 older patient, diagnostic (optical)
 spectroscopy, midwifery, and labor and
 delivery nursing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ophthalmic Devices Panel of the Medical       3            November 1,
 Devices Advisory Committee--                               2009
 ophthalmologists specializing in cataract
 and refractive surgery and vitreo-retinal
 surgery, in addition to vision scientists,
 optometrists, and biostatisticians
 practiced in ophthalmic clinical trials
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel  3            Immediately
 of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee--  2            Immediately
 orthopedic surgeons (joint, spine, trauma,   2            September 1,
 and pediatric); rheumatologists; engineers                 2010
 (biomedical, biomaterials, and
 biomechanical); experts in rehabilitation
 medicine, sports medicine, and connective
 tissue engineering; and biostatisticians
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiological Devices Panel of the Medical     2            February 1,
 Devices Advisory Committee--physicians with                2010
 experience in general radiology,
 mammography, ultrasound, magnetic
 resonance, computed tomography, other
 radiological subspecialties and radiation
 oncology; scientists with experience in
 diagnostic devices, radiation physics,
 statistical analysis, digital imaging and
 image analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Mammography Quality Assurance        6            Immediately
 Advisory Committee--physicians,
 practitioners, or other health
 professionals whose clinical practice,
 research specialization, or professional
 expertise include a significant focus on
 mammography
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory   7            Immediately
 Committee--vacancies include three
 government representatives, two public
 representatives and two health
 professionals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Electronic Product Radiation        15           Immediately
 Safety Standards Committee--vacancies
 include five government representatives,
 five industry representatives and five
 general public representatives
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Functions

A. Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    The committee reviews and evaluates data on the safety and
effectiveness of marketed and investigational devices and makes
recommendations for their regulation. The panels engage in a number of
activities to fulfill the functions of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the act) envisions for device advisory panels. With the
exception of the Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel,
according to its specialty area performs the following duties: (1)
Advises the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) regarding
recommended classification or reclassification of devices into one of
three regulatory categories, (2) advises on any possible risks to
health associated with the use of devices, (3) advises on formulation
of product development protocols; (4) reviews premarket approval
applications for medical devices, (5) reviews guidelines and guidance
documents, (6) recommends exemption of certain devices from the
application of portions of the act, (7) advises on the necessity to ban
a device, and (8) responds to requests from the agency to review and
make recommendations on specific issues or problems concerning the
safety and effectiveness of devices. With the exception of the Medical

Devices Dispute Resolution Panel, each panel, according to its
specialty area, may also make appropriate recommendations to the
Commissioner on issues relating to the design of clinical studies
regarding the safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational
devices.
    The Dental Products Panel also functions at times as a dental drug
panel. The functions of the dental drug panel are to evaluate and
recommend whether various prescription drug products should be changed
to over-the-counter status and to evaluate data and make
recommendations concerning the approval of new dental drug products for
human use.
    The Medical Devices Dispute Resolution Panel provides advice to the
Commissioner on complex or contested scientific issues between FDA and
medical device sponsors, applicants, or manufacturers relating to
specific products, marketing applications, regulatory decisions and
actions by FDA, and agency guidance and policies. The panel makes
recommendations on issues that are lacking resolution, are highly
complex in nature, or result from challenges to regular advisory panel
proceedings or agency decisions or actions.

B. National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee

    The functions of the committee are to advise FDA on the following
topics: (1) Developing appropriate quality standards and regulations
for mammography facilities; (2) developing appropriate standards and
regulations for bodies accrediting mammography facilities under this
program; (3) developing regulations with respect to sanctions; (4)
developing procedures for monitoring compliance with standards; (5)
establishing a mechanism to investigate consumer complaints; (6)
reporting new developments concerning breast imaging which should be
considered in the oversight of mammography facilities; (7) determining
whether there exists a shortage of mammography facilities in rural and
health professional shortage areas and determining the effects of
personnel on access to the services of such facilities in such areas;
(8) determining whether there will exist a sufficient number of medical
physicists after October 1, 1999, and (9) determining the costs and
benefits of compliance with these requirements.

C. Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee

    The functions of the committee are to review proposed regulations
issuance regarding good manufacturing practices governing the methods
used in, and the facilities and controls used for manufacture,
packaging, storage, installation, and servicing of devices, and make
recommendations regarding the feasibility and reasonableness of those
proposed regulations. The committee also reviews and makes
recommendations on proposed guidelines developed to assist the medical
device industry in meeting the good manufacturing practice
requirements, and provides advice with regard to any petition submitted
by a manufacturer for an exemption or variance from good manufacturing
practice regulations.
    Section 520 of the act, (21 U.S.C. 360(j)), as amended, provides
that the Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee shall be
composed of nine members as follows: (1) Three of the members shall be
appointed from persons who are officers or employees of any Federal,
State, or local government; (2) two shall be representatives of the
interests of the device manufacturing industry: (3) two shall be
representatives of the interests of physicians and other health
professionals; and (4) two shall be representatives of the interests of
the general public. The agency will publish a separate notice
announcing the vacancies of two representatives of interests of the
device manufacturing industry as they become available.

D. Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee

    The function of the committee is to provide advice and consultation
on the technical feasibility, reasonableness, and practicability of
performance standards for electronic products to control the emission
of radiation from such products. The committee may recommend electronic
product radiation safety standards for consideration.
    Section 534(f) of the act (21 U.S.C. 360kk(f)), as amended by the
Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990, provides that the Technical
Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee include five
members from governmental agencies, including State or Federal
Governments, five members from the affected industries, and five
members from the general public, of which at least one shall be a
representative of organized labor.

III. Qualifications

A. Panels of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee

    Persons nominated for membership on the panels should have
adequately diversified experience appropriate to the work of the panel
in such fields as clinical and administrative medicine, engineering,
biological and physical sciences, statistics, and other related
professions. The nature of specialized training and experience
necessary to qualify the nominee as an expert suitable for appointment
may include experience in medical practice, teaching, and/or research
relevant to the field of activity of the panel. The particular needs at
this time for each panel are listed in section I of this document. The
term of office is up to 4 years, depending on the appointment date.

B. National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee

    Persons nominated for membership should be physicians,
practitioners, and other health professionals, whose clinical practice,
research specialization, or professional expertise include a
significant focus on mammography and individuals identified with
consumer interests. Prior experience on Federal public advisory
committees in the same or similar subject areas will also be considered
relevant professional expertise. The particular needs at this time for
this committee are listed in section I of this document. The term of
office is up to 4 years, depending on the appointment date.

C. Device Good Manufacturing Practice Advisory Committee

    Persons nominated for membership as a health professional or
officer or employee of any Federal, State, or local government should
have knowledge of or expertise in any one or more of the following
areas: Quality assurance concerning the design, manufacture, and use of
medical devices. To be eligible for selection as a representative of
the general public, nominees should possess appropriate qualifications
to understand and contribute to the committee's work. The particular
needs at this time for this committee are listed in section I of this
document. The term of office is up to 4 years, depending on the
appointment date.

D. Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee

    Persons nominated should be technically qualified by training and
experience in one or more fields of science or engineering applicable
to electronic product radiation safety. The particular needs at this
time for this committee are listed in section I of this document. The
term of office is up to 4

years, depending on the appointment date.

IV. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified persons
for membership on one or more of the advisory panels or advisory
committees. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations must
include a current, complete resume or curriculum vitae of each nominee,
current business and/or home address, telephone number, and e-mail
address if available. Nominations must specify the advisory panel(s) or
advisory committee(s) for which the nominee is recommended. Nominations
must also acknowledge that the nominee is aware of the nomination,
unless self-nominated. FDA will ask potential candidates to provide
detailed information concerning such matters as financial holdings,
employment, and research grants and/or contracts.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14 relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: October 9, 2009.
David Horowitz,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-24896 Filed 10-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 76 (Monday, April 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 21872]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08308]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4476-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

Tennessee; Amendment No. 1 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 Tennessee (FEMA-4476-DR), dated March 5, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES:  This amendment was issued March 24, 2020.

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 notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Tennessee is hereby amended to include permanent work
under the Public Assistance program for those areas determined to have
been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the
President in his declaration of March 5, 2020.

    Davidson, Putnam, and Wilson Counties for Public Assistance
[Categories C-G] (already designated for Individual Assistance and
assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures
[Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the
Public Assistance program).
    Benton, Carroll, and Smith Counties for Public Assistance.

    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.

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-08308 Filed 4-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P